Advertisement

The Role of Models in Comparative Politics

  • Christine Mironesco
Chapter
Part of the Methodos Series book series (METH, volume 1)

Abstract

The term “model” is by no means unequivocal. It is used in natural and social sciences; it belongs to everyday speech as well. Those various contexts all bear upon the meanings of the term “model”, in a way which may be relevant with respect to comparative politics.

Keywords

Technology Assessment Political Change Executive Branch Comparative Politics Political Rule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartolini, S. (1993). On time and comparative research. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 5(2), 131–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1996). La construction sociale de la réalité. Paris: Colin. (Original work published 1966.)Google Scholar
  3. Blondel, J. (1994). Plaidoyer pour une conception œcuménique de l’analyse comparée. Revue Internationale de Politique Comparée, I, 15–19.Google Scholar
  4. Coenen-Huther, J. (1997). Tocqueville. Paris: PUF (Que sais-je?).Google Scholar
  5. Coombes, D. (1979). The future of European Parliament. London: European Centre for Political Studies, Studies in European Politics.Google Scholar
  6. Das, V. (1997). Cultural rights: the state, the community and the individual. Colombo: International Centre for Ethnic Studies (ICES), Geneva Lecture, May 26.Google Scholar
  7. Edvardsen, U. (1997). A cultural approach to understanding modes of transition to democracy. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 9(1), 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franck, R. (1994). Fautil chercher aux causes une raison? L’explication causale dans les sciences humaines. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  9. Gordon, S. (1995). The history and philosophy of social sciences. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Habermas, J. (1976). Connaissance et intérêt. Paris: Gallimard. (Original work published 1968.)Google Scholar
  11. Habermas, J. (1990). On the logic of the social sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press. (Original work published 1970.)Google Scholar
  12. Lane, J. E., & Ersson, S. (1994). Comparative politics. An introduction and new approach. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Laponce, J., & Saint-Jacques, B. (1997). Institutions as problem-solvers. International Political Science Review, XVIII, 3, 233–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mironesco, C. (1997). Un enjeu démocratique: le Technology Assessment. Maîtrise de la technologie aux Etats-Unis et en Europe. Genève: Georg.Google Scholar
  15. Rostow, W. (1960). The stages of economic growth. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Sartori, G. (1993). Totalitarianism, model mania and learning from error. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 5(1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sartori, G. (1994). Compare why and how. Comparing, miscomparing and the comparative method. In M. Dogan & Kazancigil (Eds.), Comparing Nations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Seiler, D. (1994). Science politique, comparaison et universaux ou ce que comparer veut dire. Revue Internationale de Politique Comparée, I, 1, 91–101.Google Scholar
  19. Sharman, C. (1990). Parliamentary federations and limited government. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(2), 205–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tocqueville, A. de (1986). De la démocratie en Amérique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  21. Tocqueville, A. de (1987). L’ancien régime et la Révolution. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christine Mironesco

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations