Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Defining Political Science
Defining Political Science
Defining Political Science
doi:10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210171
Abstract
It has been nearly two decades since Gabriel Almond observed that political
scientists tend to sit at ‘separate tables’. Surprisingly, there has been no
attempt to ask extensively among the members of the profession what
they actually believe about its essential meaning, purpose, and trajectory.
This paper is based on a questionnaire sent to faculty in more than 500
political science departments worldwide. Respondents were asked to
define political science, to list three works that best represent political
science as they understand it, and to give their views regarding what
political science will be over the next twenty years.
I
t has been nearly two decades since admiration within discrete islands of
Gabriel Almond observed that politi- specialisation, and bitter accusation
cal scientists tend to sit at ‘separate across them. Despite Almond’s call for
tables’ (Almond, 1988). We have be- dominance by a ‘cafeteria of the centre’,
come, he argued, a discipline dominated widespread debate persists in the
by disconnected schools and sects, each profession regarding the meaning of
defending its own conception of appro- political science, the object of our study,
priate research, substantively and meth- and the quality of our contributions to
odologically. Academic departments exist knowledge and to society.
allegedly as mere ad hoc collections of In a celebrated roundtable discussion in
scholars with little to unite them other response to Almond’s challenge, held at
than the security of institutional tenure the American Political Science Association
and prestige. Academic discourse has far 1989 annual convention, Kristen Monroe
too often evolved into self-affirming asked the participants to consider
european political science: 7 2008 207
(207 – 219) & 2008 European Consortium for Political Research. 1680-4333/08 $30 www.palgrave-journals.com/eps
whether there was a core to contempor- ‘ywe know of no
ary political science. If so, what is it? If
not, does the absence matter? (Monroe,
attempt that asks
1990). It is important to note that, while extensively among
the invited panellists shared their indivi- the members of the
dual perceptions and offered clever
insights, none of them had undertaken
profession what they
empirical analysis, surveying the range believe about its
of political scientists in the United States essential meaning,
and around the world. Almond, himself,
was speaking entirely from personal
purposes, and
impression when he characterised the trajectory’
discipline as increasingly disjointed, frag-
mented, and frustrated. Moreover, we to discern from the answers whether, in
know of no attempt that asks extensively general, they are satisfied or dissatisfied
among the members of the profession with the discipline as it has evolved in
what they believe about its essential recent years. As a supplemental question,
meaning, purposes, and trajectory. Filling we requested that the respondents list
this empirical gap is the intention of the ‘the three most important works that
present paper. have helped to give definition/meaning
The authors sent a brief questionnaire to political science as you understand it’.
electronically to political science faculty Again, any essential disciplinary core
from departments with a webpage acces- should be reflected by correlated an-
sible and in English listed by the UK swers, indicating general dependence
Political Studies Association (www.psa. upon a common set of influential texts
ac.uk). This included 307 departments in and/or authors.
the US, seventy-eight in the UK, seventy- Finally, the Almond roundtable discus-
four in Continental Europe, forty in Cana- sants in 1989 were asked regarding the
da, twenty in Australasia, ten in Asia, and issues that will concern political scientists
nine in the Middle East. The original over the next ten years. Professor Almond
sample included more than 8,500 indivi- remarked that he hoped the problem of
duals with ostensibly working e-mail disciplinary unity would become a moti-
addresses. Of this total, 61 per cent were vating priority. We thus included a parallel
scholars working in the US and 39 per question. We requested that the respon-
cent were scholars working outside the dents offer their views regarding how
US. The response rate was slightly great- political science might be different 20
er than 1 per cent (n ¼ 88), representing years into the future. The answers should
the number of completed questionnaires allow us to identify any predicted
returned and useable for coding. probable direction, and to assess the
We requested that our colleagues con- degree of expressed optimism or pessi-
struct a brief statement ‘presenting in mism regarding the disciplinary future
your own words your personal definition/ (the only vaguely parallel study (Somit
meaning of political science, reflecting the and Tanenhaus, 1964) is long out-of-
way you understand and teach political date, included only American scholars,
science’. If there is some core to our asked relatively formulaic questions, and
enterprise, it should be visible in the did not permit open-ended responses).
commonalities and coherence among Coding was performed by the two
the answers given by practicing, current authors of this paper cooperatively. The
political scientists. We should also be able coding schema in general was established
208 european political science: 7 2008 defining political science
prior to the answers having been received there was no appreciable difference in
and read, although the categories were sophistication for respondents across
refined and sharpened after analysing subfields. Many respondents also self-
some of the initial responses. identified themselves by academic rank.
Unfortunately, the response rate to our The terms ‘Professor’, ‘Associate Profes-
survey was well below anticipated. The sor’, ‘Lecturer’, etc. have different faculty
regional distribution of responses did meanings in different institutional con-
match the distribution in the sample – texts, yet a comparison of results showed
59 per cent of respondents with com- no association between self-identified
pleted questionnaires (52 of 88) were academic rank and the sophistication of
self-identified as working in the US. responses provided.
Slightly more than 20 per cent of respon- The findings from our survey thus can-
dents worked in Western Europe (19 of not be considered statistically valid be-
88), slightly fewer than 10 per cent cause of the low response rate, and they
worked in the UK (seven of 88), and the cannot be assumed as randomly distrib-
remainder were distributed widely across uted representations of opinion across the
the globe. Political scientists are busy and target population. Nevertheless, they are
cannot be expected to answer every certainly illuminating and interesting to
survey questionnaire that arrives in their read. They contain a number of carefully
e-mail. The low response rate, however, considered remarks regarding the nature
constrains our ability to generalise any and direction of political science as a
findings derived on the answers supplied. profession, the challenges before us, and
Furthermore, while many seem to have the value attached to our scholarly output.
responded from a genuine sense of pro- For that reason alone, they deserve
fessional responsibility, we cannot dis- serious attention.
miss the proposition that our colleagues
with intense existing predispositions were
THE MEANING OF
especially likely to comment.
POLITICAL SCIENCE
On the other hand, the good news is
that the responses submitted to our
The most obvious way to identify com-
questionnaire were, on the whole, quite
monalities across the suggested mean-
interesting and insightful. They were
ings of political science is to search for
coded into three categories – very so-
similar keywords and phrases. This is
phisticated, somewhat sophisticated, or
easily done by computer. We found only
not especially sophisticated – based on
one noteworthy recurring word: power.
the theoretical concepts used and the
elaboration of opinions presented. Nearly Political science is the systematic study
half of all responses were very sophisti- of the distribution of power in society.
cated in their articulated understanding
Who gets power and how they wield
of the discipline, its current trajectory,
power are perennial questions.
strengths, and weaknesses. Another
quarter of responses were coded as Any definition of politics or political
somewhat sophisticated. There was no science must focus on the centrality of
appreciable difference in sophistication power.
for responses from scholars at US
An attempt to assess the nature of
universities versus those at non-US
power relationships.
universities. Many of the respondents
self-identified their research interests Political science is the study of the
within the various subfields of study; exercise of power.
ronald f. king and cosmin gabriel marian european political science: 7 2008 209
Nearly 36 per cent of all responses utilised ‘your reading suggests
the word, ‘power’. The complication is that
respondents used the word in substan-
three very different foci
tially different ways – for example, power among the responses –
used for social or class domination; power emphasizing political
over state decision-making; legitimate
power through democratic elections;
science as the study of
power over citizens via law enforcement. human processes; as
Moreover, some respondents clearly were the study of government
referring to power relations while not
using the word – for example, obtaining
institutions; and as
obedience from large groups, establishing the study of social
binding decisions for society, reinforcing outcomes’
systematic arrangements of subordination
and superordination. The implication is
that a far more careful reading of res-
They accept mutual engagement as a
ponses is necessary in order to discover
process of fashioning collective decisions.
any correspondence patterns across the
Whether those decisions and the influ-
contributed definitions. In doing so, we will
ences upon them are biased or balanced,
make an elementary distinction between
the activity of politics works to construct
the identified subject of political science
both personal and societal identity, ‘shap-
and the identified method of political
ing the kind of world in which we will live
science.
and the kinds of persons we will become
in that world’. This is a conception of
THE SUBJECT OF POLITICAL political science that emphasises under-
SCIENCE
lying political psychology and observable
political behaviour. Politics is a realm of
Regarding the disciplinary subject, our
social conflict, of essentially contested
reading suggests three very different foci
interactions among individuals and
among the responses – emphasising
groups pursuing contrary objectives. As
political science as the study of human
such, it need not be narrowly confined to
processes, as the study of government
formal state structures, but exists more
institutions, and as the study of social
broadly over a wide range of social
outcomes. Not every response can be
institutions. Approximately one-quarter
categorised effectively using these three
of total responses included a perspective
cells; some responses can be categorised
of this sort.
into more than one of them. Yet there are
sufficient differences across these types Political science, in contrast to econom-
of answers, often more implicit than ics, is the domain of non-market deci-
conscious and intentional, to justify treat- sion-making, and necessarily deals with
ing them as separate and independent the issues of preference aggregation.
dimensions.
Political lifeyis constituted by sets of
The first focus identifies politics as a
human interactionsyfound as a multiple
distinct domain of personal interaction.
aspect of human life and society.
Individuals have preferences, ideals,
goals, and motivations. They engage in Political science is a means to under-
conflict and/or cooperation in the pursuit standythe processes, activities, and
of those preferences, and utilise strategy behaviors that occur across the political
in order to advance those preferences. system and its components.
210 european political science: 7 2008 defining political science
As I practice itypolitical inquiry is the Political science to me concerns the
study of these contested processes of input, conversion, output and outcome
social self-productionywith a critical side of the state in all its manifesta-
eye toward relations of power and tions.
domination.
We study the actions and interactions of
Public means of interest aggregation institutions that make collectively-bind-
are among the objects of political study, ing decisions, namely governments.
but so are the exercises of influence
Political science is the scientific inquiry
outside the public sphere.
intoythe institutionalization, functions,
Politicsyis tied tightly to social conflict effects, norms and behaviour of the
which occurs at all levels of society and bodies engaged in authoritative deci-
at all times. sion-making.
The second focus among the respondents It is the study of how societies govern
identifies the subject of political science themselves. How do they define power,
more narrowly, centred upon a distinct responsibility, citizenship? What institu-
and special arena within social life. Alleg- tions have they set up to manage their
edly, we study the public as opposed to polity? How do those institutions inter-
the private sector; the state as comprised act, and how does the society train its
by its formal/informal constitution and citizens to take part in government?
various institutions; the government with
Political science investigates the inter-
its officials, functions, norms, routines,
vening structure between citizens and
influences, and effects on society. This is
the general will in forms of constitu-
a definition that accords with Easton’s
tions, parliaments, electoral laws, par-
dictum, that political science is concerned
ties, and domestic and international
with the authoritative allocation of values,
institutions.
given a pronounced accent on the role of
authority in making the allocations. The Political science is the systematic study
state establishes, implements, and inter- of actors, institutions, and processes
prets the law. Its edicts carry inherent relating to the state; i.e., the organiza-
legitimacy and are enforced as binding tion with a legal monopoly on the use of
decisions. The state rules over a specified coercion within a given area.
territory and recognises certain individuals
The third focus among respondents iden-
as having citizenship. It establishes distinct
tifies the subject of political science not in
channels for participation, and certain
terms of the process or location of poli-
required approvals as necessary for valid
tics, but instead in terms of its products.
policy-making. Political science therefore is
Approximately one-quarter of total re-
concerned not with a kind of activity, but
sponses were coded as including this
instead with a social location, a place
general category. Some emphasised the
where certain kinds of decisions occur.
non-market provision of public and col-
Approximately 45 per cent of total res-
lective goods, items not supplied by
ponses included a perspective of this sort.
private market competitive forces. Some
It is the science about how government mentioned comparative study to under-
behaves and the impacts of government stand differences in policy outcomes
decisions. As for government, I across regimes. Others referred to
mean both the institutions and the Lasswell’s definition of politics based on
individuals who are in charge of the the assigned distribution of benefits and
government. costs.
ronald f. king and cosmin gabriel marian european political science: 7 2008 211
Political science is the study of politics. against the possibilities for mass empow-
Politics is the distribution of important erment).
things – who gets them, in what pro-
portion, when, how, and with what THE METHOD OF POLITICAL
justification. SCIENCE
To me, being a political scientist means
Approximately half of all respondents
being interested in ‘who gets what and
included in their definitions of political
why’ (in all sorts of societies).
science explicit reference to methodolo-
Yet most of the respondents who expli- gical issues. By ‘folding in’ the answers
citly linked political science to political supplied to the other questions in the
outcomes instead emphasised normative survey, we were able to clarify and code
rather than empirical themes. Political approximately two-thirds of respondents
scientists allegedly have an obligation to regarding their opinions on methodology
engage contemporary issues, to educate and its importance to the discipline. The
citizens, and to investigate and promote assertions here tended to be somewhat
the common good. more impassioned and polemical, com-
pared to those addressing substantive
I believe the task of political science is issues. We sorted the responses into
both reactive, namely making sense of three categories – those that stressed
events in the real world, and pro-active methodological pluralism and diversity,
(or normative), suggesting ways to those that stressed formal modelling and
improve the organization of political rigorous testing, and those that stressed
life, in Aristotelian terms to search for humanistic studies, usually accompanied
the ‘good life’. by a condemnation of excess quantifica-
To contend with the larger questions of tion and the pretence of ‘science’.
policy and the good society. Nearly one-quarter of total responses
can be assigned to the first category,
After describing what political phenom- understanding political science as a com-
ena is occurring and why, the third goal plex field that requires a number of
is to evaluate political processes diverse methodological approaches. It is
against some normative standards of a ‘big tent’, wrote one respondent, able to
judgment. hold various kinds of scholars and theo-
A responsible science of politics should reticians under one roof. It is like ‘a tavern
be concerned to promote political in old days’, wrote another, filled with
health and a robust civic life, while different travellers all in pursuit of effec-
diagnosing and seeking remedies for tive knowledge. To some, the good scho-
political pathology. lar is comfortable working in various
methodologies. To others, the good de-
Some respondents mentioned explicit partment achieves broad representation
social goals to be promoted – freedom, among them. Allegedly, the profession is
self-determination, escaping war, oppres- eclectic. Some topics might be amenable
sion, and tyranny. Surprisingly, few to a more scientific approach and others
among those emphasising the practical less so. There are many ways to generate
obligations of political science could be political insight, respondents taking this
identified easily as sitting on the political approach seem to claim, and we should
right (e.g., referring to Greek ideals be more concerned with the value of the
of civic justice) or the political left insight than the technique by which it was
(e.g., referring to hegemonic domination reached.
212 european political science: 7 2008 defining political science
Methods for study vary, depending on stand and possibly affect the political
the particular topic, availability of in- world, depends on its scientific commit-
formation, and other circumstances. ment. Rigorous and systematic study
provides the foundations necessary for
It encompasses a variety of methodo-
any valid contribution to knowledge.
logical approaches, including historical,
philosophical, and quantitative. Application of the scientific method to
There are a variety of ways in which political data. This requires testable
politics can be studied: through the theory development, specification of
gathering of evidence and rigorous hypotheses that would test the theory,
testing of models in order to understand and use of data (quantitative or other-
causal relations between political wise) to test the hypotheses.
events, or through contextualized inter- Using scientific methods to understand
pretation of meanings of political acts politics and draw inferences about
and discourses, or through critical, cause and effect in political life. Re-
even deconstructive unmasking of search should be question-driven, with
power relations. cycles of deduction and induction, hy-
I do believe that political science must pothesis generation and hypothesis
be analytical and open to evidence of testing.
many different kinds. Political science is a discipline whose
Slightly more than one-quarter of re- practitioners are engaged in the search
sponses can be assigned to the second for methods of empirical inquiry that
category, those giving serious weight to will provide replicable refutation (or
the science of political science. The object validation) of non-trivial propositions
is sophisticated empirical inquiry, using and generalizations about the political
rigorous epistemological standards to process and political institutions.
establish robust causal linkages and re- Political science largely adheres to the
veal the systematic patterns that exist standards of scientific methodythat
across separate observations. Some of emphasizes theory development and
the responses placed in this category hypothesis testingyThese standards
emphasised positivist methods, mathe- place higher value on prediction than
matical expressions, and nomothetic con- description.
clusions. Others emphasised the
importance of theoretical model-building The least number of responses, less than
to avoid mindless number-crunching. Vir- one-fifth of the total, can be coded as
tually all in this category insisted on the falling into the third category, which
need to go beyond mere description and identifies political science as a humanistic
interpretation, in the pursuit of formalisa- pursuit that is diverted and distorted by
tion, generalisation, explanation, and the pretence of scientific method. Alleg-
prediction. Allegedly, our scholarship edly, empirical research is somewhat
must rest upon a firm methodological myopic and crude, confined solely to what
insistence regarding precise hypothesis can be easily observed and measured.
specification, variable operationalisation, Useful political commentary, by contrast,
measurement, and testing. This is what needs to interpret and not just report
gives discipline to our discipline. Other- reality. Proper political analysis should
wise we risk falling victim to impressio- attend to reasons, motives, concepts
nistic commentary and private opinion. and meanings, not all of which are con-
The value of political science, to under- scious among the actors. Responsible
ronald f. king and cosmin gabriel marian european political science: 7 2008 213
political scholarship must probe beneath subfield within the profession. By country,
and beyond present relationships, ques- scholars working in the United States
tioning received wisdom and proposing were slightly more likely to define political
visions of social improvement. The re- science methodologically as a rigorous
sponses in this category often were science, whereas those working outside
among the most aggressive in tone, of the United States were more evenly
expressing a frustration with political divided among the three categories.
science in its current format. The articu- Scholars working outside the United
lated fear is that we have become a States were slightly more likely to define
discipline of superficial understanding political science substantively as focused
and irrelevant scholarship, neglecting on the state as an institution, whereas
the critical issues affecting real political those working in the United States were
societies. more evenly divided among the cate-
gories. By subfield, political theorists
I place political science into the Huma-
were slightly less likely to define political
nities; thus I believe it is not, nor should
science methodologically as a rigorous
it aim to be a ‘hard science’ working
science. International relations specia-
with closed models for the purpose
lists were slightly less likely to define
of generating predictions and policy
political science substantively in terms of
advice.
the institutional state whereas American
Social sciences seek to understand not politics specialists were slightly more
just behavior but also the role of ideas, likely to define political science as a
reasons, and social structures, and behavioural process. The findings are in
hence political science needs to avoid the directions expected. Nevertheless, in
relying merely on observational meth- all cases, the differences are relatively
ods and put adequate emphasis on small. It should be remembered, how-
conceptual and interpretive inquiry. ever, that these various ‘meanings’ of
political science and the observed distri-
I am deeply skeptical about the whole
butional patterns among them reflect
notion of political science. Whereas
only the answers submitted to our ques-
there are few areas of political life that
tionnaire; they cannot be generalised
obviously are measurable, many are
automatically as indicative of opinion
not; and even those aspects that
across the political science profession at
are measurable do not always follow
large.
‘law-like’ relationships.
To others, this would be a desirable occur- A large, diffuse field held loosely to-
rence, for an increasing reliance upon gether by a fascination with the political
‘assumptions, models, empirical tests, and debates about what politics is and
and proofs’ will add sophistication to our how best to study it.
studies, incorporate modern technologies,
and make the findings more objective, self- Absent a schism, which I expect in the
conscious, authoritative, and influential. future, political science will become
On the other hand, about one-sixth of increasingly fragmented and fractiona-
respondents predict reduced emphasis lized, divided by method and intellec-
upon quantitative political science. Again, tual orientationsy. I expect these
some foresee this as a positive develop- trends to continue, and the result to
ment, ‘toward the acceptance of various be an increasingly rancorous internal
non-empiricist theoretical understand- kulturkampf.
ings of the political’. Others foresee it
Political science will be as divided a
more negatively, as relaxing professional
discipline as it is today, with different
safeguards against bias, prejudice, and
people pursuing different methodolo-
personal opinion.
gies to answer some of the enduring
Political science is likely to become less questions in politics.
rigorous and more partisan in the next
two decades. The field seems to be Political science will be more highly
becoming more ideological and less polarized along political views than ever
analytical as time passes. previously.
ronald f. king and cosmin gabriel marian european political science: 7 2008 217
Political science was never a discipline ‘In general, there
with clearly defined boundaries to
other disciplinesyand I think these
seemed to be only
boundaries will become even fuzzier. limited insistence upon
The discipline will be more divided. the quest for
There will be differences about theore- overarching unity
tical approaches, methodology, and
motivation to conduct research.
within political
science’
The main disagreement is the degree to
which such separation within political
science is harmful or not. According to methods appropriate for that investiga-
one respondent, ‘Political science is a tion, regarding the core works pro-
house semi-divided, which is both a duced and the central findings achieved,
strength and a weakness’. For some, regarding the intellectual purpose of our
there is virtue in the plurality of ap- enterprise and trajectory we should be
proaches that comprise contemporary pursuing. This disjunction is clearly visible
political science, as we learn increasingly in the retrospectives published on the
‘to tolerate these different perspectives current state of the discipline (Greenstein
and to translate between them’. It is only and Polsby, 1975; Finifter, 1993; Goodin
through inclusion and understanding that and Klingemann, 1996; Katznelson and
the profession can address adequately Milner, 2002), in the various histories of
the complexity of political life and ap- the discipline (Dryzek and Leonard,
preciate the multiple forms of investiga- 1988), and even in proposals for an
tion. For others, by contrast, there is effective undergraduate curriculum
danger inherent to pervasive acrimony, (Wahlke, 1991). It is a topic of regular
as it deflects our attention from the pur- commentary and assessment, some of
suit of knowledge, toward scholastic and which are deeply incisive and articulate.
confusing internal ‘paradigm battles’ of The contribution of this article is that it
interest to none but ourselves. Members reports how members of the political
of the former group indicate confidence science profession – from a number of
about the ability of political science to academic departments in a number of
manage its diversity. Members of the different countries – speak for them-
latter worry that no overriding synthesis selves, in their own words. Given the
across divergent perspectives is now in importance of the topic, the surprise is
sight. ‘While these are not irreconcilable that there exists no similar effort to the
positions’, a respondent concluded, ‘they best of our knowledge.
are not currently reconciled, and the next The response rate to our questionnaire
twenty years will probably be consumed unfortunately was too low to permit valid
with this effort’. generalisation to the initial sample and its
underlying population. Nevertheless, the
CONCLUSION qualitative analysis of the data is note-
worthy, revealing how certain of our
There is nothing unique to the claim that colleagues wish to express themselves
political science is a disparate discipline. about political science and the political
There is no established concurrence re- science profession. The respondents were
garding the boundaries of the field and its articulate and often impassioned in their
internal subdivisions, regarding the sub- answers, as they characterised their cho-
ject matter to be investigated and the sen field of academic study. There was
218 european political science: 7 2008 defining political science
also a strong normative component to the appeared resolved, even respectful, of
answers supplied. Many respondents different perspectives. In general, there
were prescribing what they wanted seemed to be only limited insistence upon
political science to become, not just the quest for overarching unity within
describing what it has become. There political science. The propensity to dis-
were clear disagreements, only part of pute apparently does not contradict the
which concerned methodology. With willingness to include.
regard to Almond’s assertion of separate
tables, the respondents are visibly ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
diverse when addressing the substantive
meaning of political science, the future We express our thanks to colleagues
direction of political science, and the at San Diego State University (USA)
authors whose works give definition to and Babes¸-Bolyai University (Romania),
the field. There was some indication of and to the Council for the International
‘hard’ and ‘soft’ positions; less indication Exchange of Scholars whose support was
of ‘left’ and ‘right’. Some of the respon- responsible for the conversation out of
dents were intentionally combative; more which this project grew.
References
Almond, G.A. (1988) ‘Separate tables: schools and sects in political science’, PS: Political Science and
Politics 21: 828–842.
Dryzek, J.S. and Leonard, S.T. (1988) ‘History and discipline in political science’, American Political
Science Review 82: 1245–1260.
Finifter, A.W. (ed.) (1993) Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, Washington, DC, American
Political Science Association.
Goodin, R.E. and Klingemann, H.-D. (eds.) (1996) New Handbook of Political Science, New York: Oxford
University Press.
Greenstein, F.I. and Polsby, N.W. (eds.) (1975) The Handbook of Political Science, Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Katznelson, I. and Milner, H.W. (eds.) (2002) Political Science: The State of the Discipline, Centennial
Edition, New York: W.W. Norton.
Monroe, K. (ed.) (1990) ‘The nature of contemporary political science: a roundtable discussion’, PS:
Political Science and Politics 23: 34–43.
Somit, A. and Tanenhaus, J. (1964) American Political Science: A Profile of a Discipline, New York:
Atherton Press.
Wahlke, J.C. (1991) ‘Liberal learning and the political science major: a report to the profession’, PS:
Political Science and Politics 43: 48–60.
Cosmin Gabriel Marian is lector universitar (Assistant Professor) in the departamentul de stiint¸e
politice, Universitatea Babes¸-Bolyai of Cluj-Napoca, Romania. His field of specialisation is
research methods in the social sciences.
ronald f. king and cosmin gabriel marian european political science: 7 2008 219