Robert Adcock

Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Scholars routinely make claims that presuppose the validity of the observations and measurements that operationalize their concepts. Yet, despite recent advances in political science methods, surprisingly little attention has been devoted to measurement validity. We address this gap by exploring four themes. First, we seek to establish a shared framework that allows quantitative and qualitative scholars to assess more effectively, and communicate about, issues of valid measurement. Second, we underscore the need to draw a clear distinction between measurement issues and disputes about concepts. Third, we discuss the contextual specificity of measurement claims, exploring a variety of measurement strategies that seek to combine generality and validity by devoting greater attention to context. Fourth, we address the proliferation of terms for alternative measurement validation procedures and offer an account of the three main types of validation most relevant to political scientists.

Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1880

Acknowledgments vii List of Contributors ix Chapter One: A History of Political Science: How? What? Why? Robert Adcock, Mark Bevir, and Shannon C. Stimson 1 Chapter Two: Anglo-American Political Science, 1880-1920 Dorothy Ross 18 Chapter Three: The Origins of a Historical Political Science in Late Victorian and Edwardian Britain Sandra M. den Otter 37 Chapter Four: The Historical Science(s) of Politics: The Principles, Association, and Fate of an American Discipline James Farr 66 Chapter Five: The Emergence of an Embryonic Discipline: British Politics without Political Scientists Dennis Kavanagh 97 Chapter Six: A Tale of Two Charlies: Political Science, History, and Civic Reform, 1890-1940 Mark C. Smith 118 Chapter Seven: Making Democracy Safe for the World: Political Science between the Wars John G. Gunnell 137 Chapter Eight: Birth of a Discipline: Interpreting British Political Studies in the 1950s and 1960s Michael Kenny 158 Chapter Nine: Interpreting Behavioralism Robert Adcock 180 Chapter Ten: The Remaking of Political Theory Robert Adcock and Mark Bevir 209 Chapter Eleven: Traditions of Political Science in Contemporary Britain Mark Bevir and R.A.W. Rhodes 234 Chapter Twelve: Historicizing the New Institutionalism(s) Robert Adcock, Mark Bevir, and Shannon C. Stimson 259 Chapter Thirteen: Institutionalism and the Third Way Mark Bevir 290 Bibliography 313 Index 349

The History of Political Science

The history of political science serves as a context within which we make sense of the nature and role of our discipline. Narratives about the past development of British and American political science help to frame debates, choices, and identities within the contemporary discipline in Britain. What do recent studies on the history of political science tell us about the character of political science in Britain and America? What do they suggest about the relation of the British study of politics to British identities more generally? Our review of recent work concentrates on three issues: (1) how historical studies of political science relate to approaches and identities within the contemporary discipline; (2) how they relate to the past, i.e. whether their historical vision is marred by presentism; (3) whether they look beyond the boundaries of the discipline.

Who's Afraid of Determinism? The Ambivalence of Macro-Historical Inquiry

This paper explores explanatory practices of macro-historical social science in light of philosophical stances on determinism versus indeterminism. Analysis of determinism and its implications show its compatibility with practices emphasizing causal complexity, contingency, and choice. It can, moreover, clarify and contain these practices in ways that extend the priority traditionally given to causal explanation by macro-historical social scientists. Analysis of indeterminism shows, by contrast, that each of its major varieties challenge macro-historical explanatory practices. To embrace indeterminism and follow through its implications would, in effect, terminate the tradition of macro-historical inquiry as pursued by American sociologists and political scientists.