This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Munck, G. L. Articles by Snyder, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Debating the Direction of Comparative Politics

An Analysis of Leading Journals

University of Southern California, Los Angeles

Richard Snyder

Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island

This article contributes to ongoing debates about the direction of comparative politics through an analysis of new data on the scope, objectives, and methods of research in the field. The results of the analysis are as follows. Comparative politics is a rich and diverse field that cannot be accurately characterized on the basis of just one dimension or even summarized in simple terms. In turn, the tendency to frame choices about the direction of the field in terms of a stark alternative between an old area studies approach and a new economic approach relies on largely unsupported assumptions. It is therefore advisable to focus on problematic methodological practices that, as this study shows, are widespread in comparative research and thus pose serious impediments to the production of knowledge.

Key Words: comparative politics • paradigm • scope • methods • area studies • rational choice

Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 40, No. 1, 5-31 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0010414006294815


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I. Rohlfing What You See and What You Get: Pitfalls and Principles of Nested Analysis in Comparative Research Comparative Political Studies, November 1, 2008; 41(11): 1492 - 1514. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. M. Jones Book Review: Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Comparative Political Studies, January 1, 2008; 41(1): 128 - 131. [PDF]