Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Andriole-Wilkenfeld Hpple 1975

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Pietrafesa
    6 views40 pages
    Andriole-Wilkenfeld

    Original Title

    Andriole-wilkenfeld Hpple 1975

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Andriole-Wilkenfeld

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views40 pages

    Andriole-Wilkenfeld Hpple 1975

    Uploaded by

    Pedro Pietrafesa
    Andriole-Wilkenfeld

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 40
    A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Foreign Policy Behavior Stephen J. Andriole; Jonathan Wilkenfeld; Gerald W. Hopple International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2. (Jun., 1975), pp. 160-198, Stable URL: http links jstor.orgsicisici=01020-8833 28 197500929 19%3A2%3C 160% 3A APPICAGIE20.CO%SB2-G Incernational Studies Quarterty is custently published by The International Saidies Association. Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at flip: feworwjtor org/aboutterms.htmal. ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in par, that unless you fave obtained pcior permission, you may not dowaload an cnt isus of @ journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe ISTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial uss. Please contact the publisher cegarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at bupsforwer.jstor.org/joumals/isa html Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transtnission. ISTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contact support @jstor.org- hup:thrwwjstor.orgy ‘Sun Aug 27 11:03:19 2006 A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Foreign Policy Behavior ‘STEPHEN J, ANDRIOLE, JONATHAN WILKENFELD, and GERALD W, HOFPLE Deparment of Government and Pes rivers of Meeland Research progress in the comparative analysis of foreign policy has beet impeded by the absence of a viable framework for analysis. An exartination of the major published inventory ‘of findings in this relatively young subfield demonstrates that research Tas been disparate, unever, and noncumulative (McGowan and Shapiro, 1973). Only one specific area of inquiry—the study of the relationship between domestic and foreign conflict behavior—has received more than cursory scrutiny (McGowan and Shapiro, 1973: 79-83, 198-199; Wilkenfeld, 1973). Like its pareat field international polities—the comparative study of foreign policy has tended to pursue an implicit course that tavolves the construction of islands or clusters of theory, a AUTHORS’ NOTE: This teveach was supported by tke Athareeé Resch Projects Agecy of the Desarimeat of Defeas and nas mcaltored by ONR. under Contact NO001447-4.0739-00%6, The authors would Tike to actowledge the ames incviaual who reviewed an eats version of thls paper and parry ‘hots who offered extensive, comments-MichuelB, Dolan, Frdaic 8, Penson, Purse J. MeGowan, Ray E Lieder, Rotare Stos, Mchol K: O'Leary, ichand H. Van Atta, and labeth Rink, The article repens the itl semen af fe Inectate Bekavion Arayse (DA) Psjet, an ongoing resewck project based othe Univecy af Maryland designed to stcive al comparative aod empkical peneralizs: tions eonceming de sours and proces of Fors poly belrio. ITEQNATIONAL STUCIE. QUARTERLY, Vi 19 No.2, e978 (60) ivi ea, FOREIGN POLICY BEHAVIOR FRAMEWORK [36] strategy that was suggested over two decades ago by Guetzkow (1950). Guetzkow expressed the hope that such islands could eventually be merged into a-general theory system, From a Philosophy of social science vantage point, this kind of orientation is clearly unacceptable; actual developments in the field of international politics provide even more convincing evidence of the inherent limitations of this perspective. The “islands of theory” strategy is thus unproductive and very probably detrimental. Thete is, furthermore, a need to avoid the extreme of undirected data collection as well as excessively abstract exercises in the construction of theories and “pretheories." Central to our research is the conviction that there must be a dynamic dialogue between data collection and theory building, Empirical data must be accumulated within the context of an overarching theoretical framework, while theatet- ical propositions and hypotheses must te subjected to careful ‘operationalization and testing. The present research and its eccompanying analytical frame- work—which will be presented below-represent an effort to go beyond previous research and pretheoretical efforts. Several assumptions or guidelines are central to the development and refinement of this framework, First is the desite to be theoretically comprehensive. For example, the five general independent variable clusters, to be dlaborated below, ate derived ultimately from the five com- monly identified social scientific levels of analysis, While ensuing research will ettempt to specify the relative potency of 1, Date psthesing proigcte and ptetheores ae important elements ia. the armament of saci Sets; no intelestal hubs intended by our eaque Gf pat reparch corenning the comarsine study of foci pokey. As Young (C992: 187190) pomte out, such actives As entation, conccptelztin, and factual anesoment ar iiportan, hat should not be equated with theorizing Ct, ‘Would ed, wit framework cnesrution), ‘Our lies to construct an aralc famework for the comparative study of oaviga policy would be inconcemabke without the data calecton ard nypothesic ‘ering Sat ave aeady cesued. What is most nib inthe socialsciences is te Uilarveste fendeney fo invent schema ot theareswathout reference ta das, 3 fwotlem that andenably retarded propets i the suilé af eomparve poles ter she prolfteation of “theoretical” txonomies, ypologies and fameworks in the {980s Fors concrete itt of the renling Np etn theory 38 tain tanparatine sly, se Hopkins (1969: 71-94). [162] INTERNATIONAL STUDIES QUARTPRLY the five clusters in the context of varving types of states and foreign policy events, it is our contention that one of the clusters can be arbitrarily innored. Equally crucial is the integrative nature of this work, Research progress at this stage of inquiry warrants a synthesis of previous findings, Such a synthesis should constitute an ordering of propositions in terms of independent variable clusters and state and event typologies, rather than the presentation of a potpourri of hypotheses in inventory form, Integration extends beyond this and embraces the array of ‘operational strategies that have been executed in foreign policy and international political analysis. Agarceate data (Russett et al, 1964; Taylor and Hudson, 1972; Banks and Textor, 1963; Banks, 1971; Rummel, 1972), events data (Azar et al., 1972; Burgess and Lawion, 1972; Sigler et al., 1972), and cortent analytic data (Norti et al., 1963) need to be employed. While we propose to collect some new data, the data acquisition projects of the past decase offer a firm empirical base from ‘which hypotheses might be extracted. ‘Methodological integration as conceived here also involves an explicit effort to nurture a creative interplay between qualita- tive and quantitative data. Qualitative data range from deci sional case studies to in-depth psychological analyses of foreign policy decision makers. Not all key variables can be converted into “hard data,” and the exclusion of certain qualitative factors would truncate the range of possible generalizations concerning the sources and processes of foreign policy ber havior? The goals of integrating theoretical propositions and come ‘ining operational research techniques are based on the assump- 2. Generalizations cancening the sources of foci policy behavior refer to statements about he coal or deteinatve [ctor af behave, whe generale ns concen te process af fren policy formulation and executon reer ta Stements out the Gehavon of the decimal unit caen ae indduae and snseztes) caraed with cesgonding to. an extetal even Inthe cas of source Stays «2! of independent variable is ustsposed with tof dependent yables ‘which genetllycefets to an external oes poley event. Proce nals cevere tbe Ihslaeaton snd conceptualize indegenden! soure variables as dependec, whie Dosing the extemal event as the tatpenden’ vanable (2 Andre, 3974) ‘Accordingly, is aril deals exciey th sontce analysand it amowork Is

    You might also like