The Scientification of the Study of Politics: Some Observations on the Behavioral Evolution in

Political Science
Author(s): Jon R. Bond
Source: The Journal of Politics, Vol. 69, No. 4 (Nov., 2007), pp. 897-907
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Southern Political Science
Association

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4622604 .

Accessed: 12/01/2015 20:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press and Southern Political Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TheScientification
oftheStudy
ofPolitics:
Some
Observations
ontheBehavioral
Evolution
in
Political
Science
JonR.Bond TexasA&MUniversity

We

callourdiscipline
The
science."
"political

term"science"impliesuse of thescientific
method."Science"has had different
meantimes.In thearchaicsense,scienceis
ingsat different
or knowledgegainedby study.In
just "knowledge,"
modernusage(sincetheeighteenth
science
century),
is a methodoflearningbasedon systematic
observation usingthe scientific
method.It is a methodof
different
fromthearts.The"scientification
of
learning
the studyof politics"refersto the processthrough
whichpoliticalscienceas an academicdisciplinehas
cometo use thescientific
methodfortheproduction
and dissemination
of knowledge
aboutpolitics.'The
notionof scientification
a two-way
relationsuggests
shipbetweenscienceand politics.As Weingart
says,it
of
two
inter"canbe describedas a recursive
coupling
scientification
ofpolidependent
developments-the
ticsand thepoliticisation
ofscience"(2002).
Fromthegenesisofthediscipline
aroundtheturn
ofthetwentieth
century
through
everystageofdeveland debateoverthe
opment,therehas been conflict
linkagesbetweenpoliticsand science:
1. Is politicsartor science?
2. Ifpoliticsis a science,canpolitical
science
be a "real"
scienceand discoverunderlying
lawsofpolitics?
3. Evenifpoliticalscienceis (or canbe) a realscience,
is thisa good thing?
This conflictis not just academic.It's political.As
HaroldLasswell(1938) observed,
politicsis thereso-

lutionof conflict
over"who getswhat,when,how?"
The"what"in thisparticular
politicaldebateis educaofdissemination
tion,bywhichI meantheproduction
of knowledge
and
The
throughpublication teaching.
mostintensepartof the debatehas focusedon the
"how"-the methodof producingknowledgeabout
politics.
The debate,forthemostpart,has been civiland
Yetintensefeelingson both sideshave
professional.
some
acrimoniousexchanges.
One famous
produced
exampleoccurredin theearly1960sduringwhatwe
refer
to as the"behavioral
revolution."
In the
typically
of
series
a
of
epilogue
essays(Storing1962)critiquing
what was termed"the new politicalscience,"Leo
Straussobserved,"Nevertheless
one may say of it
[quantitative
politicalscience]thatit fiddleswhile
Rome burns.It is excusedby two facts:it does not
knowthatit fiddles,
and it does notknowthatRome
burns"(1962,327). In a lengthy
JohnSchaar
"review,"
and SheldonWolincharacterize
thebook as "fanatiStraussresponded
callyserious"(1963,126).Professor
thatthereviewwas characterized
byfanaticism,
"preciselythe vice of which [he was] accused,"and he
suggestedthat the authors misunderstoodthe
thatwouldbe "clearto
meaningofcertainstatements
and fairness"
everyreaderof ordinaryintelligence
et
al.
1963,
153).
(Storing
In a contemporary
iterationof thisdebate,our

KimHillaccepts
the"scientific
of
colleague
legitimacy

thediscipline
buthe laments
that
[as] unassailable"

'"Scientification"
isanuglyword,
harsh
totheearandirritating
tothebrain,
a caseofacademic
so,butI am
jargonatitsworst.
Perhaps
notthefirst
touseit.Itappeared
asearly
asthemid-nineteenth
inanessay
Green(1877)ina music
TheMusical
century
byJoseph
journal,
Times
andSinging
ClassCircular,
intheUnited
Theearliest
useI foundinAmerican
socialscience
published
isby
Kingdom.
journals
andEdwinBoring
(1938)intheJournal
George
Stigler
Itdidnotshow
ofFarmEconomics,
(1942)intheAmerican
Journal
ofPsychology.
science
untilthe1960s:JoanBondurant
up inpolitical
andFredric
journals
(1963)intheJournal
Resolution,
ofConflict
(1963)
Cheyette
inPolitical
Science
Itappeared
inthepagesoftheJournal
in1984(Kaufman-Osborn
Quarterly.
ofPolitics
1984).Thus,thewordhasbeen
aroundfora longtime,
itsuseis notfrequent.
though
TheJournal
Vol.69,No.4,November
2007,pp.897-907
ofPolitics,
Political
Science
Association
ISSN0022-3816
? 2007Southern
897

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ION R. BOND

898

political science is "the only scientificdisciin

failsto educateitsstudents
pline... thatessentially
concern"(2002,113).On theothersideof
itsprimary
the debate,our colleagueHarveyMansfieldlaments
in "greatno longereducatestudents
thatuniversities
He
indicts
books.
of
the
ness"through study great
in
socialscienceas a keyobstacleto education greatare thatthe
ness. The groundsforthis indictment
in
search"forthecause of greatness
socialscientist's
or trends... is
ofmassmovements
thecircumstances
the
of
based on a simplistic
psychology maximizing
the
is
It
blind
to
one's
of
psypreferences....
power
becauseitcannotseeactionsthat
chologyofgreatness
to espouse a cause. It has no
sacrificeself-interest
.thatpromptsus to
of
human
inkling
spiritedness..,
asserta principlebywhichto live-and forwhichto
die-as opposedto surviving
byanymeanspossible"
(2006).
Thus,thedebateaboutscienceand politicscontinues.The behavioralstudyof politicsincorporates
includofthescientific
elements
theessential
method,
of
and
the
development testing general-or at
ing
The so-called"behavioral
least,mid-range-theory.
inthe
as a watershed
is typically
revolution"
presented
and
of
of
the
scientific
study politics, its
development
the
1960s.I wantto take
to
traced
originsaretypically
of
thecharacterization
to reconsider
thisopportunity
as
a
of
thescientific
"revolution."
study politics
in thescienI proposeto outlinesomelandmarks
notonly
ofpoliticalscience,payingattention
tification
butalsoto
useofthescientific
tothegrowing
method,
scientific
oftheory(in theempirical,
thedevelopment
sense). This task was done admirablyforresearch
PoliticalScienceReviewin its
in theAmerican
reported
centennialissue (Volume 100, November2006).
AlthoughtheAPSR maybe the discipline'spremier
journal,it is but one of severaloutletsforscientific
thesciention politics.To betterunderstand
research
I willlookata broaderrange
ofthediscipline,
fication
of outletsavailableforthe publicationof scientific
I lookatresearch
on politics.In particular,
scholarship
publishedin other professionaljournals available
since the foundingof the discipline(e.g., Political
ScienceQuarterlyand some sociologyand history
to
journals2).I willalso look at someearlytextbooks
students
were
see what our predecessors
teaching

aboutthescientific
studyofpolitics.To keepthetask
in
thediscussionwillreflect
myinterest
manageable,
the studyof democratic(mostlyAmerican)political
institutions
and behavior.
I findevidencethatthescientific
of thestudyof
before
the 1960s.The
was
common
decades
politics
extendto the foundingof
roots of behavioralism
politicalscience as an academic discipline.While
behavioralanalysisbegan to dominate
quantitative,
the
APSR in the 1960s(Sigelman2006),
thepagesof
basedstudiesofAmerican
scientific,
politheoretically
social
in
tics were regularly
appearing professional
decades
textbooks
sciencejournalsandundergraduate
earlier.Those spiritedand sometimesacrimonious
above,mayhave
debates,suchas theone referenced
butitwasthe
ofrevolution,
soundedliketherhetoric
than
the
the
rhetoric
rather
of
scholarship
intensity
thatchangedso abruptly.
to thisdebate,I
As I add mypersonalperspective
of
the
to
avoid
the
past.Thoseofyou
acrimony
hope
won'tbe surknow
me
and
who
mywork,however,
prisedthat I come down squarelyon the side of
science.
there
1. I believethatwhilethereis an artto politics,3
are basic lawsthatexplainpoliticalbehaviorand
thescientific
theselawscan be discovered
through
method.
2. I believethatpoliticalscienceis a "real"science,
thanthe
thoughin an earlierstageofdevelopment
naturaland materialsciences.NoticethatI didn't
call those otherfields"hard sciences:"Political
scienceis trulya "hard"sciencebecauseofthedifofkey
we facein themeasurement
ficult
challenges
the
in
and
even
observing politicalproconcepts
cessesand behaviorwe seekto study.JamesMarch
whenhe said,"God gavealltheeasyprobwasright
lemstothephysicists"
1986,59).
(quotedbyWuffle
and
to measurement
I don'tknowifourchallenges
data collectionare greaterthanthosefacingsay,
butwe do havethe
or meteorologists,
astronomers
ourworkas
additionalburdenofhavingto justify
everclaimto be
science.I doubtthatastronomers
(or viceversa).
astrologists
3. I believethatthe scientific
studyof politicsis a
it
advances
because
knowledgeand
good thing
3Amongnumerousexamplesof the art of politics,one of my

when
TheLastHurrah
canfoundinEdwinO'Connor's
favorites
of
art
the
Frank
(1956,
Boss
three
until
did
not
"compromise"
the
explains
Skeffington
beginpublishing roughly
Although JOP
to political
is notconfined
theartofpolitics
disci- 237).Butshowing
as a separate
science
ofpolitical
thefounding
decadesafter
Fenno
Richard
and
V.
of
research
the
In
fiction.
its
from
almost
view,
of
studies
scientific
it
Key
my
O.
politics
pline, published
their
andusesit to enrich
muchoftheartofpolitics
to thescientifica- captures
contributions
andmadeimportant
inception,
Fenno
science
1978;
1949).
(see
of
Key
of
the
tion
e.g.,
political
study politics.
in theJournal
21 willalsolookat research
ofPolitics.
published

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE SCIENTIFICATION

OF THE STUDY OF POLITICS

human understanding.
It's not the onlyway to
studyand learnaboutpolitics.I agreewithProfessor Mansfieldthatthe studyof greatbooks and
greatmen-and women-deservesa place at the
centeroftheuniversity.
Butjustas scienceisnotthe
to
learn
and
create
neither
do
onlyway
knowledge,
theartsand humanities
havea monopolyon education.IfAristotle
is rightthat"manis bynaturea
animal"
(ThePolitics1253al-3),thenthe
political
studyof politicsis the most importantpart of
becomingan educatedpersonand citizen.And
recallthatAristotle
studiedboththeartandscience
ofpolitics.He is an earlyexampleofa greatscholar
and philosopher
who analyzedthe art of politics
informedby systematic,
empiricalobservation
BookIII).
(ThePolitics,
Beforelookingat theevidence,I shouldidentify
the keyelementsof sciencethatI lookedforin my
searchforlandmarks.

ofthe
KeyElements
Scientific
Method
The keyelementsof the scientific
methodare well
known,so thiswillbe a briefsketchofwhatI consider
the most important.The beginningof scientific
The scientistis
inquiryis thefact/value
dichotomy.
concerned
withthestudyofhowandwhythingswork
as theydo ratherthanwithhow theyshouldwork.
Some philosophersobjectto thisdistinction-facts
arevaluesand valuesarefacts.The choiceofa puzzle
tostudy,
ofwhich"facts"
tocollect,
indeed,theveryact
ofscientific
involvevaluejudgments.
The
studyitself,
objectionis valid,butit does notnegatetheneedfor
and worthof science.I suspectthatmanyscientists
believethatscientific
is superiorto knowlknowledge
from
art
or
literature
or "great"leaders.
edgegained
I'm not readyto makesuch a sweeping
Personally,
value judgment.But art and scienceuse different
methodsto answer different
questions,and they
kindsof knowledge.
I am readyto
producedifferent
makethevaluejudgmentthatthisdiversity
ofknowledgebenefitssocietyin generaland our studentsin
We arebetteroffwithboththanwe would
particular.
be withonlyone.
Anotherfeatureof the scientific
methodis the
observation
of empiricalfacts.Pleasenote
systematic
thatI am notsuggesting
thatartorliterature
is unsystematic.Good artand good literature
surelyrequire
the systematic
observation
of the empiricalworld.I
that
art
and
literature
are producedby
suspect
great

899

themostgifted
observers.
Butscientific
observation
is
done withan eye towardreliability
and replication.
Sincescienceis basedon thedistinction
betweenfact
and opinion,scientistsmust provideinformation
about how observations
weremade and analyzedso
thatsomeoneelse can checkour work.An independentcheckon our workinvolvesmorethancatching
errors,
althoughthatis partof it.JohnFerejohnwas
surelyrightwhenhe said,"Thethingthatkeepsmost
honestis thatsomewhere
politicalscientists
empirical
outthereis [a] graduatestudent
withyournameon it"
is indis1986,57). Butreplication
(quotedbyWuffle
of scientific
pensableto the development
theory.If
anotherresearcher
cannotfollowourprocedures
and
thenthe measuresconreproducethe same results,
structedfromour observations
are meaningless-or
at bestthemeaningis unknown.
Measures,ofcourse,
mustalso be validindicators
of theconceptswe are
Butan unreliable
measurecannotbe valid.
studying.
foundbetweenunreliable,
invalid
Anyrelationships
measurescannotfittogether
withotherdiscoveries
to
buildtheory.
A closelyrelatedelementofthescientific
method
is quantification.
is usefulforsystemQuantification
observations
and forcheckingreliaticallyrecording
is indispensablefor testing
ability.Quantification
and finding
in studieswitha
hypotheses
relationships
number
of
cases.
large
This bringsme to the coregoal of thescientific
method-hypothesistestingand theorybuilding.
withthehowandwhyofnatural
Theoryis concerned
phenomena-howdoesitworkand whydoes itwork
thatway?Theorybuildingproceedsfromdescription
to explanationand prediction.
Descriptionof some
naturalphenomenon
is a critical
first
step-we haveto
knowtheessentialelementsof something
beforewe
can answerhow and whyit endedup as it did. But
isthecoregoal.Ifwecanexplainhowand
explanation
why somethingvaries,then we should be able to
predictwhatwillhappenundercertainconditions.
Theory building involves testinghypotheses
throughempiricalobservation.Empiricaltesting
Anempirical
orhypothesis
implies
falsifiability.
theory
cannotbe scientific
unlessthereis at leastthepossibilityof provingit wrong(Popper1959).In science,
beingwrongis farfromtheworstthatcan happen.
a falsehypothesis
isusefulbecauseitelimiDisproving
natesa deadendandallowsus tolookformorepromA theorythat can't be falsified
ising explanations.
offers
no suchbenefit.
As theoretical
Wolfphysicist
weakstudent
gangPauli once said of a particularly
paper,"It is not evenwrong"(quoted in Burkeman
methodproceedsnot by
2005). Thus,the scientific

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JON R. BOND

900

whatis
provingwhatis true,butrather
byeliminating
false.It is muchlikeSherlockHolmes'description
of
how he solvedmysteries:
"whenyou haveeliminated
all which is impossible,then whateverremains,
however
mustbe thetruth"
improbable,
(Doyle1926).
The scientific
methodalso seekstheoriesthatare
generalizable
beyonda particularcase. Case studies
have-and deserve-an important
place in scientific
research.We should recognizethatcase studiesare
empirical-theycan explainhowand whysomething
observation
of all the
happenedthroughsystematic
detailsof a particularevent.Even extreme,
atypical
cases oftenrevealcriticalinsightsand suggestnew
variablesand hypotheses.
Indeed,findinga single
will
case
a theoryclaimingthat
nonconforming
falsify
no suchcase exists.
Unlike case studiesthat seek to describeand
all of thedetailsin play
explainreality
byidentifying
forsomeevent,however,
thescientific
methodseeksto
builda theorythatis an abstraction
ofreality.
Thatis,
a scientific
of
theoryis not an accuratereflection
Instead,it is a model thatignoresfactsand
reality.
detailsthatare not essentialto explainsomegeneral
processor a classofevents.As JamesRogersexplains,
of... anymodel... is nota vice,itis a
"theunrealism
virtue"(2006,276). He observesthata streetmap is a
Yetit
modeloftheearth'ssurfacethatdistorts
reality.
to achieveits
containstheessentialdetailsnecessary
purpose-to show motoriststhe streetsand where
theygo. A more realisticdepictionof a citywould
not be usefulfor navigationbecause the essential
feature-thestreets-wouldbe obscuredin a hostof
irrelevant
details.
ofthe
elements
These,inmyview,aretheessential
but no one by
scientific
method.Each is necessary,
methodrequires(at
The scientific
itselfis sufficient.
least)all ofthesefeatures.

first
issuein 1886;theAmerican
PoliticalScienceAssociationwas established
in 1903and beganpublishing
the AmericanPoliticalScienceReviewin 1906; the
first
Journal
ofPolitics
appearedin 1939.

TheEarlyDecades:TheRootsofthe

Scientific
ofPolitical
Behavior
Study
theempirical
research
the
Although
published
during
first
ofthediscipline
twodecades
wasmainly
descriptheprevailing
vision
wasthatpolitical
science
is
tive,
theobjectivestudyof government
basedon thefact/
value dichotomy.
In the firstissue of the Political
Science Quarterly,Munroe Smith outlined "The
DomainofPoliticalScience"usinglanguagethatcontains featuresof the scientificmethodas I have
describedit. He says,"Scienceis the discoveryof

andpolitical
science
isthe"science
ofthestate"
truth,"
"theorganization
andfunctions
ofthestate"
including
The
method
of
science
is
(1886,2).
political
"comparison"ofempirical
data,andthegoalsoundsremarkably
similarto model building:"The singlefactmeans

tous;weaccumulate
facts
thatseemakin;we
nothing

and reclassify
and
them,discarding
classify
superficial
. . ." (4).
accidentalsimilarities.
The American Political Science Association
emergedfromtheAmericanEconomicand American
HistoricalAssociationsin 1903. Readingthe notes
who formedthe
publishedby thepoliticalscientists
initialorganizingcommittee,
our Foundersunderstoodthattheywereengagedin a politicalprocessas
theytactfully
praisedthe parentorganizations(or
forthe institushouldit be "sister"organizations?)
tionalsupport.Theyappearto use theterm"science"
in the sense of objectivestudy(AmericanPolitical
addressesof
ScienceAssociation1904). Presidential
echoedthenotionthatpolitical
earlyAPSApresidents
factsfrom
scienceis thestudyofpoliticsthatseparates
values (Ford 1905; Goodnow 1904; Shaw 1907). In
in theScientification 1910,A. LawrenceLowelldrewan explicitparallel
Landmarks
ofPolitics
oftheStudy
address
betweenscienceandpoliticsinhispresidential
He urgedpoliticalscien"The Physiology
ofPolitics."
thattheorgansofgovernofpoli- tiststo studythefunctions
theempirical
Itiscommon
tonotethat
study
ratherthanthosethatare
do perform"
tics, includinga systematicresearchagenda that ment"actually
outto collectdata,dates intended(1910,1). In addition,Lowellobservedthat
involved
sendingstudents
much "everyactionis the resultantof manyforceswhich
I beginmyoverview
backat leasttoAristotle.
ofpolitical
scienceas a dis- cannotbe isolated,and hence is capable of being
laterwiththebeginning
tinctacademicdiscipline.
ways"(1910,8). Consequently,
Althoughtherewerechairs explainedin different
of a widerangeof
needknowledge
of politicalscienceas earlyas the politicalscientists
and departments
motives"
and "apprein
"feel
the
order
to
conditions
of
a
distinct
academic
the
formal
1860s,
organization
and eco- ciatethereasons"whypoliticalactorsdo whattheydo
sociology,
disciplineseparatefromhistory,
(10). This
nomicsbeganaroundthe turnof the twentieth (9). He evencalls forthe use of statistics
me
call
for
the
as
a
strikes
its
Science
thePolitical
study"political
quantitative
Quarterly
published
century:

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE SCIENTIFICATION

OF THE STUDY OF POLITICS

o901

behavior"in whatis essentially

a stimulus-organism-old concept.And althoughthereare no statistical
framework.
tests,Lowell(1908,85 and 92) explainsthe
hypothesis
responsetheoretical
In additionto lookingat researchpublishedin highlevelofpartydisciplinein Englandas "a natural
oftheparliamentary
inwhichthelossof
system
journals,I sampledsome books. Any result"
professional
ofpoliticalsciencein the a keyvoteresultsin thefallofthegovernment.
reviewofthescientification
UnitedStatesmustbeginwithArthurBentley'sThe
The American Political Science Association
be
inordiProcessofGovernment
educationinAmerican
(1908). Bentley
may
adoptedthegoalofimproving
(Committeeof
earlyin its development
natelywordy,takingnumerousdiscursivedetours government
beforegetting
to a point,but thisworkdeservesits Five 1908). The much malignedAmericangovernstatusas a classicstudyin politicalscience,withthe menttextbookoccupieda higherstatusin thescholemphasison science.
Bentley
analyzespoliticsthrough arshipof the day than is the case now. American
observation
of
behavior.
Moreimportantly, government
eventhoseintendedforuse in
textbooks,
systematic
the analysisis groundedin sociologicaltheorythat highschools,wereroutinely
reviewedin theAPSR.
makes assumptionsabout what motivatespolitical Andtheauthorsofthisgenreofscholarship
included
In short,I viewthisworkas an earlyexample themostproductive
behavior.
and mostinfluential
politicalsciofbehavioralism.
Itis clearly
a majorpartoftheschol- entistsoftheday.KimHill's(2002) lamentaboutthe
of
research
its
stateofscienceeducationinpoliticalsciencemademe
arly
day.
Anotherexampleof earlyresearch
withelements curious about what earlypoliticalscientistswere
of scienceis A. LawrenceLowell'sTheGovernment
of teachingundergraduates.
This
is
book
a
remarkable
of
The earliestAmericangovernment
textbookI
(1908).
England
example
Its
two
volumes
of
more
than
500
could
hands
on
is
Charles
A.
Beard's
American
scholarship.
pages
getmy
eachprovidea comprehensive
and Politics(1910).Thisis clearlynotthe
analysisofpoliticsand Government
in
in
the
latter
of
the
ninefirst
such
but Beardindicatesthatfewof the
book,
government England
part
teenthcentury.
much
of
the
details
texts
available
at
thattimeweredesignedspecifically
specific
Although
andprocesses
havechanged,
thescienceinitcontinues forcollegestudents.
He does notviewit as a "contriI wasespecially
toenlighten.
with
his
bution
to
but [it] is frankly
based
impressed
analypoliticalliterature,
sis of "The Strength
in
of PartyTies" the House of uponthebestauthorities
ofrecenttimes"(v). Thatis,
Commons(Lowell1908,vol.2, Chap.XXXV).Lowell it is notoriginalresearch,
but it teachesundergraduwith
a
case
for
statistics
to
ates
what
science
researchhas discovered
begins
strong
using
study
political
He
worksand whyit
observes,"Statisticsare proverbially about how Americangovernment
politics.
But "if appliedwithdiscretion,
are
works
as
it
I
does.
found
that
this
textbook
is indeed
deceptive."
they
as
a
means
of
truth"
based
on
the
of
the
(Lowell
indispensable
discovering
politicalscholarship
day.It will
The
basis of his argumentis thatwhat comeas no surprise
thatmostofthebookis historical
1908, 71).
humanbeingssee and remember
aboutpoliticsis not and legalistic
oftheinstitutions
and prodescriptions
in
In
the
case
of
cesses
of
American
necessarily
representative general.
government.
thereareelements
ofpoliticalbehavNonetheless,
politicalparties,for example,Lowell suggeststhat
on politicalparties,
forexample,
relies
peopleare morelikelyto be consciousof "instances ior.Thechapter
wherepartyis abusedforpurposesthatseem... im- extensively
on Bentley(1908),and posesa versionof
buttoscarcely
noticethecaseswhereitis used theWhyParties?
as a government
proper,"
question:"inasmuch
forsomething
deemedproper.Furthermore,
he argues is ... a humaninstitution,
witha policytoexecuteand
thatit is "highlyunsafe"to assumethatsomething dutiesto perform,
partiesare inevitable..." (Beard
observedinoneinstance
worksthesameinothercases 1910,101). Professor
Beard'sanswersto whyparties
"an observer..,.is likelyto be misled areessentialto democratic
(72). Therefore,
are:
governance
in regardto theinfluence
ofparty"unlessthemisper1. Partiesreduceinformation
costs,enablingvotersto
(71). Lowell'sanalysis
ceptionis corrected
bystatistics
make"wisechoice[s]"on thelargenumberofelecofpartiesshowsthatpartydiscipline
is muchstronger
tiveoffices
in America(102); and
in theHouse of Commonsthanin theU.S. Congress
2. Partiesarenecessary
to coordinate
policyin a govand statelegislatures(1908, 74-92). He definesa
ernmental
structure
and
fragmented
byfederalism
"partyvote"as one on whichmorethan90% of the
ofpowers"ifthewillofthevotersis to
separation
and"truepartyvotes"arethoseon
partyvotetogether,
be realized"(101).
which90% ofonepartyvotesagainst90% oftheother
of thisobservation
forthescientifiparty (75-76). Contemporarymeasuresof party The significance
are
on
based
the
of
this
votingCongress
V.O. Key's
logic
century- cationofpoliticalscienceis thatitpresages

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JON R. BOND

902

functionalist
thatparties
are esizedrelationships
derivedfrompsychological
(1942)essentially
theory
of populargovernment.theory,
ina waythattheresearch
couldbe
to theoperation
conducted
necessary
andreplicated
Andwhileit is notpresented
as such,thiscan be repeated
(alsoseeLasswell
1925).
to
Arnold
Bennett
Hallorganized
conferences
onthe
as a theory
thatpolitical
develop
parties
interpreted
inthemid-1920s
thegoalof
action "science
with
ofpolitics"
whatwe wouldnowcallcollective
overcome
theories
methods
to study
teaches
scientific
and
Beard
also
1995).
(1910)
(Aldrich
problems
advancing
Hall
et
al.
behavior
that:
students
1925).It is
(Hall1924;
political

thatseveral
of thosewho
noteworthy
particularly
from
the
conferences
attended
reported
using
reports
in
as a basisforseminars,
that
indicating training
instruction
science
wasbecoming
partofgraduate
behavioral
1924,
scientific,
(Hall
121).Extending
science
course
the
to introductory
political
analysis
inthe1920s(Bates
wasthetheme
ofconferences
later
technical
And
1927;Spencer1928).
increasingly
in
Catlin
to
the
APSR
articles
1927;
(e.g.,
begin appear
Rice1926).
outlet
forsciButtheAPSRwasnottheexclusive
in
the
1920s.
entific
of
behavior
analysis political
in
research
ofbehavioral
Notable
appeared
examples
Incidence
The1920s:Increasing
Gosnell's
as
Merriam
and
such
books
Non-Voting:
ofBehavioralism
CausesandMethods
(1924)andGosnell's
ofControl
OuttheVote(1927).Furthermore,
evidence
thatthestudy Getting
Inthe1920sweseeincreasing
judging
inthese
cited
theliterature
morescientific,
withmore from
of politicsis becoming
studies,
quantitative,
were
behavior
ofpolitical
basedstudies
Theleaderof theoretically
andquantification.
on theory
emphasis
Ameriscience
social
common
in
other
others
was CharlesMerriam,
thistransition
(e.g.,
journals
though
andPolitical
SocialForces,
ofthestateof canJournal
Merriam's
contributed.
(1921)review
ofSociology,
Political
scientists
thatthe Science
in 1921is an earlyrecognition
thediscipline
amongothers).
Quarterly,
in
the
science
in
who
wanted
a
the
theoretical
more
was
of
grounded scienpolitical
study politics becoming
andoutlets
numerous
tific
had
method
Two
by
examples
yearslater,
waythatwe use the termtoday.
Merriam
(1923) was able to reviewa considerable the1920s.
on political
research
of thescientific
amount of researchdemonstrating
significant Findings
seemto
at
the
available
behavior
He
of
towardthescientific
time,however,
study politics.
progress
American
in undergraduate
thatusethemethod appearless regularly
ofstudies
notesseveral
examples
I systematically
textbooks.
with government
ofvarioustypesofinstitutions,
of"comparison
Although
ofFrederic
edition
similari- reviewed
theviewofclassifying,
one,I chosethefirst
only
discovering
analyzing,
to
American
Introduction
Orman
A.
and
in them"(1923,282),citing
tiesand dissimilarities
Ray's
Ogg P.
werepublished
editions
He also Government
Lowell(1908) amongothersas examples.
(1922).Revised
beconsidthis
book
and
until
the
be
to
which
came
of
a
"form
to
1950s,
might
early
investigation
points
such
a thing
can
be
if
there
its
of
ered
a
"classic"
to
researchers
in which
calledthesurvey"
genre,
attempt
PartI on
textbook.
American
to objec- asa "classic"
somesystemof measurement"
government
"standardize
is
of
Government"
and
Problems
Nature
the
"The
observeandexplainpoliticalbehavior(Merriam
tively
The
ofpolitical
in theliterature
accurate grounded
ofdeveloping
theory.
1923,283).He notesdifficulties
contain
of thebook,however,
sections
that remaining
andheobserves
measuresofpoliticalphenomena,
ofAmerican
oftheinstitutions
"seemedto be beyondthe legalistic
controlledexperiments
descriptions
onConThechapters
andstate
Yet national
reachofthestudentofpoliticalor socialscience."
government.
and
of
rules
contain
for
be
can
this
that
descriptions
Merriamexpresses
gress, example,
difficulty
optimism
of
the
does
discuss
Onechapter
importance
overcomebecausepoliticalprocessesareongoingand processes.
discicaucusin maintaining
and to verify theparty
party
strong
thatit "is possibleto drawinferences
or
research
evidence
no
there
is
but
He
observation"
theseinferences
empirical
pline,
(289).
by repeated
the
thisassertion.
to support
Similarly,
followedthisup withan analysisof"TheSignificance presented
focus
onlegalissues,
andvoting
onelections
forthe Studyof Politics"(Merriam chapters
of Psychology
orinfluence
the
of
discussions
include
no
but
research
he
advocated
in
which
origins
hypoth1924)
testing

ofCongress
is largely
determined
1. theworking
by
wasthecasewhenthis
thetwoparties
(267),which
bookwaswritten;
2. members
secure"pork"fortheirdistricts
through
and
in
reelected
order
to
(269-71);
get
"log-rolling"
condoneincommittees
3. legislative
workislargely
trolled
party.
bythemajority
inthe
behavior
wasevident
ofpolitical
So,theanalysis
occaand
there
are
of
the
formative
discipline,
stages
thatbehavior.
toexplain
sionalhintsoftheories

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE SCIENTIFICATION

OF THE STUDY OF POLITICS

ofpartyidentification.
Thus,whileI foundevidenceof
a considerable
bodyof researchon politicalbehavior
in professional
journals,thisresearchdid not make
into
this
its way
highlysuccessfulundergraduate
textbook.
continued
to
somepoliticalscientists
Nonetheless,
advocatea morescientific
approachto undergraduate
therewereconferences
that
In
the
late
1920s,
teaching.
includedroundtablesadvocatingadoptinga "funcstructural
tional"ratherthana descriptive,
approach
course(Bates1927;Spencer1928).
totheintroductory
to Durkheim([1895]
AlthoughI foundno reference
1982),theideasofthis"functional"
approacharecerwith
the
sociologicaltheoryof
tainlycompatible
forexample,
madea
Richard
"functionalism."
Spencer,
case fororganizing
coursesto "enablethestudentto
and
to
methodsrather
expect
applytrulyscientific
than impulsiveresponsesto politicalphenomena"
of this educationalgoal
(1928, 955). Achievement
withthefunassumes"thattheinstructor
is familiar
damentalmethodsof scientificinvestigation
and
notonlyin thesocialbutalso in thenatural
thought,
sciences-thathe is familiar
withtheuse of observainductive
tion, analysis,hypothesis,
measurement,
reasoning,synthesis,and the making of further
forpurposesofexperiment
and test."And
hypotheses
whatis meantby"function"?

903

discussionoftheseinstiusualapproachofrepeating
tutionsand processesforeach levelof government.
of the
The book containedlittleif anypresentation
research
on
of
scientific
politics.Chapfindings basic,
terson parties,
andlegislatures,
forexample,
elections,
containednone of the specificlessonsand findings
foundin Beard(1910).

Behavioral
The 1930sand 1940s:Scientific,
Takes
Hold
Analysis

quantitative
Bythe1930sand 1940s,articlesreporting
were
research
ofpoliticalbehaviorgroundedintheory
in theAPSRand the
appearingwithgreater
regularity
Politics.
Almondand
Articles
Gabriel
Journalof
by
Harold Lasswell (1934) and Harold Gosnell and
NormanGill (1935) reportresearchcontainingthe
elementsof the scientific
methodoutlinedearlier.
Gosnelland Gill's (1935) analysisof the 1932 presidentialelectionin Chicago,forexample,usedcorrelation, partial correlation,and factoranalysis,and
relatedthefindings
to theory.
theanalysisis
Although
not based on a representative
nationalsample,the
resultsof thisstudyare remarkably
consistent
with
foundin laterresearch.
V. O. Key(1943)
relationships
a
of
published quantitative
analysis interestgroup
influence
and howsupportor opposi(i.e.,Veterans)
tion to thatintereston roll-callvotesin Congress
of anything
is whatit by nature affected
Now,thefunction
members'
reelection.
AndhisSouthern
Politics
does. Politicsor governmental
is a
usefully
activity
in
function-one
of themanyfunctions
of society-the appeared 1949.
Weseeadditionalevidenceofthescientification
of
function
which
men
withtheposby
regulate
(usually
sibleemployment
of force)theiractivities
withand the disciplinein textbooks.
V. O. Keypublishedthe
toward
eachotheras individuals
orgroups
ofindividu- firsteditionof his undergraduate
textbook,
Politics,
theindividual
andviceversa. Partiesand Pressure
als,or as groupstoward
in 1942.The book is well
Groups
is a function
whichat itsborders
Government
blends
withmanyothersocialfunctions.
Whatgovernment groundedin thebasicresearchavailableat thattime.
doesconstitutes
thevariousfunctions
of government.Althoughit is not explicitin thisedition,we can see
ofKey'stripartite
definition
ofpolitical
its functions
with thebeginnings
performs
... What government
constitutes
theagencies
ofgovernment.
Theseagencies party-partyin theelectorate,
in
party government,
ofeither
formal
or informal and
maypossessthecharacter
in laterediparty
organization-that
appeared
structures
of thenatureof lawand custom.(Spencer
tions(Key 1958,180-82).Moreover,
Keyreportsthe
1928,957)
resultsof numerousstudiesof votingbehavior.For
The ultimateeducationalgoal of the functional example,Key's book taughtundergraduates
about
approachis buildinga generaltheoryof causes of partyvotingand partydisciplinein Congress(Key
politicalphenomena,and Spencerarguedthatthe 1942,502-503).Theylearnedthatinformal
groupsof
"Functionalattitudepreparesone to searchforthe "radicals"and"progressives"
weremorecohesivethan
of causeand effect"
eitherparty group (Rice 1928, 208-17) because
(1928,963).
relationship
I foundone Americangovernment
textbookthat members'reelection
goalcausesthemto supportconclaimedto adopt "a 'functional'as distinctfroma
overpartyifthereis conflict
stituency
(Herring1935,
'structural'
pointof view"(Anderson1938,iv). The 997). The chapteron ElectoralBehaviorreports
oftheapproach,
seemstobe
however,
dozensof quantitative
studiesexplaining
votechoice
implementation
littlemore than describinga particular"function" as a function
ofeconomicstatus,changein economic
and busicharacteristics,
(e.g., legislative,executive,and judicial) through status,culturalbackground
insteadof the nesscycles(Key1942,624-32).He explainsto undernational,state,and local government

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ION R. BOND

904

a studyby
graduates(Key1942,634) howto interpret
WilliamF.Ogburnand NellSnowTalbotpublishedin
SocialForces(1929) thatusespartialcorrelation
analysis to sort out the relativeinfluenceof several
variables-foreignborn, urban, Catholics,Democraticvoters,and "wet voters"-on supportforAl
Smithin 1928.Howmanycontemporary
undergraduate textbooksattemptto educatestudentsin techmethod?
niquesofthescientific
is groundedin
of
Key'spresentation thisresearch
Associated
The discussionof "Characteristics
theory.
withVoting"poses two questions:(1) are cleavages
electionexplainedby
betweenpartiesin a particular
economicinterest,
else;and
race,orsomething
wealth,
from
in
affiliation
for
what
accounts
(2)
changes party
electionto election?(Key 1942,623). He tellsunderhave been formugraduatesthat"manyhypotheses
a rational
of
them
"assume
that
most
but
lated,"
politicalman who votesin accordancewithhis estimateof how his 'interests'
maybe defendedor promoted"(624).
Althoughmuchof theearlyresearchfocusedon
scienpoliticalparties,electionsand votingbehavior,
tificanalysisof politicalbehaviorextendedto other
C. Herman Pritchett's
institutions.
analysisof the
Court
of
behavior
justicesis a parSupreme
voting
in
the
behavioralevomilestone
important
ticularly
lution.At the same time thatV. O. Key's parties
textbookfirstappeared,Pritchett
(1941, 1942) published studiesof the votingbehaviorof Supreme
PoliticalScienceReview
Courtjusticesin theAmerican
Pritchett
In
thesearticles,
Politics.
and intheJournal
of
Court
forhisbook TheRoosevelt
laidthegroundwork
(1948) and launchedwhat would evolveinto the
model"ofjudicialdecisionmaking(Segal
"attitudinal
and Spaeth1993).
of thisresearchis
The theoretical
underpinning
framework.
thestimulus-organism-response
Coming
out of therealisttheoryofjudicialdecisionmaking,
of the
Pritchett
arguesthat"itis theprivateattitudes
majorityof the Court whichbecome public law"
arerevealedby
(1941,890),and thejustices'attitudes
oflegal
theirvotes.He does notdenytheimportance
values in judicial decisionmaking.Most decisions
studiedwereunaniduringthecourttermPritchett
mous,andhe assumesthatinthesecases"thefactsand
is allowedfor
thelawareso clearthatno opportunity
of the justicesto lead themto
the autobiographies
Butthejustices'votesin nonopposingconclusions?'."
Sincethejusunanimouscasesrevealtheirattitudes.
ticesareexposedto thesamestimulus-"anidentical
set of facts,and.., roughlycomparabletrainingin
thelaw"-when theycome to different
conclusions,

the"divisionsof opiniongrowout of theconscious

or unconsciouspreferences
and prejudicesof the
The
allowed
Pritchett
(1941, 894)
justices."
analysis
to array the Justicesalong a left-right,
liberalconservativecontinuumwith Black and Douglas
anchoringthe liberal bloc and McReynoldsand
Robertson theright.
Andhe defined
ideologymuchas
in termsof theuse of governmental
we do currently
theuse governmental
favor
powerin
power-liberals
economicregulation
casesand conservatives
oppose,
but in civillibertiescases the positionsare reversed
withliberalsseekingto limitgovernment
authority
and conservatives
(895-96).
supporting
government
Pritchettreplicatedthe basic theoryand findings
withdata fromsubsequentCourttermsin an article
publishedin theJournalofPolitics(1942) and in a
book (1948).
methodto study
Thus,the use of the scientific
oftheorywas
and
the
behavior
development
political
the 1930sand 1940s.
advancingbriskly
through

So,WhatIs theStateofthe
ofPoliticalScience?
Scientification
of political
is thatthe scientification
My assessment
sciencehas progressed
duringthedisciconsiderably
method
The use of thescientific
pline'sfirstcentury.
to studypoliticalbehaviorwasevidentduringtheforcommonduring
mativeyearsandbecameincreasingly
to thescienthe1920s.Bythe1930s,thecommitment
tificstudyofpoliticalbehaviorwasfirmly
established,
severaldecadesbeforewe beganthatragingdebate
To me,the
overtheso-called"behavioralrevolution.:'
ofpoliticalsciencelookslesslikea revoscientification
lutionand morelikea trendthathas been evolving
I knowI willcease teachingmy
fromthebeginning.
thatscientific
students
studyin politicalsciencebegan
in the1960s.
distance
Despite havingtraveleda significant
downtheroadto becominga "real"science,however,
thanthe
we arestillin an earlierstageofdevelopment
naturaland materialsciences.Partof the reasonfor
as a scienceis thatpolitical
thelagin ourdevelopment
scienceis a truly"hard"science.The challengesto
of our key concepts
observationand measurement
thanthosefacingothersciences.ButI am
seemgreater
complex and
skepticalthat learningincreasingly
sophisticatedstatisticalmethodswill do much to
Thekindofrevoadvanceourscientific
development.
to propelpoliticalscienceto thenext
lutionnecessary
SirIsaac
intheory.
is a revolution
levelofdevelopment
to thescienceof physicswas
Newton'scontribution

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE SCIENTIFICATION

OF THE STUDY OF POLITICS

not the basic researchhe did, but ratherit was his

recognitionof how to put what physicists
already
knewtogether
intoa newoverarching
I believe
theory.
it's possiblethat politicalsciencehas accumulated
abouthowandwhypoliticswork
enoughinformation
as theydo to supportsucha synthesis.
Butno one has
comealongyettodo forpoliticalsciencewhatNewton
did forphysics.Lee Cronbachand PhilipConverse
were rightwhen theysaid, "In the social sciences,
waitingforNewtonis likewaitingforGodot"(quoted
in Wuffle
1986,59).
A reviewofthescientific
on politicspubresearch
lishedinthetoppoliticalsciencejournalsoverthepast
couple of decadesindicatesthateconomictheoryis
the dominanttheoreticalperspectivein
currently
science.
RonaldReagandefinedeconomists
as
political
thatworksin practiceand
"peoplewhoseesomething
wonderifitwouldworkin theory."
Or moreprecisely,
if
wonder
it
would
work
in
rational
choicetheory.
they
The answerit seems is always"yes"-any political
activitycan be analyzedand explainedas rational
actorsmakingrationalchoices.Despiteitsnumerous
contributions
and insightsabout politics,I am not
that
willprovidethat
persuaded rationalchoicetheory
Newtoniantheoreticalbreakthrough
for political
science.So far,it seemsto me thatrationalchoice
I oncesuggested
to an econotheoryis nonfalsifiable.
mistfriend
thatrationalchoicetheory
is a tautology"peopledo whatpeopledo." I was surprisedthathe
agreed,saying"yes,but it's an enormously
powerful
tautology."Powerfulindeed-powerfulenough to
becomethedominantparadigmin at leasttwosocial
sciencedisciplines.But I tendto agreewithPopper
unlessit is
(1959) thata theorycannotbe scientific
falsifiable
at leastin principle.
corrects
somemajor
Thus,whileeconomictheory
flawsin sociologicaltheoryand functionalism
(Barry
1970) and has madeour studyofpoliticsmorerigorous,I don'tthinkwe shoulduse and teachthistheoreticalframework
as the sole way to studypolitics
As we progress
as a scientific
I
scientifically.
discipline,
to thedominance
expectthattherewillbe challenges
ofeconomictheory,
thoughitis notclearto me what
thenextparadigmmightbe (Kuhn1962).Somepolitical scientists
have gainedtheoretical
leveragein the
and ecology
analysisofpoliticsfrombiology,
genetics,
(Alford,Funk,and Hibbing2005; Baumgartner
and
Jones1993;Carmen2004;GrayandLowery1996).I'm
not readyto embracethis perspective
as the next
dominantparadigmeither.
I do thinkwe havelearned
and willcontinueto learnfromdiverseperspectives.
To paraphrasethateconomiststrandedon thedesert
islandwithno wayto opena canofbeans,let'sassume

905

progress,and go ahead and conductthe research.

Normalscienceis nota bad thing.
Thus, we returnto that importantnormative
as a science,
questionof whetherour development
howeverretardedor advancedit maybe, is a good
I thinkit is a good thing.
thing.As I haveindicated,
AndI don'tbelievethatpoliticalscientists
areenemies
of greatness.
Professor
Mansfield
arguesthatbecause
"Modernscienceis... alwayson theadvance..,.the
like Galileo,Kepler,and
greatnessof past scientists
Newtonis diminishedby theirobsolescence"(2006,
xx). I disagree.Scienceis aboutthesearchfor"truth"
verified.
"Truth"are plural-thereis not
empirically
one truthforall timeand all things.If new evidence
comestolightthatrenders
someempirical
truthfalse,
the obsolescencedoes not diminishthe greatness
of thescientist
who made the greatdiscovery.
Does
Galileo's experiment
with fallingobjects falsifying
Aristotle's
ofgravity
diminish
Aristotle's
theory
greatness?The scientist
who corrects
errorsor revealsthe
limitationsof even the greatestscientific
discovery
deservesa shareof greatness,
butthegreatness
of the
remainsundiminished.
Greatoriginalcontribution
nessexpandsas newevidenceandnewideasadd tothe
storehouse
ofknowledge.
The scientific
methodis a journeyin searchof
truth.The first
stepis to askimportant
questions.An
indication
thatyouknowenoughto asktheimportant
of how muchyou don't
questionsis therecognition
know-thatis,youhavetoknowenoughtobe wrong.
The markof a scholaris a thirstto knowmore-to
correcttheerrorsand discoverevenmorequestions.
The truthsthatwe findalong the way are always
and reallyquitesecondaryto
incomplete,
transitory,
thequestions.Thisis thenatureofeducationin greatness.The greatness
ofeducationis in thejourney.

Acknowledgments
I am grateful
to RichardFleisher,GeorgeEdwards,
KimHill,PatriciaHurley,
JohnGeer,CaryNederman,
and probablyseveralothercolleaguesthatI haveforand suggestions.
gottenaboutforhelpfulcomments

References
Aldrich,JohnH. 1995.WhyParties?TheOriginand Transformation of PoliticalPartiesin America.Chicago: University
of
ChicagoPress.
Alford,
JohnR.,CarolynL. Funk,and JohnR. Hibbing.2005."Are
Political OrientationsGeneticallyTransmitted?"
American
PoliticalScienceReview99 (May): 153-68.

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JONR. BOND

906

ofthe
Almond,Gabriel,and Harold D. Lasswell.1934. "Aggressive Gosnell,HaroldE, and NormanN. Gill.1935."AnAnalysis
Behaviorby ClientsTowardPublicReliefAdministrators:
A
1932Presidential
Votein Chicago":'
American
PoliticalScience
AmericanPoliticalScienceReview28
Review29 (December):967-84.
Configurative
Analysis."
(August):643-55.
and David Lowery.1996.ThePopulation
Gray,Virginia,
Ecology
of
InterestRepresentation.
Ann Arbor:University
of Michigan
AmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation.1904."The Organization
Press.
of theAmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation."
Proceedings
of
the AmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation1 (FirstAnnual
TheMusical
Green,Joseph.1877."Musiciansand TheirMasters."
Meeting):5-15.
Timesand SingingClass Circular18 (No. 415, Sep. 1, 1877):
NewYork:Henry
417-19.
William.1938.American
Government.
Anderson,
Holtand Company.
Hall,ArnoldBennett.1924."Reportsof theNationalConference
on theScienceof Politics."
"Introduction."
American
Political
and Democracy.
Economists,
Barry,Brian.M. 1970. Sociologist,
ScienceReview18 (February):119-22.
London:Collier-Macmillan.
in PoliticalScienceon FuncBates,FrankG. 1927."Instruction
tional RatherThan DescriptiveLines."AmericanPolitical
ScienceReview21 (May):402-05.
FrankR., and BryanD. Jones.1993.Agendasand
Baumgartner,
inAmerican
ofChicago
Politics.
Instability
Chicago:University
Press.

L. L. Thurstone,
A. N. Holcombe,VictorJ.
Hall,ArnoldBennett,
and
West,MorrisB. Lambie,JohnA. Fairlie,EdwinA. Cottrell,
PitmanB. Potter.1925."ReportsoftheSecondNationalConferenceon theScienceof Politics."
American
PoliticalScience
Review19 (February):104-62.

E. Pendleton.1935."FirstSessionof theSeventy-fourth
Herring,
American
PoliticalScienceReview29 (December):
Congress."
and Politics.New
Beard,CharlesA. 1910.AmericanGovernment
997.
York:Macmillan.
EduHill,KimQuaile.2002."The LamentableStateof Scientific
ArthurF. 1908.TheProcessofGovernment.
Bloomington,
Bentley,
cationin PoliticalScience."PS: PoliticalScienceand Politics35
IN: PrincipiaPress.
(March):113-16.
A NewConcept
Bondurant,
JoanV. 1963."Paraguerrilla
Strategy:
V. 1984."JohnDeweyand theLiberal
Kaufman-Osborn,
Timothy
in ArmsControl'."
WeaponsManagementin WorldPolitics:
Scienceof Community.'
Journalof Politics46 (November):
ArmsControlSymposium,
Proceedingsof the International
1142-65.
7
Resolution
1962.
December,
Journal
(September):
ofConflict
Parties,and Pressure
235-45.
Groups.NewYork:
Key,V. 0. 1942.Politics,
ThomasY. Crowell.
vs.
1942.
"Human
Nature
Sensation:
Edwin
G.
William
Boring,
A
andtheHouseofRepresentatives:
ofthePresent."
American
Key,V.0. 1943."TheVeterans
Journal
Jamesand thePsychology
of
Journal
55 (July):310-27.
Groupand ElectoralMortality."
of
Studyofa Pressure
Psychology
27-40.
Politics5 (February):
Burkeman,Oliver. 2005. "Not Even Wrong."The Guardian.
0.
Politicsin Stateand Nation.NewYork:
V.
1949.
Southern
Key,
MondaySeptember19, 2005. http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/
Books.
2007.
Vintage
30,
May
story/0,,1573072,00.html.
andPressure
Parties,
Groups.4thed. New
TheConstitution
Key,V. 0. 1958.Politics,
in theLaboratory:
Carmen,IraH. 2004.Politics
of
York:Crowell.
ofWisconsinPress.
Madison:University
HumanGenomics.
Revolutions.
Kuhn,Thomas S. 1962. The Structure
of Scientific
of
andMeasurability
Catlin,GeorgeE. G. 1927."TheDelimitation
ofChicago
Press.
Chicago:
University
PoliticalPhenomena."AmericanPoliticalScienceReview21
Studiesin PoliticalPsyHaroldD. 1925."TwoForgotten
Lasswell,
(May):255-69.
AmericanPoliticalScienceReview19 (November):
chology."
Medieval'ConCase
and
L.
1963.
Fredric
Law,
"Custom,
Cheyette,
707-17.
PoliticalScienceQuarterly
A Re-Examination."
stitutionalism':
78 (September):362-90.
Lasswell,HaroldD. 1938.Politics:WhoGetsWhat,When,How.
NewYork:McGraw-Hill.
Five
of
the
of
Committee
ofFive.1908."ReportoftheCommittee
In EssaysontheScientific
AmericanPoliticalScience Associationon Instructionin
Leo Strauss.1962."AnEpilogue."
Studyof
and
in SecondarySchools."Proceedings
AmericanGovernment
Politics,ed. HerbertStoring.New York:Holt,Rinehart,
of
the AmericanPoliticalScienceAssociation5 (FifthAnnual
Winston.
Meeting):219-57.
Lowell,A. Lawrence.1908. The Government
ofEngland,Vol. II.
Macmillan.
New
York:
of
Blanched
Adventure
the
"The
1926.
Arthur
Conan.
Doyle,
Holmes.ClassicLiterature Lowell,A. Lawrence.
TheCase BookofSherlock
Soldier'."
ofPolitics:Presidential
1910."ThePhysiology
Library. http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/d/doyle/Arthur
Address,SixthAnnual Meetingof the AmericanPolitical
conan/d75ca/blanched.soldier.html.
June17,2007.
American
PoliticalScienceReview4 (FebScienceAssociation."
Method.New
Durkheim,
ruary):1-15.
tmile. [1895] 1982.RulesofSociological
York:FreePress.
The EducaMansfield,
Harvey.2006."Democracyand Greatness:
tion AmericansNeed?" The WeeklyStandard12, Issue 13,
and Their
Fenno,RichardF.,Jr.1978.HomeStyle:HouseMembers
Boston:Little,Brown.
Districts.
12/11/2006.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/
June16,2007.
Articles/000/000/013/038zkkwf.asp.
ProceedFord,HenryJones.1905."TheScopeofPoliticalScience'."
"The
Stateof the Studyof
Present
E.
1921.
Charles
Merriam,
2
Association
Science
American
Political
the
(Second
ingsof
PoliticalScienceReview15 (May): 173-85.
American
Politics."
AnnualMeeting):198-206.
CharlesE. 1923."RecentAdvancesinPoliticalMethods'."
Goodnow,FrankJ.1904."The Workof The AmericanPolitical Merriam,
PoliticalScienceReview17 (May):275-95.
American
Science Association'."
of the AmericanPolitical
Proceedings
1 (FirstAnnualMeeting):35-46.
ScienceAssociation
forthe
ofPsychology
CharlesE. 1924."TheSignificance
Merriam,
American
PoliticalScienceReview18 (May):
Out theVote.Chicago:University
Studyof Politics'."
Gosnell,HaroldF. 1927.Getting
469-88.
ofChicagoPress.

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE SCIENTIFICATION

OF THE STUDY OF POLITICS

Merriam,CharlesE., and Harold F. Gosnell.1924.Non-Voting:

CausesandMethodsofControl.
ofChicago
Chicago:University
Press.
O'Connor,Edwin. 1956. The Last Hurrah.New York:Bantam
Books.
Ogburn,WilliamF.,and NellSnowTalbot.1929."A Measurement
Electionof 1928."SocialForces
oftheFactorsinthePresidential
8 (December):175-83.
toAmeriA.,and P. OrmanRay.1922.Introduction
Ogg,Frederic
can Government.
NewYork:The CenturyCo.
New York:
Popper,Karl. 1959. The Logicof Scientific
Discovery.
BasicBooks.
C. Herman.1941."DivisionsofOpinionAmongJustices
Pritchett,
of the U. S. SupremeCourt,1939-1941."AmericanPolitical
ScienceReview35 (October):890-98.
C. Herman.1942."TheVotingBehavioroftheSupreme
Pritchett,
Court,1941-42."Journal
ofPolitics4 (November):491-506.
C. Herman.1948.TheRoosevelt
Court:A StudyinJudicial
Pritchett,
Politicsand Values,1937-1946.NewYork:Macmillan.
of Statistical
Methodto
Rice,StuartA. 1926."SomeApplications
PoliticalResearch."
American
PoliticalScienceReview20 (May):
313-29.
Methodsin Politics.
NewYork:
Rice,StuartA. 1928.Quantitative
Knopf.
Rogers,JamesR. 2006."Appendix:Primeron Game Theory."In
Institutional
Gamesand theU.S. SupremeCourt,ed. JamesR.
and JonR. Bond. Charlottesville:
Rogers,Roy B. Flemming,
ofVirginiaPress.
University
Schaar,JohnH.,andSheldonS. Wolin.1963."ReviewEssay:Essays
on theScientific
A Critique."
American
PolitiStudyofPolitics:
cal ScienceReview57 (March):125-50.
A., and HaroldJ.Spaeth.1993.The SupremeCourt
Segal,Jeffrey
and theAttitudinal
Model.New York:CambridgeUniversity
Press.

907

Address:ThirdAnnualMeeting
Shaw,Albert.1907."Presidential
oftheAmerican
PoliticalScienceAssociation."
American
Political ScienceReview1 (February):177-86.
Sigelman,Lee. 2006. "The Coevolutionof AmericanPolitical
Scienceand theAmerican
PoliticalScienceReview."
American
PoliticalScienceReview100 (November):463-78.
The Domain of Political
Smith,Munroe.1886."Introduction:
Science."PoliticalScienceQuarterly
1 (March):1-8.
and Research:
Spencer,RichardC. 1928."Noteson Instruction
Significanceof FunctionalApproachin the Introductory
Coursein PoliticalScience."American
PoliticalScienceReview
22 (November):954-66.
Prices."
Stigler,GeorgeJ. 1938."SocialWelfareand Differential
20 (August):573-86.
Journal
ofFarmEconomics
HerbertJ.1962.Essayson theScientific
Storing,
StudyofPolitics.
NewYork:Holt,Rinehart
and Winston.
HerbertJ.,Leo Strauss,
WalterBerns,Leo Weinstein,
and
Storing,
RobertHorwitz.1963."Repliesto Schaarand Wolin:1-IV."
American
PoliticalScienceReview57 (March):151-60.
Strauss,Leo. 1962."Epilogue."In Essayson theScientific
Studyof
ed. HerbertJ.Storing.New York:Holt,Rinehartand
Politics,
Winston,305-28.
Peter.2002. "The Momentof TruthforScience:The
Weingart,
Consequencesof the 'KnowledgeSociety'for Societyand
Science."EMBO reports3, 8, 703-706 doi:10.1093/emboreports/kvfl65.
http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v3/n8/
14#B14.
full/embor093.html#B
June16,2007.
A. 1986."Reflections
on Academia."PS: PoliticalScience
Wuffle,
and Politics19 (Winter):57-61.

JonR. Bond is immediatepast presidentof the

SouthernPoliticalScienceAssociationand professor
of politicalscience,TexasA&M University,
College
Station,TX 77843.

This content downloaded from 136.159.235.223 on Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:50:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions