A Neo-Marxist Theory of Comparative Analysis

Slavic Review ◽  
1967 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 657-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
David T. Cattell
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Marxist Theory ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Initial Stage ◽  
The Social ◽  
Communist Countries ◽  
American Political Science ◽  
Science Association

The symposium on “Comparative Politics and Communist Systems” (Slavic Review, March 1967) represents, I believe, a general consensus among social scientists in Slavic studies that the study of Communist countries should be integrated into developments in the social sciences in general. The question is how this should be accomplished. The symposium participants argued for immediate and direct integration through various models such as the developmental or bureaucratic model. Another group, represented by the Communist Studies Conference of the American Political Science Association and the recent Carnegie grant for comparative communism, proposes that comparative communism be considered a major subcategory of comparative analysis. At least in the initial stage, it is reasoned, the various Communist systems should be compared with one another. I would suggest, however, that before either scheme is accepted the net be cast wider for a broader, more flexible organizing device.

Area Studies and the Disciplines: A Rejoinder

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-31
Author(s):  
John W. Harbeson
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
Important Work ◽  
Area Studies ◽  
The Social ◽  
American Political Science ◽  
Science Association

Robert Bates’ letter entitled “Area Studies and the Discipline” (American Political Science Association, Comparative Politics 1, Winter 1996, pp. 1-2) uses the occasion of the SSRC’s abolishing of area committees to announce that “within the academy, the consensus has formed that area studies has failed to generate scientific knowledge.” As someone who has done some of his most important work on African development issues, Bates deplores declining investment in area studies as a “loss to the social sciences, as well as to the academy,” at an inopportune moment, “just when our [political science] discipline is becoming equipped to handle area knowledge in a rigorous fashion.”

Political Science as a Discipline: A Statement by the Committee on Standards of Instruction of the American Political Science Association

1962 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel A. Almond ◽  
Eric C. Bellquist ◽  
Joseph M. Ray ◽  
John P. Roche ◽  
Irvin Stewart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Psychology ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Human Experience ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
Conceptual Schemes ◽  
The Social ◽  
American Political Science ◽  
Factual Data ◽  
Science Association

Political science is a basic discipline in the social sciences. Although it must necessarily maintain close scholarly association with the disciplines of history, economics, sociology, anthropology, geography, and social psychology, political science cannot be considered a part of any of these other social sciences. Political science has its own area of human experience to analyze, its own body of descriptive and factual data to gather, its own conceptual schemes to formulate and test for truth.

Understanding a Foreign Society: A Sociologist's View

1951 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Inkeles
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Radical Innovations ◽  
New Science ◽  
Foreign Culture ◽  
American Sociological Society ◽  
Joint Section ◽  
American Political Science ◽  
Science Association

The scheduling of a joint section meeting of the American Political Science Association and the American Sociological Society on “The Understanding of a Foreign Culture” may be taken as evidence that American social scientists feel the study of foreign societies to be a problem of increasing concern. It may perhaps also indicate that they are not fully satisfied with the progress made to date. Since this is a period given to radical innovations in social science, however, it seems appropriate to offer the caution that our problem cannot properly be defined as one of developing a new science of foreign societies. There cannot be one social science for the study of one's own country and a different one for the study of other nations. The primary task is not that of making our research methods more adequate for the study of foreign societies, but of improving our conceptual tools and methodological equipment to make us more effective in the study of any society.

Report on a Survey of the Membership of the American Political Science Association

1974 ◽  
Vol 7 (04) ◽  
pp. 382-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Mann
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Executive Director ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
Full Time ◽  
National Office ◽  
Final Questionnaire ◽  
American Political Science ◽  
Number Of Individuals ◽  
Science Association

In conjunction with a discussion of the FY 1974–75 Budget at its April, 1974, meeting, the Council of the American Political Science Association instructed the Executive Director to survey the membership of the Association as to their attitudes toward the usefulness ofPSin form and content. In order to take full advantage of the resources needed to conduct this survey, the National Office conceived a broader study of membership attitudes toward Association activities. The final questionnaire was approved by the Council.On June 7, 1974, the questionnaire was mailed to 1,000 individuals selected randomly from the membership files of the Association. A second mailing was sent to those who had not responded on July 9. A total of 530 completed questionnaires were received for a response rate of 53 percent.The demographic characteristics of the membership, as reflected in the sample, are portrayed in Table 1.The small number of students in the sample is surprising, given the fact that a third of all Association members pay student dues. This discrepancy cannot be attributed to differential response rates; a check of our numbering system confirms the fact that “student” members returned their questionnaires at the same rate as “annual” members. Clearly, a substantial number of individuals paying student dues are employed full-time.

The Political Scientist Decides: An Examination of the 1969 APSA Ballot

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (03) ◽  
pp. 311-320
Author(s):  
John E. Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Annual Meeting ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
American Political Science Association ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
Alphabetical Order ◽  
American Political Science ◽  
First Time ◽  
Vote Result ◽  
Science Association

I always vote for the man, not the party.–Trad.In its election for offices in 1969, the American Political Science Association, apparently for the first time in its rarely turbulent history, found the nominees of its Official Nominating Committee challenged by an insurgent group. In order to handle this unprecedented situation, it was decided at the annual meeting to carry out the election by mail ballot and the American Arbitration Association was engaged to administer the operation.Ballots were mailed to the 13,061 members of the Association in October, 1969. Accompanying them were materials containing statements of belief and biographies for each of the candidates. The response rate was 64 percent.The ballots carried the contestants indicated in Table 1. For each office the candidates are listed in the Table in the order of their vote result (they were listed in alphabetical order on the ballot) and for each candidate the group endorsements, as they were presented on the ballot, are indicated. Except for the group endorsements, no identifying information accompanied the names of the candidates on the ballots.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document