“Comparativists want to understand the critical events of the day, a position that ensures that dreams of theory address the political world as it exists, not formal abstractions or utopias.” (Lichbach/Zuckerman 1997: 3-4)
These are ambitious goals of comparativists. The aim of this paper is to further expose the goals and the methods of the field of comparative politics. In order to do so, one has to define “field” to begin with and then go on with defining the subfield of political science. What is comparative politics, how did the field emerge and what are its methods? These are questions to be answered by this paper.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 What is comparative politics and what are its goals?
3 How did the field emerge?
4 What are the methods of the field?
5 Case studies – an important tool
6 Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this paper is to explore the fundamental goals and methodological framework of comparative politics as a subfield within political science. It seeks to clarify how the field defines itself, how it emerged historically, and how researchers utilize specific analytical tools to explain and generalize political phenomena.
- Definitions and scope of comparative politics
- Historical emergence of the field
- Methodological approaches: Rational choice, culturalist, and structural
- The significance and application of case studies
- Theory-building and generalization in political inquiry
Excerpt from the Book
Case studies – an important tool
What is a case study? John Gerring answers by defining it as an “intensive study of a single unit with an aim to generalize across a larger set of units” (Gerring 2004:341). In other words a case study is the examination of individual cases or a group of cases in order to derive general theories from the examination in order to apply the theories to a larger class of similar phenomena. Case studies are an important technique, which all three theoretical schools within the field of comparative politics use.
Research designs face the choice between knowing more about less (in depth study of a single case) and knowing less about more (in breadth study of more than one case). From the former one can expect no generalizations but theory-building, which then could lead to the latter – in breath case studies.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter establishes the scope of the paper, aiming to define the field of comparative politics and its primary research objectives.
2 What is comparative politics and what are its goals?: This section explores how comparative politics is characterized as a subfield and its pursuit of explaining and generalizing theories regarding political phenomena.
3 How did the field emerge?: This chapter briefly examines the historical development of the field, noting its expansion in response to post-World War II political challenges.
4 What are the methods of the field?: This section categorizes the major theoretical schools within the field, specifically identifying rational choice, culturalist approaches, and structural analysis.
5 Case studies – an important tool: This chapter defines the function of case studies as an intensive research technique used to facilitate theory-building and generalization.
6 Conclusion: This final chapter addresses the inherent challenges in comparative research, such as variable limitations and the necessity of rigorous methodology.
Keywords
Comparative politics, Political Science, Methodology, Theory-building, Case studies, Rational choice, Culturalist approach, Structural analysis, Generalization, Democratization, Regime changes, Electoral systems, Political phenomena, Field of study, Research design
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this paper?
The paper examines the identity of comparative politics, investigating whether it is defined primarily by its subject matter or by its specific scientific methods.
What are the central themes discussed in the work?
The work focuses on the goals of explanation and generalization, the historical evolution of the discipline, and the three major theoretical schools of thought.
What is the primary goal of the author?
The goal is to define the field of comparative politics and provide an overview of the methodologies used to analyze political phenomena.
Which scientific methods are analyzed?
The paper highlights three key approaches: rational choice theories, culturalist approaches, and structural analyses.
What does the main body cover?
The main body covers the definition of the field, its historical origins, the categorization of its methods, and the specific utility of case studies in research.
Which keywords characterize this paper?
Key terms include comparative politics, methodology, theory-building, case studies, rational choice, and structural analysis.
How does the author define a "field" in political science?
The author defines a field as a class of objects under study, characterized by specific approaches and methods that are of general scientific interest.
What is the relationship between case studies and theory-building?
The author argues that theory-building is a major objective of comparativists and is best derived from in-depth single case analyses.
Why does the author warn against "monkey-stone" comparisons?
The author refers to Giovanni Sartori to emphasize that comparisons must be meaningful and that researchers should avoid superficial methodologies.
- Quote paper
- Claudia Baczewski (Author), 2005, Comparative Politics: Method or Field?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/63375
