Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. PS: Political Science & Politics
  4. Volume 29
Journal Home
Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Publication date:
Topic: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Volume 29 - September 1996

Contents

Page 1 of 13

Other

Letter

  • The APSR Hall of Fame: A Comment

  • Nils Peter Gleditsch
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, pp. 637-638
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Instant Political Reform: A Recipe for Democracy's Demise

  • Gary Andres
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, pp. 413-414
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • More “Bad News, Period”

  • Richard H. Reeb, Jr.
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, pp. 414-415
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Response to Wolfgang Hirczy

  • Wilma Rule
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, p. 143
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Other

Research Article

  • The Study of Politics: What Does Replicability Have to Do with It?

  • Miriam Feldblum
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, pp. 7-9

  • The purpose of this rejoinder is twofold. The first is to question the call to extend a “replication standard” for qualitative research in political science. (See Golden, 1995a). The second is to question how useful the focus on “replicability” is for research in political science in general (see King, 1995a, and the debate on “Verification/Replication” in PS, 1995 28(3): 443–99).

    What underlies a replication standard for qualitative research? I believe that the call for a replication standard for qualitative research is applicable to only certain kinds of research, and that, even within its own limitations, is probably misguided. For the most part, when proponents of a replication standard have anticipated dissension over the requirement of replication for qualitative research, they have pointed to logistical, pragmatic, and privacy burdens that such a requirement may impose on researchers.

    In contrast, my main contention concerns the very conceptualization of research as replicable. I argue that the assumptions underlying a replication standard are strongly and narrowly positivist. The replication standard itself is reductionist, and its use would marginalize a portion of the qualitative research now being conducted in political science.

Other

Letter

  • Verification/Replication: A Graduate Student's Perspective

  • Quentin Kidd
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, p. 415
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Discussion

Other

James Madison Lecture

Other

Letter

  • An Outside Look

  • Don Sneed
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 September 2013, pp. 415-416
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Discussion

Other

John Gaus Lecture

Page 1 of 13