A Model Discipline: Political Science and the Logic of Representations

In A Model Discipline, Kevin A. Clarke and David M. Primo turn a critical eye to the methodological approach that dominates modern political science. Clarke and Primo contend that the field's emphasis on model testing has led to a distortion of both the modeling process and the art of data analysis and cannot be logically justified. The authors argue that models should be seen as "objects" and thus regarded as neither true nor false. Models should instead be evaluated for their usefulness for a particular purpose. Divided into two parts, the book first establishes that current practice is not philosophy-free and rests on a number of questionable assumptions. The second part focuses on the different ways that theoretical and statistical models can be useful, and closes with a defensible justification for integrating theoretical and statistical models. A novel work of methodology, A Model Discipline offers a new perspective on long-held assumptions about the way research in the social sciences should be conducted.

Table of Contents:
Preface 1 A Model Discipline 1.1 The Model in Political Science 1.2 Metaphors and Analogies, Fables and Fictions 1.3 The broad themes of the book 1.3.1 Science is not what we think it is 1.3.2 Current practice is not "philosophy-free" 1.3.3 Models are objects 1.3.4 Models are not tested with data 1.3.5 Explanation 1.4 Plan of the Book 1.5 What this Book is Not 2 The Science in Political Science 2.1 Introduction 2.2 What Political Scientists Say They Are Doing 2.3 Hypothetico-Deductivism 2.4 Problems with H-D 2.4.1 Deductions are Truth-Preserving 2.4.2 Data Can't Speak for Themselves 2.4.3 Other Problems with H-D 2.5 How We Got Here 2.5.1 Logical Positivism 2.5.2 Pathologies of Rational Choice 2.5.3 Methods and Models 2.5.4 The Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models 2.6 Conclusion 3 What is a Model? 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Models as Maps 3.3 A Few Examples 3.4 The Received View of Scientific Theories 3.5 The Semantic Conception of Scientific Theories 3.6 The Model-Based View of Scientific Theories 3.7 Models and Theories 3.8 Conclusion 4 Theoretical Models 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Aspects of Theoretical Models 4.3 The Purposes of Models 4.3.1 Foundational Models 4.3.2 Organizational Models 4.3.3 Exploratory Models 4.3.4 Predictive Models 4.4 Judging a Theoretical Model 4.4.1 Prediction is the Wrong Standard (Usually) 4.4.2 The Illusion of Precise Standards 4.4.3 Dimensions of Usefulness 4.5 Conclusion 5 Empirical Models 5.1 Introduction 5.2 What is an Empirical Model? 5.2.1 A Model-Based Understanding 5.3 The Purposes of Empirical Models 5.4 The Illogic of Theory Testing 5.4.1 Falsificationism 5.4.2 Verificationism 5.4.3 Bayesian Confirmation 5.5 The Other Uses of Empirical Modeling 5.6 Conclusion 6 Explanation 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Existing justifications 6.3 Explanation 6.3.1 What constitutes an explanation? 6.3.2 Explanation in Political Science 6.4 Models as explanations 6.5 Choosing among explanations 6.5.1 Comparative Model Testing 6.5.2 Is choosing necessary? 6.6 Conclusion 7 Conclusion 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Review of the argument 7.3 Issues and counterarguments Bibliography

About the Author :
Kevin A. Clarke, an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Rochester, received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Michigan. His research focuses on political methodology and model discrimination tests. Clarke's articles have appeared in American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Political Analysis, and many other journals. David M. Primo is Associate Professor of Political Science and Business Administration at the University of Rochester. His research focuses on American politics and political economy. He is the author of two other books, Rules and Restraint (2007) and The Plane Truth (with Roger W. Cobb, 2003), and many journal articles.

Review :
"This is an outstanding book that should be read, thought about, and discussed by every political scientist. Professors Clarke and Primo provide a clear discussion of what models are, a persuasive critique of current practice in the discipline, and solid guidance for how to effectively assess models of all types. This is a must-read."--Andrew D. Martin, Professor of Law and Political Science, Washington University in St. Louis "This is not a book for those who need the comforts of conventional wisdom. It mounts a powerful challenge to our prevailing orthodoxies, both theoretical and methodological. This is fresh, aggressive thinking--a joy to encounter."--Christopher Achen, Princeton University "This smart book proposes two things simultaneously for political scientists. First, we ought to have a consensus on what we should not do with our models, and that is we should not insist on testing them as models. But second, we also ought to allow for diversity in what our theoretical models can do, how they are judged, and how they are structured. They argue that models ought to be judged based on how useful they are. The same can be said for books-and this is a very useful book."--Ken Kollman, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor