Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:11:15.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing the Renaissance of Individuals in International Relations Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2021

Marcus Holmes Open the ORCID record for Marcus Holmes [Opens in a new window] ,
Richard Jordan Open the ORCID record for Richard Jordan [Opens in a new window]  and
Eric Parajon Open the ORCID record for Eric Parajon [Opens in a new window]
Marcus Holmes
Affiliation:
William & Mary
Richard Jordan
Affiliation:
Baylor University
Eric Parajon
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The study of microfoundations, especially individuals, is enjoying a renaissance in international relations (IR) scholarship. Yet, this rise is more difficult to find in publication data. Using the Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) journal-article database, we show that only 13.7% of IR articles in 12 leading journals use the first image. This proportion remains approximately the same from 1980 through 2018. Interrogating the data, we show that this distribution does not stem from epistemological or methodological commitments, such as positivism, quantitative analysis, or formal modeling. We suggest several reasons for this apparent disjuncture between qualitative assessments of the rebirth of first-image theorizing and the quantitative data that imply a slower or perhaps more limited return.

Type
Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , April 2021 , pp. 214 - 219
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bjrkdahl, Annika, Hall, Martin, and Svensson, Ted. 2019. “Everyday International Relations: Editors Introduction.” Cooperation and Conflict 54 (2): 123–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byman, Daniel, and Pollack, Kenneth. 2001. “Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesman Back In.” International Security 25 (4): 107–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakravarty, Anuradha. 2013. “Political Science and the Micro-Politics Research Agenda.” Journal of Political Science & Public Affairs 1:1. doi: 10.4172/2332-0761.1000e103.Google Scholar
Croft, Stuart, and Vaughan-Williams, Nick. 2017. “Fit for Purpose? Fitting Ontological Security Studies into the Discipline of International Relations: Towards a Vernacular Turn.” Cooperation and Conflict 52 (1): 12–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Cali, Horowitz, Michael, and Stam, Allan. 2015. “Introducing the LEAD Data Set.” International Interactions 41 (4): 718–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garand, James C., and Giles, Micheal W.. 2003. “Journals in the Discipline: A Report on a New Survey of American Political Scientists.” PS: Political Science & Politics 36 (2): 293–308.Google Scholar
Gerring, John. 2008. “The Mechanismic Worldview: Thinking Inside the Box.” British Journal of Political Science 38 (1): 161–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goemans, Henk, Gleditsch, Kristian Skrede, and Chiozza, Giacomo. 2009. “Introducing Archigos: A Dataset of Political Leaders.” Journal of Peace Research 46 (2): 269–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Michael, Stam, Allan, and Ellis, Cali. 2015. Why Leaders Fight. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert. 2009. “The Old IPE and the New.” Review of International Political Economy 16 (1): 34–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kertzer, Joshua, and Tingley, Dustin. 2018. “Political Psychology in International Relations: Beyond the Paradigms.” Annual Review of Political Science 21:319–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krebs, Ronald, and Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. 2007. “Twisting Tongues and Twisting Arms: The Power of Political Rhetoric.” European Journal of International Relations 13 (1): 35–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristensen, Peter Marcus. 2018. “International Relations at the End: A Sociological Autopsy.” International Studies Quarterly 62 (2): 245–59.Google Scholar
Lake, David, and Powell, Robert. 1999. Strategic Choice and International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maliniak, Daniel, Peterson, Susan, Powers, Ryan, and Tierney, Michael. 2018. “TRIP Journal Article Database Codebook Version 2.2.” Williamsburg, VA: Teaching, Research, and International Policy Project, Global Research Institute.Google Scholar
Maliniak, Daniel, and Tierney, Michael. 2009. “The American School of IPE.” Review of International Political Economy 16 (1): 6–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitzen, Jennifer. 2006. “Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma.” European Journal of International Relations 12 (3): 341–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 1997. “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization 51 (4): 513–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naylor, Tristen. 2018. Social Closure and International Society: Status Groups from the Family of Civilised Nations to the G20. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parasiliti, Andrew, Byman, Daniel, and Pollack, Kenneth. 2001. “Correspondence: The First Image Revisited.” International Security 26 (2): 166–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, Susan, Powers, Ryan, and Tierney, Michael. 2018. “TRIP Snap Poll XI.” Williamsburg, VA: The College of William & Mary.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl. 1985. Popper Selections. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pouliot, Vincent. 2010. “The Materials of Practice: Nuclear Warheads, Rhetorical Commonplaces and Committee Meetings in Russian–Atlantic Relations.” Cooperation and Conflict 45 (3): 294–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouliot, Vincent. 2016. International Pecking Orders: The Politics and Practice of Multilateral Diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathbun, Brian. 2011. Trust in International Cooperation: International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics and American Multilateralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathbun, Brian. 2014. Diplomacy’s Value. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rathbun, Brian. 2019. Reasoning of State: Realists, Romantics and Rationality in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, Elizabeth. 2011. Leaders at War: How Presidents Shape Military Interventions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sending, Ole Jacob, Pouliot, Vincent, and Neumann, Iver B.. 2015. Diplomacy and the Making of World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, David. 1961. “The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations.” World Politics 14 (1): 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, Ty, and Steele, Brent. 2017. “Micro-Moves in International Relations Theory.” European Journal of International Relations 23 (2): 267–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) Project. 2020. “TRIP Journal Article Database Release (Version 3.3).” Available at https://trip.wm.edu/data/dashboard/journal-article-database.Google Scholar
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, Nicholas. 2018. Trusting Enemies: Interpersonal Relationships in International Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfers, Arnold. 1962. Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Yarhi-Milo, Keren. 2018. Who Fights for Reputation: The Psychology of Leaders in International Conflict, Vol. 156. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Holmes et al. supplementary material

Appendix

Download Holmes et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 114.5 KB