Taking Ideas Seriously in Political Science Research

Session Submission Type: Roundtable

Session Description

The role of ideas in politics attracted a wave of attention in the late 1990s, upgrading ideational analysis from the margins of political science to a relatively mainstream status. But if ideational theorists have gained a seat at the table with more prominent publications and posts, that still does not mean that their approaches are widely acknowledged as routine alternatives in concrete research design. Ideational scholars must typically confront non-ideational alternatives to achieve salient publication, but non-ideational theories still frequently make no mention of ideational alternatives. To what extent is this situation justified by the methodological challenges of studying ideas, or by epistemological divides? Should all research designs take ideas seriously when they tackle concrete puzzles, or is that notion not relevant or feasible for some questions? Is this asymmetry in research designs stronger in some sub-fields of the discipline than in others? In which ones? Why? This roundtable brings together prominent experts on ideational theory to discuss the past, present and future of ideational analysis in political science.

Sub Unit

• Division 54: Ideas, Knowledge, and Politics

Chair

• Daniel Béland McGill University

Presenters

• Mark Blyth Brown University

• Sheri Berman Barnard College, Columbia University

• Adolfo Garcé Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de la República

• Oddny Helgadottir Copenhagen Business School