Skip to main content
Methods and Models
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 59
  • Cited by
    This book has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Heuwieser, Raphael J. 2018. Submissive Lobby Fodder or Assertive Political Actors? Party Loyalty of Career Politicians in the UK House of Commons, 2005-15. Legislative Studies Quarterly, Vol. 43, Issue. 2, p. 305.

    Ruhe, Constantin Schneider, Gerald and Spilker, Gabriele 2017. Handbuch Internationale Beziehungen. p. 641.

    Woods, Dwayne 2017. Populism in Search of its Model. Chinese Political Science Review, Vol. 2, Issue. 3, p. 253.

    Nguyen, Thanh An and Zeng, Yong 2017. A theoretical model of design fixation. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, Vol. 5, Issue. 3-4, p. 185.

    Lorentzen, Peter Fravel, M Taylor and Paine, Jack 2017. Qualitative investigation of theoretical models: the value of process tracing. Journal of Theoretical Politics, Vol. 29, Issue. 3, p. 467.

    Bendle, Neil and Cotte, June 2016. Assumptions of Rationality in Political Marketing: The Case of the Republican Autopsy. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 28, Issue. 1, p. 66.

    Abulof, Uriel 2015. The malpractice of “rationality” in international relations. Rationality and Society, Vol. 27, Issue. 3, p. 358.

    Traversa, Federico 2015. Income and the stability of democracy: Pushing beyond the borders of logic to explain a strong correlation?. Constitutional Political Economy, Vol. 26, Issue. 2, p. 121.

    Clemens, Austin Crespin, Michael and Finocchiaro, Charles J. 2015. Earmarks and Subcommittee Government in the U.S. Congress. American Politics Research, Vol. 43, Issue. 6, p. 1074.

    Johnson, James 2015. Simon Hug's Retrospective onPathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Dissent. Swiss Political Science Review, Vol. 21, Issue. 1, p. 180.

    Hug, Simon 2015. Dissenting (in part) with the Dissent: A Response to James Johnson. Swiss Political Science Review, Vol. 21, Issue. 1, p. 188.

    Johnson, James 2014. Models Among the Political Theorists. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 58, Issue. 3, p. 547.

    Hug, Simon 2014. Further Twenty Years of Pathologies? Is Rational Choice better than it used to be?. Swiss Political Science Review, Vol. 20, Issue. 3, p. 486.

    NEUMANN, ROBERT and GRAEFF, PETER 2013. Method Bias in Comparative Research: Problems of Construct Validity as Exemplified by the Measurement of Ethnic Diversity. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, Vol. 37, Issue. 2, p. 85.

    Kuehn, David 2013. Combining Game Theory Models and Process Tracing: Potential and Limits. European Political Science, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 52.

    Lynch, Michael S. and Madonna, Anthony J. 2013. Viva Voce: Implications from the Disappearing Voice Vote, 1865-1996. Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 94, Issue. 2, p. 530.

    Urpelainen, Johannes 2012. Geoengineering and global warming: a strategic perspective. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Vol. 12, Issue. 4, p. 375.

    de Lange, Sarah L. 2012. New Alliances: Why Mainstream Parties Govern with Radical Right-Wing Populist Parties. Political Studies, Vol. 60, Issue. 4, p. 899.

    Clinton, Joshua D. 2012. Using Roll Call Estimates to Test Models of Politics. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 15, Issue. 1, p. 79.

    de Leon, Cesar Garcia Perez 2012. Does implicit voting matter? Coalitional bargaining in the EU legislative process. European Union Politics, Vol. 13, Issue. 4, p. 513.


Book description

At present much of political science consists of a large body of formal mathematical work that remains largely unexplored empirically and an expanding use of sophisticated statistical techniques. While there are examples of noteworthy efforts to bridge the gap between these, there is still a need for much more cooperative work between formal theorists and empirical researchers in the discipline. This book explores how empirical analysis has, can, and should be used to evaluate formal models in political science. The book is intended to be a guide for active and future political scientists who are confronting the issues of empirical analysis with formal models in their work and as a basis for a needed dialogue between empirical and formal theoretical researchers in political science. These developments, if combined, are potentially a basis for a new revolution in political science.

Refine List
Actions for selected content:
Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Send to Kindle
  • Send to Dropbox
  • Send to Google Drive
  • Send content to

    To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to .

    To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

    Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

    Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

    Please be advised that item(s) you selected are not available.
    You are about to send

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.


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed