FROM THE BEHAVIORAL ANALYSIS TO POST-BEHAVIORALISM: HISTORY OF PARADIGM
https://doi.org/10.24290/1029-3736-2017-23-1-28-48
Abstract
Article is devoted to the review of formation and decline of behavioralism paradigm in political science. The author begins the analysis with critical consideration of the scientific concepts preceding emergence of modernist empiricism within which there is a behavioral analysis. Further the researcher traces formation behaviorism in the social disciplines: formation model in psychology, release of the theory out of limits of pure psychology and transferring ideas in sociology and political science. The author analyzes inquiries to the scientific theory by behavioralism. He opens the principles of behavioralism as paradigm in political science. The author presents the conceptual and contextual factors promoting recession of popularity behavioralism in political science and submits methodological restrictions approach. The author states the main claims of critics to this research approach and explains the reasons decline this paradigm. At the same time the methodological reflection of behavioralism which has followed recession of his popularity is reflected in work. The author opens the principles of the new methodological direction – post-behavioralism and the position of modern representatives of the behavioral analysis.
About the Author
M. I. Bogachev
National research university higher school of economics / Russian Presidential academy of national economy and public administration
Russian Federation
Bogachev Maksim Igorevich, lecturer
Russian Federation
Bogachev Maksim Igorevich, lecturer
References
1. Adcock R. Interpreting behavioralism // Modern Political Science: AngloAmerican Exchanges since 1880 / Ed. by R. Adcock, M. Bevir, S. Stimson. Princeton, 2007. P. 180–208.
2. Alekseeva T.A. Sovremennye politicheskie teorii [Modern political theories]. M., 2001. URL: http://www.mgimo.ru/publications/?id=21128 (data obraschteniya: 27.03.2015)) (in Russian).
3. Almond G., Verba S. The civic culture: political attitudes and democracy in five nations // Campbell A. et al. The American Voter. N.Y., 1960.
4. Berelson B., Lazarsfeld P., McPhee W. Voting: a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago, 1954.
5. Berndtson E. Behavioralism: origins of the concept’, prepared for presentation at the XVIIth World Congress of the International political science association, August 17–21, 1997 Seoul, Korea. URL: http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/ berndtso/behavior.htm (accessed: 27.03.2015).
6. Bevir M. Meta-methodology: clearing the underbrush // The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. Oxford, 2008. P. 48–70.
7. Campbell A., Converse P.E., Miller W.E., Stokes D.E. The American voter. N.Y., 1960. Campbell A., Gurin G., Miller W. The voter decides. Evanstone, 1954.
8. Christian B. A critical evaluation of the behavioral literature // James A., Vincent T. Contemporary Political Thought: Issues and Scope, Value and Direction. N.Y., 1969.
9. Contemporary empirical political theory / Ed. by K.R. Monroe. Berkeley, 1997.
10. Dahl R.A. The behavioral approach in political science: epitaph for a monument to a successful protest // The American Political Science Review. 1961. Vol. 55. N 4. Р. 763–772.
11. Easton D. Political science in the United States: past and present // International Political Science Review. Revue internationale de science politique. 1985. Vol. 6. N 1. P. 133–152.
12. Easton D. Introduction: the current meaning of behavioralism // Limits of Behavioralism in Political Science / Ed. by J.C. Chatsworth. Philadelphia, 1962. P. 1–25.
13. Easton D. The current meaning of behaviouralism // Contemporary Political Analysis / Ed. by J.C. Chatsworth. N.Y., 1967.
14. Easton D. The future of the post-behavioral phase in political science // Contemporary Empirical Political Theory / Ed. by K.R. Monroe. Berkeley; Los Angeles, 1997. P. 13–46.
15. Easton D. The new revolution in political science // The American Political Science Review. 1969. N 62. Р. 1051–1061.
16. Easton D. The political system: an inquiry into the state of political science. N.Y., 1974.
17. Eesuola K. Political behavior. Lagos, 2013. URL: http://www.nou.edu.ng/NOUN_OCL/pdf/SASS/POL318%20POLITICAL%20BEHAVIOR.pdf (accessed: 27.03.2015).
18. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Reading, 1975.
19. Haass M., Becker L. The behavioural revolution and after // Approaches to the Study of Political Science / Ed. by M. Haas, H. Kariel. San Francisco, 1970.
20. Johns R. Behaviouralism // The Oxford Handbook of British Politics / Ed. by M. Flinders, A. Gamble, C. Hay, M. Kenny. Oxford; N.Y., 2009. P. 92–110.
21. Kirn M.E. Behavioralism, post-behavioralism, and the philosophy of science: two houses, one plague // The Review of Politics. 1977. Vol. 39. N 1. Р. 82–102.
22. Kollinz P. Chetyre sociologicheskih tradicii [Four sociological traditions]. M., 2009 (in Russian).
23. Lasswell H.D. Politics: who gets what, when, how. Cleveland, 1936.
24. Lazarsfeld P., Berelson B., Gaudet H. The people’s choice: how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. N.Y., 1944.
25. Lipset S.M. Political man: the social bases of politics. Garden City; N.Y., 1960.
26. McClosky H. Consensus and ideology in American politics // The American Political Science Review. 1964. Vol. 58. Iss. 2. P. 361–382.
27. O’Donohue W., Kitchener R. Handbook of behaviorism. Boston, 1999.
28. Ostrom E. A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: presidential address, American political science association, 1997 // The American Political Science Review. 1998. Vol. 92. N 1. P. 1–22.
29. Pye L. The behavioral revolution and the remaking of comparative politics // The Oxford Handbook of Contextual Political Analysis / Ed. by R.E. Goodin, Ch.Tilly. Oxford; N.Y., 2006. P. 797–805.
30. Rathore L.S. The tragedy of political theory // The Indian Journal of Political Science. 1990. Vol. 51. N 1. P. 1–14.
31. Rose R. Perspectives on political behavior in time and space // The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior / Ed. by R.J. Dalton, H.-D. Klingemann. Oxford; N.Y., 2007. P. 283–304.
32. Sanders D. Behaviouralism // Theory and Methods in Political Science / Ed. by D. Marsh, G. Stoker. Houndmills; Basingstoke, 2002.
33. Singh В.Р. The problem of value in the post-behavioural era // The Indian Journal of Political Science. 1986. Vol. 47. N 3. P. 353–365.
34. Tagepera R. Predictive versus postdictive models // European Political Science. 2007. N 6. Р. 114–123.
35. Truman D. The impact on political science of the revolution in the behavioral sciences // Research Frontiers in Politics and Government. Washington, 1955.
36. Vasilenko I.A. Administrativno-gosudarstvennoe upravlenie v stranah Zapada: SShA, Velikobritanija, Francija, Germanija: Uch. posob. [Administrative public administration in the countries of the West: USA, Great Britain, France, Germany: education guidance]. M., 2001. URL: http://www.bibliotekar.ru/administrativnoe-pravo-7/6.htm (data oratcsheniya: 27.03.2015)) (in Russian).
37. Wahlke J.C. Pre-behavioralism in political science // The American Political Science Review. 1979. Vol. 73. N 1. P. 9–31.
38. Ward H. Rational choice // Theory and Methods in Political Science / Ed. by D. Marsh, G. Stoker. Houndmills; Basingstoke, 2002.
Review
For citations:
Bogachev M.I. FROM THE BEHAVIORAL ANALYSIS TO POST-BEHAVIORALISM: HISTORY OF PARADIGM. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 18. Sociology and Political Science. 2017;23(1):28-48. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24290/1029-3736-2017-23-1-28-48
Views:
2196
Email this article 