Institut for Statskundskab

Feet of Clay? How to Review Political Science Papers that Make Use of the Work of Historians

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Dokumenter

DOI

Political scientists increasingly enlist the work of historians but they often treat this work in a nonchalant or superficial way, which makes their evidentiary record questionable. It follows that we need to check the validity of the interpretation of historians' work in review processes. This article argues that enlisting historians as reviewers is not the answer. Instead, it proposes four simple criteria that can be used to flag situations in which the use of historians' work as empirical evidence is unconvincing. The general purpose of the article is to increase awareness about what is at stake when political scientists base empirical analysis on evidence gathered by historians.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftPS: Political Science & Politics
Vol/bind53
Nummer2
Sider (fra-til)253-257
Antal sider5
ISSN1049-0965
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 1 apr. 2020

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

Download-statistik

Ingen data tilgængelig

ID: 164121101