ASHER, H. B.
(1973) “The learning of legislative norms.”Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.67: 499-513.
2.
AXELROD, R.
[ed.] (1976) Structure of Decision. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
3.
BALL. T.
(1976) “From paradigms to research programs: toward a post-Kuhnian political science.”Amer. J. of Pol. Sci.20: 151-177.
4.
BANDURA, A.
(1977) Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
5.
BLAUG, M.
(1975) “Kuhn versus Lakatos, or paradigms versus research programmes in the history of economics.”History of Pol. Economy7: 399-434.
6.
BOULDING, K. E.
(1966) The Image. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.
7.
CAPLAN, N.
(1979) “The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization.”Amer. Behavioral Scientist22: 459-470.
8.
CAPLAN, N.
(1977) “A minimal set of conditions necessary for the utilization of social science knowledge in policy formulation at the national level,” pp. 183-199 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy Making. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
9.
CAPLAN, N.
, A. MORRISON, and R. STAMBAUGH. (1975) The Use of Social Science Knowledge in Policy Decisions at the National Level. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
10.
CHURCHMAN, C. W.
(1971) The Design of Inquiring Systems. New York: Basic Books.
11.
COBB, R. W.
(1973) “The belief system perspective: an assessment of a framework.”J. of Politics35: 121-153.
12.
CONNOLLY, W. E.
(1967) Political Science and Ideology. New York: Atherton.
13.
COOK, T. D.
, J. LEVINSON-ROSE, and W. E. POLLARD (1980) “The misutilization of evaluation research: some pitfalls of definition.”Knowledge1: 477-498.
14.
DUGGER, W. M.
(1978) “Institutional and neoclassical economics compared.”Social Sci. Q.58: 449-461.
15.
DUNN, W. E.
(1980) “The two-communities metaphor and models of knowledge use: an explanatory case survey.”Knowledge: 1: 515-536.
16.
HAMMOND, K. R.
(1978) “Toward increasing competence of thought in public policy formation,” pp. 11-32 in K. R. Hammond (ed.) Judgment and Decision in Public Policy Formation. Boulder, CO: Westview.
17.
HERSHEY, M. R.
(1977) “A social learning theory of innovation and change in political campaigning.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, September 1-4.
18.
HOROWITZ, D. L.
(1977) “The courts as guardians of the public interest.”Public Admin. Rev.37: 148-154.
19.
KIRKPATRICK, S. A.
(1975) “Psychological views of decision-making,” pp. 39-112 in C. P. Cotton (ed.) Political Science Annual, vol. 6. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
20.
KNORR, K. D.
(1977) “Policymakers' use of social science knowledge: symbolic or instrumental,” pp. 165-182 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy Making. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
21.
KUHN, T. S.
(1977) “Second thoughts on paradigms,” pp. 293-319 in T. S. Kuhn (ed.) The Essential Tension. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
22.
KUHN, T. S.
(1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
23.
LAKATOS, I.
(1971) “History of science and its rational reconstruction,” pp. 91-136 in R. C. Buck and R. S. Cohen (eds.) Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 8. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel.
24.
LAKATOS, I.
(1970) “Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes,” pp. 91-176 in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
25.
LASSWELL, H. D.
(1975) “Research in policy analysis: the intelligence and appraisal functions,” pp. 1-23 in F. I. Greenstein and N. W. Polsby (eds.) Handbook of Political Science. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26.
LINDBLOM, C. E.
and D. K. COHEN (1979) Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Social Problem Solving. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
27.
MITROFF, I. I.
and L. R. PONDY (1974) “On the organization of inquiry: a comparison of some radically different approaches to policy analysis.”Public Admin. Rev.34: 471-479.
28.
MOON, J. D.
(1975) “The logic of political inquiry: a synthesis of opposed perspectives,” pp. 131-228 in F. I. Greenstein and N. W. Polsby (eds.) Handbook of Political Science. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29.
PEPPER, S. C.
(1966) World Hypotheses. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
30.
PUTNAM, R. D.
(1971) “Studying elite political culture: the case of ideology.”Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.65: 651-681.
31.
RICH, R. F.
(1977) “Use of social science information by federal bureaucrats: knowledge for action versus knowledge for understanding,” pp. 197-212 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy Making. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
32.
SCOTT, R. A.
and A. R. SHORE (1979) Why Sociology Does Not Apply. New York: Elsevier North-Holland.
33.
SNOW, C. P.
(1965) The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
34.
SUNQUIST, J. L.
(1978) “Research brokerage: the weak link,” in L. E. Lynn (ed.) Knowledge and Policy: The Uncertain Connection. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science.
35.
WEISS, C. H.
(1979) “The many meanings of research utilization.”Public Admin. Rev.39: 426-431.
36.
WEISS, C. H.
(1977) “Introduction,” pp. 1-22 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy Making. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.