Comprehensively mapping political science methods: an instructors’ survey

References

• Adorno, A., Dahrendorf, R., Habermas, J., Pilot, H., & Popper, K. (1976). The positivist dispute in German sociology. London: Heinemann, Harper Torchbook.
   Google Scholar
• Almond, G. A. (1998). Separate tables: Schools and sects in political science. PS. Political Science and Politics, 21, 828–842.
   Google Scholar
• Beissel-Durrant, G. (2004). A typology of research methods within the social sciences. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods (NCRM) and Southampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute (S3RI) ( NCRM Working Paper).  Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/34817/
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, A., Barth, A., & Rutherford, K. R. (2003). Do we preach what we practice? A survey of methods in political science journals and curricula. PS. Political Science and Politics, 36, 373–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanchard, P. (2007). Quantitative vs. qualitative: Method betrayed by its discourse. Congress of the French Association of Political Science, Toulouse. Retrieved from http://www.afsp.msh-paris.fr/congres2007/tablesrondes/textes/tr1sess1blanchard.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Blanchard, P. (2010). Sorcery and the sociology of academic publishing. Conference selective affinities, friendship and obligations in the investigations in sociology and political science: fieldwork in a comparative perspective in Europe, Freiburg, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Blanchard, P., & Patou, C. (2003). Les usages de l’analyse factorielle dans les sciences sociales en France  [The uses of factor analysis in the social sciences in France]. In P. Blanchard & T. Ribémont (Eds.), Méthodes et outils des sciences sociales. Innovation et renouvellement [Methods and tools in the social sciences. Innovating and renewing] (pp. 85–110). Paris: L’Harmattan.
   Google Scholar
• Boncourt, T. (2007). The evolution of political science in France and Britain: A comparative study of two political science journals. European Political Science, 6, 276–294.10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210137
   Google Scholar
• Brady, H., & Collier, D. (Eds.). (2004). Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Durkheim, E. (1897). Le Suicide: Etude de sociologie. Paris: Felix Alcan.
   Google Scholar
• Fielding, J., & Fielding, N. (2008). Synergy and synthesis: Integrating qualitative and quantitative data. In P. Alasuutari, J. Brannen, & L. Bickman (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social research methods (pp. 555–571). London: Sage.10.4135/9781446212165
   Google Scholar
• Goodin, R., & Klingemann, H.-D. (1996). Political science: The discipline. In R. E. Goodin & H.-D. Klingemann (Eds.), A new handbook of political science (pp. 3–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keating, M. (2009). Putting European political science back together again. European Political Science Review, 1, 297–316.10.1017/S1755773909990087
   Google Scholar
• Keman, H., & Woldendorp, J. J. (in press). Handbook of research methods and applications in political science. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kittel, B. (2009). Eine disziplin auf der Suche nach Wissenschaftlichkeit: Entwicklung und Stand der Methoden in der deutschen Politikwissenschaft  [A discipline in search for scientificity: Development and present state of methods in German political science]. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 50, 577–603.10.1007/s11615-009-0148-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Le Roux, B., & Rouanet, H. (2004). Geometric data analysis: From correspondence analysis to structured data analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis-Beck, M. S., Bryman, A., & Liao, T. F. (Eds.). (2004). The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (1971) Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method. American Political Science Review, 65, 682–693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luff, R., Byatt, D., & Martin, D. (2015). Review of the typology of research methods within the social sciences ( National Centre for Research Methods Report).  University of Southampton. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/381121
   Google Scholar
• Mahoney, J., & Goertz, G. (2012). A tale of two cultures: Qualitative and quantitative research in the social sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Monroe, K. (Ed.). (2005). Perestroika! The raucus rebellion in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moses, J., Rihoux, B., & Kittel, B. (2005). Mapping political methodology: Reflections on a European perspective. European Political Science, 4, 55–68.10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210006
   Google Scholar
• Pehl, M. (2012). The study of politics in Germany: A bibliometric analysis of subfields and methods. European Political Science, 11, 54–70.10.1057/eps.2011.38
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rihoux, B. (2006). Two methodological worlds apart? Praises and critiques from a European comparativist. Political Analysis, 14, 332–335.10.1093/pan/mpj012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snow, C. (1969/1993). The two cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511819940
   Google Scholar
• Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar