Element contents
A History of Political Science
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2022
Summary
This Element denaturalises political science, stressing the contestability and contingency of ideas, traditions, subfields, and even the discipline itself. The history of political science is less one of scholars testing and improving theories by reference to data than of their appropriating and transforming ideas, often obscuring or obliterating former meanings, to serve new purposes in shifting political contexts. Political science arose in the late nineteenth century as part of a wider modernism that replaced earlier developmental narratives with more formal explanations. It changed as some scholars yoked together behavioural topics, quantitative techniques, and positivist theory, and as other scholars rejected their doing so. Subfields such as International Relations remained semi-detached and focused on policy as much as theory. Furthermore, the shifting fashions within political science – modernism, behaviouralism, realism, neoliberalism, the new institutionalism – have informed the policies by which governments have tried to tame contingency and govern people.
Keywords
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009043458Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 11 August 2022
Bibliography
Adams, H. (1892). The Germanic Origins of New England Towns. John Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 2, 5–38.Google Scholar
Adams, H. (1884). Special Methods of Historical Study. Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 1, 25–137.Google Scholar
Adams, H. (1895). Is History Past Politics? Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 3, 68–75.Google Scholar
Adcock, R. (2003). The Emergence of Political Science as a Discipline: History and the Study of Politics in America, 1875–1910. History of Political Thought, 24, 481–508.Google Scholar
Adcock, R. (2007). Interpreting Behavioralism. In Adcock, R., Bevir, M. and Stimson, S., eds., Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1880. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 181–208.Google Scholar
Adcock, R. (2014a). A Disciplinary History of Disciplinary Histories: The Case of Political Science. In Backhouse, R. and Fontaine, P., eds., A Historiography of the Modern Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 211–36.Google Scholar
Adcock, R. (2014b). Liberalism and the Emergence of American Political Science: A Transatlantic Tale. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aksu, E. ed. (2008). Early Notions of Global Governance: Selected Eighteenth-Century Proposals for ‘Perpetual Peace’. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Almond, G. (1960). A Functional Approach to Comparative Politics. In Almond, G. and Coleman, J., eds., The Politics of the Developing Areas. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 3–64.Google Scholar
Almond, G. (1965). A Developmental Approach to Political Systems. World Politics, 17, 183–214.Google Scholar
Almond, G. (1995). Political Science: The History of the Discipline. In Goodin, R. and Klingemann, H., eds., A New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 50–96.Google Scholar
Amadae, S. (2003). Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy: The Cold War Origins of Rational Choice Liberalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baer, M., Jewell, M., and Sigelman, L., eds. (1991). Political Science in America: Oral Histories of a Discipline. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Ball, T., Hauptmann, E., Gunnell, J. et al. (2017). Symposium: The Berkeley School of Political Theory. PS: Political Science and Politics, 50, 789–810.Google Scholar
Bancroft, G. (1860–74). A History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent to the Present Time, 8 vols. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Barker, E. (1915). Political Thought in England from Herbert Spencer to Present Day. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Barker, E. (1944). The Development of Public Services in Europe, 1660–1930. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barkin, J. (2015). On the Heuristic Use of Formal Models in International Relations Theory. International Studies Review, 17, 617–34.Google Scholar
Barzelay, M. (2001). The New Public Management. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Beard, C. (1961). An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Beer, S. (1956). Pressure Groups and Parties in Britain. American Political Science Review, 50, 1–23.Google Scholar
Beer, S. (1958). The Analysis of Political Systems. In Beer, S. and Ulam, A., eds., Patterns of Government: The Major Political Systems of Europe. New York: Random House, pp. 3–68.Google Scholar
Beer, S. (1963a). Causal Explanation and Imaginative Re-enactment. History and Theory, 3, 6–29.Google Scholar
Beer, S. (1963b). Modern British Politics: A Study of Parties and Pressure Groups. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Beer, S. (1970). Political Science and History. In Richter, M., ed., Essays in Theory and History: An Approach to the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 41–73.Google Scholar
Bentley, M. (2011). The Life and Thought of Herbert Butterfield: History, Science and God. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. (1999). The Logic of the History of Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bevir, M. (2002). Sidney Webb: Utilitarianism, Positivism, and Social Democracy. Journal of Modern History, 74, 217–52.Google Scholar
Blakely, J. (2016). Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, and the Demise of Naturalism. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Blakely, J. (2020). We Built Reality: How Social Science Infiltrated Culture, Politics, and Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boston, J., Martin, J., Pallot, J., and Walsh, P. (1996). Public Management: The New Zealand Model. Auckland: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bremner, G. and Conlin, J., eds. (2015). Making History: Edward Augustus Freeman and Victorian Cultural Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bryce, J. (1909). Presidential Address to the Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. American Political Science Quarterly, 3, 10–6.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1966). International Theory: The Case for a Classical Approach. World Politics, 18, 361–77.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1977). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Burgess, J. (1891). Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law, 2 vols. Boston: Ginn.Google Scholar
Burgess, J. (1897). Political Science and History. In Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1896. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, pp. 201–20.Google Scholar
Burgess, J. (1934). Reminiscences of an American Scholar. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Burrow, J. (1981). A Liberal Descent: Victorian Historians and the English Past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burton, J. (1965). International Relations: A General Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, D., and Stokes, D. (1969). Political Change in Britain: Forces Shaping Electoral Choice. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Butterfield, H., and Wight, M. (1966). Preface. In Butterfield, H. and Wight, M., eds., Diplomatic Investigations: Essays on the Theory of International Politics. London: Allen & Unwin, pp. 11–3.Google Scholar
Campbell, A., Miller, W., and Converse, P. (1960). The American Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chapman, R. (1981). To Rent or Buy? Housing Tenure Choice in New Zealand. Ph.D. Thesis, New Zealand: University of Auckland.Google Scholar
Chapman, R. (1989). Core Public Sector Reform in New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Public Money & Management, 9, 44–9.Google Scholar
Collini, S. (1988). ‘Disciplinary History’ and ‘Intellectual History’: Reflections on the Historiography of the Social Sciences in Britain and France. Revue de Synthese, 3, 387–99.Google Scholar
Collini, S. (1991). Public Moralists: Political Thought and Intellectual Life in Britain 1850–1930. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Collini, S. (2009). Postscript: Disciplines, Canons, and Publics: The History of ‘The History of Political Thought’ in Comparative Perspective. In Castiglione, D. and Hampsher-Monk, I., eds., The History of Political Thought in National Context, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 280–302.Google Scholar
Collini, S., Winch, D., and Burrow, J. (1983). That Noble Science of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crowther-Heyck, H. (2005). Herbert A. Simon: The Bounds of Reason in Modern America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
den Otter, S. (1996). British Idealism and Social Explanation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Deutsch, K. (1963). The Nerves of Government: Models of Political Communication and Control. London: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
Dolan, P., Hallsworth, M., Halpern, D., King, D., and Vlaev, I. (2010). Mindspace: Influencing Behaviour through Public Policy. London: Cabinet Office.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H., and Rabinow, P. (1983). Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1953). The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Easton, D., Gunnell, J., and Graziano, L. (1991). The Development of Political Science: A Comparative Survey, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Englander, D., and O’Day, R., eds. (1995). Retrieved Riches: Social Investigation in Britain, 1880–1914. Aldershot: Scolar Press.Google Scholar
Evans, P. (1979). Dependent Development: The Alliance of Multinational, State, and Local Capital in Brazil. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, P., Rueschemeyer, D., and Skocpol, T., eds. (1985). Bringing the State Back In. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Farr, J. (1988). Political Science and the Enlightenment of Enthusiasm. American Political Science Review, 82, 51–69.Google Scholar
Farr, J. (1991). Political Science and the State. In Brown, J. and van Keuren, D., eds., The Estate of Social Knowledge. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Farr, J. (1995). Remembering the Revolution. In Farr, J., Dryzek, J., and Leonard, S., eds., Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 198–224.Google Scholar
Finer, H. (1921). Foreign Governments at Work: An Introductory Study. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Finer, H. (1970). Theory and Practice of Modern Government. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Forrester, K. (2019). In the Shadow of Justice: Postwar Liberalism and the Remaking of Political Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Fortes, M., and Evans-Pritchard, E. (1940). African Political Systems. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1984). Nietzsche, Genealogy, History. In Rabinow, P., ed., The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books, pp.76–100.Google Scholar
Frei, C. (2001). Hans J. Morgenthau: An Intellectual Biography. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.Google Scholar
Freyberg-Inan, A. (2003). What Moves Man: The Realist Theory of International Relations and Its Judgment of Human Nature. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Friedrich, C. (1929). Review of Quantitative Methods in Politics. American Political Science Review, 23, 1022–7.Google Scholar
Friedrich, C. (1953). Comments on the Seminar Report. American Political Science Review, 47, 658–61.Google Scholar
Galisanka, A. (2019). John Rawls: The Path to A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gilman, N. (2003). Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in Cold War America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Goldfinch, S. (1998). Remaking New Zealand’s Economic Policy: Institutional Elites as Radical Innovators, 1984–1993. Governance, 11, 177–207.Google Scholar
Goodin, R., and Klingemann, H.-D. (1998). Political Science: The Discipline. In Goodin, R. and Klingemann, H.-D., eds., A New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–49.Google Scholar
Griffith, E., ed. (1948). Research in Political Science. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Guilhot, N., ed. (2011). The Invention of International Relations Theory: Realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gunnell, J. (2007). Making Democracy Safe for the World: Political Science between the Wars. In Adcock, R., Bevir, M., and Stimson, S., eds., Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1880. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 137–57.Google Scholar
Gutting, G. (1989). Michel Foucault’s Archaeology of Scientific Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haas, E. (1964). Beyond the Nation-State: Functionalism and International Organization. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, I. (2012). Dilemmas of Decline: British Intellectuals and World Politics, 1945–75. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hall, I. (2014). The Second Image Traversed: Kenneth N. Waltz’s Theory of Foreign Policy. Australian Journal of Political Science, 49, 535–41.Google Scholar
Hall, P., ed. (1989). The Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynesianism across Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, P., and Taylor, R. (1996). Political Science and the Three Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44, 936–57.Google Scholar
Halliday, F. (1988). Three Concepts of Internationalism. International Affairs, 64, 187–98.Google Scholar
Hauptmann, E. (2005). Defining ‘Theory’ in Postwar Political Science. In Steinmetz, G., ed., The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and its Epistemological Others. Chapel Hill: Duke University Press, pp. 207–32.Google Scholar
Hay, C. (2014). Neither Real nor Fictitious but ‘as if Real’? A Political Ontology of the State. British Journal of Sociology, 65, 459–80.Google Scholar
Haynes, L., Service, O., Goldacre, B., and Torgerson, D. (2012). Test, Learn, Adapt: Developing Public Policy with Randomised Controlled Trials. London: Cabinet Office.Google Scholar
Hayward, J., Barry, B., and Brown, A., eds. (1999). The British Study of Politics in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heaney, M. and Hansen, J. (2006). Building the Chicago School. American Political Science Review, 100, 589–96.Google Scholar
Herbst, J. (1965). The German Historical School in American Scholarship. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Herring, P. (1929). Group Representation before Congress. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Herring, P. (1953). On the Study of Government. American Political Science Review, 47, 961–74.Google Scholar
Heyck, H. (2007). Administrative Science. In Bevir, M., ed., Modernism and the Social Sciences: Anglo-American Exchanges, c. 1918–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 155–81.Google Scholar
Heyck, H. (2015). The Age of System: The Rise and Fracture of High Modern Social Science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. (1993). The Political Origins of Bretton Woods. In Bordo, M., Barry, J. and Eichengreen, B., eds., A Retrospective on the Bretton Woods System. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 155–82.Google Scholar
Isaac, J. (2012). Working Knowledge: Making the Human Sciences from Parsons to Kuhn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1949). The Philosophy of Kant, trans. C. Friedrich. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Katznelson, I. (1994). The State to the Rescue? Political Science and History Reconnect. Social Research, 59, 719–37.Google Scholar
Keohane, R. (1988). International Institutions: Two Approaches. International Studies Quarterly, 32, 379–96.Google Scholar
Key, V. (1958). The State of the Discipline. American Political Science Review, 52, 961–71.Google Scholar
King, A. (1975). Overload: Problems of Governing in the 1970s. Political Studies, 23, 284–96.Google Scholar
Kloppenberg, J. (1986). Uncertain Victory: Social Democracy and Progressivism in European and American Thought, 1870–1920. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koopman, C. (2013). Genealogy as Critique: Foucault and the Problems of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, M. (2004). The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law, 1870–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. (1983). Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables. In Krasner, S., ed., International Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Latham, M. (2000). Modernization as Ideology: American Social Science and ‘Nation Building’ in the Kennedy Era. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., and Gaudet, H. (1944). The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes up his Mind in a Presidential Election. New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce.Google Scholar
Linklater, A. (1990). Beyond Realism and Marxism: Critical Theory and International Relations. Houndmills: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lippincott, B. (1940). The Bias of American Political Science. Journal of Politics, 2, 125–39.Google Scholar
Lloyd, W. (1949). The United Nations and World Federalism. The Antioch Review, 9, 16–28.Google Scholar
Lowell, A. (1896). Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, 2 vols. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin.Google Scholar
Lowenberg, G. (2006). The Influence of European Émigré Scholars on Comparative Politics, 1925–65. American Political Science Review, 100, 597–604.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. (1962). A Mistake about Causality in the Social Sciences. In Laslett, P. and Runciman, W., eds., Philosophy, Politics, and Society. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 48–70.Google Scholar
Mandler, P. (2000). ‘Race’ and ‘Nation’ in Mid-Victorian Thought. In Collini, S., Whatmore, R., and Young, B., eds., History, Religion, and Culture: British Intellectual History 1750–1950. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 224–44.Google Scholar
Mannheim, K. (1940). Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction: Studies in Modern Social Structure, trans. E. Shils. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
McBriar, A. (1987). An Edwardian Mixed Doubles: The Bosanquets versus the Webbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McCallum, R., and Readman, A. (1947). The British General Election of 1945. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McKay, D. (1999). Federalism and the European Union: A Political Economy Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Merriam, C. (1970). The Present State of the Study of Politics. In New Aspects of Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 63–83.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1965). Principles of Political Economy, Books I-II. Vol. II of The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, P., and Plehwe, D., eds. (2009). The Road from Mont Pelerin: The Making of the Neoliberal Thought Collective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mitrany, D. (1943). A Working Peace System. London: Royal Institute for International Affairs.Google Scholar
Moe, T. (1984). The New Economics of Organization. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 739–77.Google Scholar
Morefield, J. (2005). Covenants without Swords: Idealist Liberalism and the Spirit of Empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Morgenthau, H. (1954). Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Murphy, C. (1994). International Organization and Industrial Change: Global Governance since 1850. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nietzsche, F. (2007). On the Genealogy of Morality, ed. Ansell-Pearson, K., trans. Diethe, C.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Odegard, P. (1928). Pressure Politics: The Story of the Anti-Saloon League. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Olsen, N. (2019). The Sovereign Consumer: A New Intellectual History of Neoliberalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Paul, H. (2008). A Collapse of Trust: Reconceptualizing the Crisis of Historicism. Journal of the Philosophy of History, 2, 63–82.Google Scholar
Pederson, S., and Mandler, P., eds. (1994). After the Victorians: Private Conscience and Public Duty in Modern Britain. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pemberton, J.-A. (2020). The Story of International Relations, 3 vols. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review, 92, 251–67.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. and Skocpol, T. (2002). Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science. In Katznelson, I. and Milner, H., eds., Political Science: The State of the Discipline. New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 693–721.Google Scholar
Pitkin, H. (1972). Wittgenstein and Justice: On the Significance of Ludwig Wittgenstein for Social and Political Thought. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C., and Bouckaert, G. (2000). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Prinz, J., and Raekstad, P. Forthcoming. The Value of Genealogies for Political Philosophy. Inquiry.Google Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, A. (1924). The Mother’s Brother in South Africa. South African Journal of Science, 21, 542–55.Google Scholar
Riker, W. (1980). Implications from the Disequilibrium of Majority Rule for the Study of Institutions. American Political Science Review, 74, 432–47.Google Scholar
Riker, W. (1982). The Two-Party System and Duverger’s Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science. American Political Science Review, 76, 753–66.Google Scholar
Risk and Regulation Advisory Council. (2009). Building Resilient Communities, from Ideas to Sustainable Action. London: RRAC.Google Scholar
Rittel, H., and Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–69.Google Scholar
Rodgers, D. (1998). Atlantic Crossings: Progressive Politics in a Social Age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (1990). On the Misunderstanding of Ranke and the Origins of the Historical Profession in America. In Iggers, G. and Powell, J., eds., Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of the Historical Discipline. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, pp. 154–69.Google Scholar
Ross, D. (1991). The Origins of American Social Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, D., ed. (1994). Modernist Impulses in the Human Sciences, 1870–1930. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J. (1975). International Responses to Technology: Concepts and Trends. International Organization, 29, 557–83.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J. (1983). International Regimes, Transactions and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order. In Krasner, S., ed., International Regimes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 195–232.Google Scholar
Sagan, S. and Waltz, K. (2003). The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Sateriale, C. (2011, September 1). Interview with Professor Allen Schick. Public Financial Management Blog. Retrieved January 9, 2022, from https://blog-pfm.imf.org/pfmblog/2011/09/interview-with-professor-allen-schick-.htmlGoogle Scholar
Schattschneider, E. (1935). Politics, Pressures, and the Tariff. New York: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Schick, A. (1996). The Spirit of Reform: Managing the New Zealand State Sector in a Time of Change. Wellington State Services Commission.Google Scholar
Scott, W. (1992). Chester I. Barnard and the Guardians of the Managerial State. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Shepsle, K. (1979). Institutional Arrangements and Equilibrium in Multidimensional Voting Models. American Journal of Political Science, 23, 27–60.Google Scholar
Shepsle, K., and Weingast, B. (1981). Structure-Induced Equilibria and Legislative Choice. Public Choice, 37, 503–19.Google Scholar
Sigelman, L. (2006). The Coevolution of American Political Science and the American Political Science Review. American Political Science Review, 100, 463–78.Google Scholar
Skinner, Q. (2009). A Genealogy of the Modern State. Proceedings of the British Academy, 162, 325–70.Google Scholar
Skocpol, T. (1978). States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Skowronek, S. (1982). Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. (1987). Paradigm Dominance in International Relations: The Development of International Relations as a Social Science. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 16, 189–206.Google Scholar
Somit, A., and Tanenhaus, J. (1967). The Development of Political Science: From Burgess to Behavioralism. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
SSRC Committee on Political Behavior. (1950). Committee Briefs: Political Behavior. Social Science Research Council Items, 4, 20.Google Scholar
Stapleton, J. (1994). Englishness and the Study of Politics: The Social and Political Thought of Ernest Barker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stapleton, J. (2000). Political Thought and National Identity, 1850–1950. In Collini, S., Whatmore, R., and Young, B., eds., History, Religion, and Culture: British Intellectual History 1750–1950, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 245–69.Google Scholar
Stedman Jones, D. (2014). Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. (1987). Principal and Agent. The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, 3, 966–71.Google Scholar
Stubbs, W. (1904). The Letters of William Stubbs, ed., Hutton, W.. London: Archibald Constable.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1971). Interpretation and the Sciences of Man. Review of Metaphysics, 25, 3–51.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Thakur, V., Davis, A., and Vale, P. (2017). Imperial Mission, ‘Scientific Method’: An Alternative Account of the Origins of IR. Millennium, 46, 3–23Google Scholar
Thelen, K. and Steinmo, S. (1992). Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics. In Steinmo, S., Thelen, K., and Longstreth, F., eds., Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
Treasury. (1987). Government Management: Briefing to the Incoming Government 1987, vol. 1. Wellington: Treasury.Google Scholar
Tully, J., ed. (1988). Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
UNESCO. (1950). Contemporary Political Science: A Survey of Methods, Research and Teaching. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Vitalis, R. (2015). White World Order, Black Power Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wallis, J. (1997). The Schick Report: Evaluating State Sector Reform in New Zealand. Agenda, 4, 489–94.Google Scholar
Williams, A. (2007). Failed Imagination? The Anglo-American New World Order from Wilson to Bush. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Winch, P. (1958). The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zimmern, A. (1936). The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 1918–1935. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
- 14
- Cited by