Skip to main content

PIED5702M
Module Reading List

Advanced Political Analysis, 2019/20, Semester 1
Dr Stuart McAnulla/ Dr Nick Robinson
S.D.McAnulla@leeds.ac.uk/N.Robinson@leeds.ac.uk
Tutor information is taken from the Module Catalogue

Advanced Political Analysis

PIED 5702M

30 credits

Taught By: Stuart McAnulla 

Module Outline:

What is political about political science? What are the ‘classics’ in political science and how do I interrogate them? How important is power? How free are agents to realise their aspirations or are they constrained by social structures? These questions and more are the subject of Advanced Political Analysis.

Top of page

SECTION ONE: Understanding and Explanation in Political Analysis

Students will be introduced to the dominant epistemological and ontological paradigms in political studies. Students will study the most influential ways in which political analysts construct understandings and explanations of political phenomena. The strengths and weaknesses of alternative approaches to political analysis will be examined.

The core textbook for the module is C. Hay (2002) Political Analysis (London: Palgrave).

1)  Introductory meeting

2)  What’s political about political analysis?

What so we mean by ‘the political’? Does the subject of politics have clear boundaries? Should political analysis be ‘inter-disciplinary?

3) Knowledge and Knowing

Can there be a ‘scientific’ approach to studying subjects like politics? Should the study of politics emulate the methods of the natural sciences? Or is this impossible? (Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos etc.)

4) Intentionalist explanation in political analysis:

Should explanations of political behaviour be constructed with primary with reference to the intentions and actions of individuals or groups? How convincing are the kinds of explanations offered approaches such as rational choice theory?

5) Structural explanation in political analysis

Should explanations of political behaviour be constructed primarily with reference to social or institutional ‘structures’? How convincing are the explanations offered by approaches such as historical institutionalism?

6) Interpretivist explanation in political analysis

Should explanations of political behaviour be constructed with primary reference to the beliefs of actors? How convincing are the explanations offered by approaches such as constructivism and interpretivism?

Top of page

SECTION TWO: Critical Review: Analysing ‘classic’ political texts

Students will critically review a range of ‘classic’ political texts i.e. books that are considered to have been highly influential in the way politics is understood, and which have each provoked intense academic debate. Students will unpack and analyse the assumptions, theories, methodologies, arguments and empirical evidence utilised in such texts. Five texts will be covered, selected through class discussion from the list below:

 1) Steven Lukes (1974) Power: A Radical View (London: Macmillan).

2) Kate Millet (1968) ‘Sexual Politics’ (New England Free Press). This is an article circulated in advance of the publication of her book of the same name in 1970. A copy is on the VLE.

3) Francis Fukuyama (1992) The end of history and the last man (Harmondsworth: Penguin). (or the famous article - Francis Fukuyama (1989) ‘The End of History? ’, National interest Summer 1989, pp.3-18. A copy of this article is on the VLE.)

4) Friedrich Von Hayek  (1944) The Road To Serfdom

5) Colin Hay (2007) Why We Hate Politics, Polity, available electronically from library

Note: the particular texts studied may be changed subject to negotiation between students and the class tutors.

Seminar Plan:

Seminar sessions of two hours will enable module tutors to use a variety of teaching methods, including i) ‘short ‘mini-lectures’ to introduce and clarify basic concepts ii) collective guided seminar discussion to enhance skills in looking critically at key texts; iii) small groups discussions to facilitate student engagement with detailed aspects of key theories.

Student’s progress will be monitored on a weekly basis by means of:

Student contributions to class discussion, which will be monitored throughout the course, though not assessed

- Assessment performance will be monitored through the submission of essay drafts/plans which will be read by the tutor prior to the submission of their final term paper. Meetings will then be offered to students to discuss their work prior to final submission. In specific terms, Students will prepare a non-assessed 2000 word essay to be completed by the end of week six. The non-assessed essay will both serve to monitor progress as well as to provide feedback and advice for students in preparation for submitting assessed work.

- Opportunities for individual discussions outside seminar times.

Top of page

Week One

SECTION ONE: Understanding and Explanation in Political Analysis

1)  Introductory meeting

Top of page

Week Two

2) What’s political about political analysis?

What do we mean by ‘the political’? Does the subject of politics have clear boundaries? Should political analysis be ‘inter-disciplinary?

C.Hay (2002) ‘What’s Political About Political Science’ in C. Hay, Political Analysis , (London: Palgrave) Chapter Two, pp. 59-75 Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

V. Lowndes., D. Marsh. and G. Stoker (2017) ‘Introduction to Part 1’ in V. Lowndes, D. Marsh .and G. Stoker Theory and Methods in Political Science, (London: Palgrave), pp. 15-22

N. Smith. and D. Lee (2015) What's Queer About Political Science?  British journal of politics & international relations. , 17, 1, 49–63

H. Savigny and L. Marsden (2011) 'Introduction' in Doing political science and international relations : theories in action, Palgrave

C. Hay (2007) ‘Political Disenchantment’ in C. Hay (2007) Why we hate politics, (Cambridge: Polity)

M. Bevir (2006) ‘Political studies as narrative and science, 1880–2000’, Political studies. 54: 583–606. 

J. Dryzek, (2006) ‘Revolutions without enemies: Key transformations in political science’, The American political science review. 100(4): 487–492. 

H. Savigny (2010) 'Looking Back to Move Forward: Historicising the Construction of Disciplinary Narratives in European Political Science and International Relations', European political science., 9, S99-S100

A. Gofas and C. Hay (2010) The role of ideas in political analysis : a portrait of contemporary debates, Routledge

S. Bagg (2018) 'What makes a Political Theory Political? A Comment on Waldron', Political studies review. ISSN: 1478-9299; 1478-9302, 16 (3), 184-191

A. Leftwich (2004) ‘Thinking Politically: On the Politics of Politics’ in A. Leftwich (eds) What Is Politics? (Oxford Blackwell) (alternatively see 1984 version of same book)

A. Leftwich (ed.) (2004) What Is Politics? (Oxford Blackwell)

G. Sartori (1973) ‘What is Politics? ’, Political theory., 1 (1); pp.5-6 (available electronically)

Z. Wang, S. Guo (2019) 'The state of the field of Chine Political Science: 'Glocalising' political science in China', European Political Science ,18 (3), 456-472

G. Smith (2019) 'Friendship as a Political Concept: a General Framework for Analysis', Political Studies Review, 17 (1), 81-92

N. J. Hirschmann & C. Di Stefano (1996) Revisioning the political : feminist reconstructions of traditional concepts in western political theory: (Boulder, CO: Westview Press)

B. Crick (2000) In Defence of Politics, fifth edition (London: Continuum) (older editions of the same book are also available)

H.J. Wiardra (2014) Political culture, political science, and identity politics : an uneasy alliance , Surrey: Ashgate

C. Bay ‘Politics and Pseudo-politics’ (available in high demand) in C. McCoy (ed), Apolitical politics : a critique of behavioralism: (Crowell: New York, 1971)

C.Hay (2002) ‘Analytical Perspectives, Analytical Controversies’ in in C. Hay, Political Analysis , (London: Palgrave, Chapter One, pp. 1-53

G. King, R. Keohane, and S. Verba, Designing social inquiry : scientific inference in qualitative research (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), pp. chap. 1.

J. Hayward, “British Approaches to Politics: The Dawn of a Self-deprecating Discipline”, in J. Hayward, B. Barry, and A. Brown, eds., The British study of politics in the twentieth century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999). Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

I. Shapiro, (2002) “Problems, Methods, and Theories in the Study of Politics; or What’s Wrong with Political Science and what to do about it”, Political theory. (30), 588-611

M. Wood (2016) 'Politicisation, Depoliticisation and Anti-Politics', Political studies review., 14 (4)

Top of page

Week Three

3) Knowledge and Knowing

Can there be a ‘scientific’ approach to studying subjects like politics? Should the study of politics emulate the methods of the natural sciences? Or is this impossible?

D. Marsh, S.A. Ercan, P. Furlong (2017) ‘A Skin not a Sweater: Ontology and Epistemology in Political Science’in V. Lowndes, D. Marsh and G. Stoker Theory and Methods in Political Science, (London: Palgrave)

H. Savigny and L. Marsden (2011) 'Themes and Issues' in Doing political science and international relations : theories in action Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

R. Jackson, ‘International Relations as a Craft Discipline’, in C. Navari (ed.), Theorising international society : English school methods (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2009).

J.W. Moses & T.L Knutsen (2007) Ways of knowing : competing methodologies and methods in social and political research: , (London: Palgrave), especially chapters 1, 2 and 7

K. Dowding (2015) The philosophy and methods of political science ISBN: 9781403904478 pbk; 9781403904461 hbk ISBN: 9781137572707 (e-book); 9781403904478 (pbk.), London Palgrave, chapter two OCR REQUESTED BY LIBRARY (KR 12/10/2018) 

M. Bevir and J. Blakely (2018) 'Why Political Science is an Ethical Issue', Political studies. ISSN: 0032-3217; 1467-9248s, 66 (2), 425-441

C.Hay (2002) ‘What’s Political About Political Science’ in C. Hay, Political Analysis , (London: Palgrave) Chapter Two, pp. 75-88

D. Sanders., ‘Behaviouralism’ in David Marsh and Gerry Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science (London: Palgrave, 2002), Chapter 2

David Easton, ‘The Future of the Post-Behavioural Phase in Political Science’, K.R. Monroe (ed) Contemporary empirical political theory (Berkley: University of California Press, 1997), first few pages are the most relevant

J.R. Bond,. (2007) ‘The scientification of the study of politics: Some observations on the behavioural evolution in political science’, The Journal of politics. 69(4): 897–907.

J. Dryzek (2006) ‘Revolutions without enemies: Key transformations in political science’, The American political science review. 100(4): 487–492.

H. Savigny (2010) 'Looking Back to Move Forward: Historicising the Construction of Disciplinary Narratives in European Political Science and International Relations', European political science., 9, S99-S100

S.T. Akindele and A. Adebo (2005) ‘A Revisitational Assessment of the Rise of Behavioral Approach in Political Science’, Journal of social sciences 10 (1), 61-64, a useful account of historical reasons for the development of behaviouralism. - Available online: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.581.7635&rep=rep1&type=pdf

G. King, R. Keohane, S. Verba Designing social inquiry : scientific inference in qualitative research, (Princetown: Princetown University Press, 1994)

C. McCoy (ed), Apolitical politics : a critique of behavioralism (Crowell: New York, 1971) strongly critical of the behavioural approach

B.Fay, (1996) Contemporary philosophy of social science : a multicultural approach: (Oxford: Blackwell,)

C. Taylor. ‘Neutrality in Political Science’ in Laslett and Runciman, eds. (1967) Philosophy, politics and society : a collection. 3rd series. (Oxford: Blackwell) Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

M. Hollis, (1994) The Philosophy of Social Science: An Introduction. (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press)

A. Sayer, (2000) Realism and social science (London: Sage)

I. Lakatos, (1974)‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in Lakatos and Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge: CUP), pp. 132-5 Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

T. Kuhn (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions., Chicago: London

Karl Popper, (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London: Hutchinson)

D. Marsh and H. Savigny (2004) ‘Political Science as a Broad Church: The Search for a Pluralist Discipline’, Politics. Vol. 24 (3).

M. Archer (et al) (1998) Critical realism : essential readings London: Routledge

J. Cruikshank (2003) Critical realism : the difference in makes: London Routledge

Top of page

Week Four

4) Intentionalist explanation in political analysis:

Should explanations of political behaviour be constructed with primary with reference to the intentions and actions of individuals or groups? How convincing are the kinds of explanations offered approaches such as rational choice theory?

S. McAnulla (2002) ‘Structure and Agency’ David Marsh and Gerry Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science (London: Palgrave, 2002), Chapter 13 Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva  

C. Hay (1995), ‘Structure and Agency’, Marsh and Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science, (London: MacMillan, 1995), First Edition

C. Hay (2002) ‘Beyond Structure versus Agency, Context versus Context’ Colin Hay Political analysis: A Critical Introduction, (London Palgrave), Chapter 3

D. Little (1991) Varieties of social explanation : an introduction to the philosophy of social science, Boulder: Westview Press, pp. 183-190 Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

S. Halerpin. and O. Heath. (2017) 'Methodological Individualism and Holism', Political research : methods and practical skills, Oxford: Oxford University Press

C. List and K. Speidermann (2013) 'Methodological Individualism and Holism in Political Science: A Reconciliation', The American political science review. , 107, 4, 629-643

A, Kydd (2008) 'Methodological Individualism and Rational Choice' in C. Rues and D. Snidal, The Oxford handbook of international relations,Oxford: Oxford University Press Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

J. Watkins (1968) ‘Methodological Individualism and the Social Sciences’ in M. Broadbeck (ed.) Readings in the philosophy of the social sciences, New York: MacMillan Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

A. Giddens Central Problems in Social Theory (London MacMillan, 1979) chapter 2. the original statement of Giddens ‘Structuration Theory’ Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

A. Giddens The constitution of society : outline of the theory of structuration, (Cambridge:Polity 1984) chapter 1 Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

M. Smith (1995) ‘Pluralism’ in Marsh and Stoker (eds) Theory and Methods in Political Science, MacMillan

D. Marsh (2002) ‘Pluralism and British Politics’ in Hay (2002) ed British politics today, Polity

T. James,  and J. Buller,  (2015) ‘Integrating Structural Context into the Assessment of Political Leadership: Philosophical Realism, Gordon Brown and the Great Financial Crisis’, Parliamentary affairs., 68, 1, 77-96

J. Dobbernack. N. Meer. and T. Momood (2015) ‘Misrecognition and Political Agency. The Case of Muslim Organisations in a General Election’, British journal of politics & international relations., 17, 2, 189–206

M.S. Archer, Realist social theory : the morphogenetic approach ’ (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995)

A. Hindmoor (2010) ‘Rational Choice’ in D. Marsh and G. Stoker (2010) Theory and Methods in Political Science, (London: Palgrave)

A. Hindmoor (2006) Rational choice (Basingstoke: Palgrave)

S. Parsons (2005) Rational choice and politics : a critical introduction, (London: Continuum)

P. John, Analysing Public Policy (London: Continuum, 2000), Chapter 6

B. Fay, (1996) ‘Must We Assume Others Are Rational? ’ in Contemporary philosophy of social science : a multicultural approach: A Multi-Cultural Approach, Oxford: Blackwell Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

D.P. Green, and I. Shapiro, Pathologies of rational choice theory : a critique of applications in political science, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994)

B. Hindess, (1998) Choice, rationality and social theory (London: Unwin)

J. Elster (1986) Rational Choice, (Oxford:Basil Blackwell, 1986)

A. Downs, (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York: Harper & Row)

Top of page

Week Five

5) Structural explanation in political analysis

Should explanations of political behaviour be constructed primarily with reference to material, social or institutional ‘structures’? How convincing are the explanations offered by approaches such as historical institutionalism?

S. McAnulla ‘Structure and Agency’ David Marsh and Gerry Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science (London: Palgrave, 2002), Chapter 13 

C. Hay, ‘Structure and Agency’, Marsh and Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science, (London: MacMillan, 1995), First Edition, Chapter 10

C. Hay ‘Beyond Structure versus Agency, Context versus Context’ Colin Hay Political analysis A Critical Introduction, (London Palgrave, 2002), Chapter 3

J. Newman. (2019). 'Morphogenetic Theory and the Constructivist Institutionalist Challenge'. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 49(1), 106-126. 

G. Clubb. (2017). ‘The Structure of Sectarianism: Response to ‘Hamas and the “trap” of sectarianism’.’ Global Discourse, 6(4), 709l-711. Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva 

C. Parsons (2007) ‘Structural Explanation’ in C. Parsons ‘ How to map arguments in political science ’, Oxford: Oxford University Press

C. Parsons (2007) ‘Institutional explanation’ in C. Parsons ‘ How to map arguments in political science ’, Oxford: Oxford University Press

M. S. Archer, (1995) Realist social theory : the morphogenetic approach ’ (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press)

B. Jessop, (1999) ‘Interpretive Sociology and the Dialectic of Structure and Agency’, Theory, culture & society., 13 (1), pp.119-28

A. King (1999) ‘Against Structure’ The sociological review., 47 (2), available electronically, King attacks Archer’s notion of structure

M.S. Archer (2000) ‘For Structure’ The sociological review., 48 (3) pp464-472, available electronically, Archer defends her theory of structure-agency against King’s attack (above)

M. Cotton (2015) 'Structure, agency and post-Fukushima nuclear policy: and alliance-context-actantiality model of political change', Journal of risk research., 18, 3, 317-332

C. Hay and D. Wincott (1998) ‘Structure, Agency and Historical Institutionalism’, Political studies., vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 951-957 available electronically

S. McAnulla (2005) ‘Making Hay with Actualism? The Need for A Realist Concept of Structure’, Politics, 25 (1), 31-38 see also Colin Hay’s response to this critique in the same journal

M. Blyth (2002)  ‘Institutions and Ideas’ David Marsh and Gerry Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science (London: Palgrave), Chapter 14

D. Howarth (2013) 'Deconstructing Structure and Agency' in Poststructuralism and after : structure, subjectivity, and power, Palgrave

P. John (2000), ‘Insitutionalism’ Analysing Public Policy, (London: Continuum), accessible with useful examples

J. March and J. Olsen, ‘The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life’, The American political science review. 78:3 (1984), pp. 734-749

P. Hall and R. Taylor, ‘Political Science and the three New Institutionalisms’, Political studies., 44:5 (1996), pp. 936-957, useful summary of some key new institutionalist perspectives

B. Guy Peters, Institutional Theory in Political Science: The ‘New Institutionalism’ (London: Pinter, 1999)

Top of page

Week Six

6) Interpretivist explanation in political analysis

Should explanations of political behaviour be constructed with primary reference to the beliefs of actors? How convincing are the explanations offered by approaches such as constructivism and interpretivism

C. Parsons (2017) ‘Constructivism and Interpretive Theory’ in V. Lowndes D. Marsh and G. Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science, fourth edition (London: Palgrave)

M. Bevir and R. Rhodes, (2002) “Interpretive Theory”, in D. Marsh and G. Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science, second edition (London Palgrave)

D. Howarth ‘Discourse Theory’, Theory and Methods in Political Science, (London: MacMillan, 1995), (First Edition)

M. Geddes (2019) 'The Explanatory Potential of 'Dilemmas': Bridging Practices of Power to Understand Political Change in Interpretive Political Science', Political Studies Review, 17 (3), 239-254 Available online 

D. Howarth (2013) Poststructuralism and after : structure, subjectivity, and power, Palgrave

M. Bevir and J. Blakely (2018) 'Why Political Science is an Ethical Issue', Political Studies, 66 (2), 425-441

C. Parsons (2007) ‘Ideational Explanation’ in C. Parsons ‘ How to map arguments in political science, Oxford: Oxford University Press

M. Bevir, O. Daddow and I. Hall (2014) Interpreting global security , London: Routledge

M Bevir and R. Rhodes (2010) The state as cultural practice [electronic resource], Oxford: Oxford University Press

D. Marsh, O. Daddow and I. Hall (2014) Two Cheers for Interpretivism: Reconstructing the British Political Tradition, Australian journal of public administration., 73, 3, 340-348

A. Gofas and C. Hay (2010) 'Varieties of Ideational Explanation' in The role of ideas in political analysis : a portrait of contemporary debates, Routledge

W. Leggett (2011) ‘The analytical and political limits to ‘interpreting’ governance’,  British politics., 6 (2): 241-51.

M. Bevir (2005) New Labour : a critique, Routledge

M. Bevir and R. Rhodes (2003) Interpreting British governance Routledge

S. McAnulla. (2006) ‘Challenging the New Interpretivism: Towards A Critical Realist Alternative’ British politics., 1 (1)

C. Hay (2002) ‘The Challenge of Postmodernism’ in C. Hay, Political analysis (London: Palgrave)

E. Laclau,  ‘Discourse’ in Goodin, Robert A., and Philip, Pettit (eds) A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995), pp. 431-437

J. Townshend, ‘Laclau’s and Mouffe’s Hegemonic Project: The Story so Far’, Political studies., 52, 2004, pp. 269-288

E. Laclau and C. Mouffe (1997), ‘Post-Marxism without Apologies’, New Left Review, 166, pp.79-106

E. Laclau and C. Mouffe Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (London: Verso, 1985)

N. Fairclough (2000) New Labour, new language? (London: Routledge), interesting examination of New Labour’s use of discourse

N. Fairclough (2003) Analyzing discourse : textual analysis for social research (London: Routledge)

N. Fairclough (1995) Critical discourse analysis : the critical study of language (London: Longman)

A. Wendt (1999) Social theory of international politics, New York: Cambridge University Press

J.W. Moses & T.L Knutsen (2012) Ways of knowing : competing methodologies and methods in social and political research: Competing Methodologies in Social and Political Research, London: Palgreave, especially chapters 8 & 9 Available as an Online Course Reading in Minerva

C. E. Epstein ‘ The power of words in international relations : birth of an anti-whaling discourse ’, (MIT Press, 2008).

Top of page

Week Seven

SECTION TWO: Critical Review: Analysing ‘classic’ political texts

Students will critically review a range of ‘classic’ political texts i.e. books that are considered to have been highly influential in the way politics is understood, and which have each provoked intense academic debate. Students will unpack and analyse the assumptions, theories, methodologies, arguments and empirical evidence utilised in such texts. Five of the texts below will be slected through class discussion for the five dedicated week classes.

An indicative list of classic texts is provided below:

 1) Steven Lukes (1974) Power: A Radical View (London: Macmillan).

2) Kate Millet (1968) ‘Sexual Politics’ (New England Free Press). This is an article circulated in advance of the publication of her book of the same name in 1970. A copy is on the VLE.

3) Francis Fukuyama (1992) The end of history and the last man (Harmondsworth: Penguin). (or the famous article - Francis Fukuyama (1989) ‘The End of History? ’, National interest Summer 1989, pp.3-18. A copy of this article is on the VLE.)

4) Friedrich Von Hayek  (1944) The Road To Serfdom

5) Colin Hay (2007)  Why We Hate Politics, Polity, available electronically from library

 

 

 

This list was last updated on 27/09/2019