I seek to explain the disappointing performance of the field of comparative politics addressing the three basic questions: Why compare? What is comparable? and How? I also challenge the view that the methodology of comparison is pretty well known and established. Hosts of unsettled issues remain, while a growing cause of frustration and failure is the undetected proliferation of `cat-dogs' (or worse), that is, nonexistent aggregates which are bound to defy, on account of their non-comparable characteristics, any and all attempts at law-like generalizations. The bottom line is that the comparative endeavor suffers from loss of purpose.
Cantori, J.L.
and A.H. Ziegler, eds (1988) Comparative Politics in the Post-Behavioral Era. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
2.
Collier, David
(1991) `The Comparative Method: Two Decades of Change', in D.A. Rustow and K.P. Erickson (eds) Comparative Political Dynamics: Global Research Perspectives. New York: Harper and Row.
3.
Dogan, Mattei
and Dominique Pelassy (1984) How to Compare Nations: Strategies in Comparative Politics. Chatham: Chatham House.
4.
Eckstein, Harry
(1975) `Case Study and Theory in Political Science', in F.I. Greenstein and N.W. Polsby (eds) Handbook of Political Science, vol. 7, ch. 3. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
5.
Feyerabend, Paul
(1975) Against Method. London: Verso.
6.
Frendreis, John P.
(1983) `Explanation of Variation and Detection of Covariation: The Purpose and Logic of Comparative Analysis', Comparative Political Studies16: 255-272.
7.
Holt, Robert T.
and John E. Turner, eds (1970) The Methodology of Comparative Research. New York: Free Press.
8.
Huntington, S.P.
and C.H. More, eds (1970) Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society. New York: Basic Books.
9.
Kalleberg, A.L.
(1966) `The Logic of Comparison: A Methodological Note on the Comparative Study of Political Systems', World Politics19: 69-82.
10.
Lakatos, Imre
(1970) `Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes', in Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. London: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Lane, Jan-Erik
(1987) `Against Theoreticism', International Review of Sociology3: 149-185.
12.
LaPalombara, Joseph (1970) `Parsimony and Empiricism in Comparative Politics', in Holt and Turner (eds).
13.
Lijphart, Arend
(1971) `Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method', American Political Science Review65: 682-693.
14.
Lijphart, Arend
(1975) `The Comparable-Cases Strategy in Comparative Research', Comparative Political Studies (8), July: 158-177.
15.
Lipset, S.M.
, M. Trow and J.S. Coleman (1956) Union Democracy. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.
16.
Macridis, Roy C.
(1953) `Research in Comparative Politics' [Report of the Social Science Seminar on Comparative Politics]. American Political Science Review47: 641-675.
17.
Macridis, Roy C.
(1955) The Study of Comparative Government. New York: Random House.
18.
Mayer, Lawrence C.
(1989) Redefining Comparative Politics. Newbury Park: Sage.
19.
Osgood, C.E.
(1967) `On the Strategy of Cross-National Research into Subjective Culture', Social Science Information (6).
20.
Przeworski, Adam
(1987) `Methods of Cross-National Research, 1970-83: An Overview', in M. Dierkeset al. (eds) Comparative Policy Research: Learning from Experience. Aldershot: Gower.
21.
Przeworski, Adam
and Henry Teune (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York, Wiley.
22.
Ragin, Charles C.
(1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
23.
Riker, W.H.
(1982) `Two-Party System and Duverger's Law', American Political Science Review76: 753-766.
24.
Sartori, Giovanni
(1970) `Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics', American Political Science Review64: 1033-1053.
25.
Sartori, Giovanni
(1976) Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Sartori, Giovanni
(1984) `Guidelines for Concept Analysis', in Giovanni Sartori (ed.) Social Science Concepts: A Systematic Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.
27.
Sartori, Giovanni
(1986) `The Influence of Electoral Systems: Faulty Laws or Faulty Method?' in B. Grofman and A. Lijphart (eds) Electoral Laws and their Political Consequences. New York: Agathon Press.
28.
Sartori, Giovanni
, Fred W. Riggs and Henry Teune (1975) Tower of Babel: On the Definition and Analysis of Concepts in the Social Sciences. Pittsburgh: International Studies Association.
29.
Sigelman, Lee
and G.H. Gadbois (1983) `Contemporary Comparative Politics: An Inventory and Assessment', Comparative Political Studies. October: 275-305.
30.
Smelser, Neil J.
(1966) `Notes on the Methodology of Comparative Analysis of Economic Activity', Transactions of the Sixth World Congress of Sociology, vol. 2, pp. 101-117. Evian: International Sociological Association.
31.
Smelser, Neil J.
(1967) `Sociology and the Other Social Sciences', in P.F. Lazarsfeldet al. (eds) The Uses of Sociology. New York: Basic Books.
32.
Smelser, Neil J.
(1976) Comparative Methods in the Social Sciences. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
33.
Somit, A.
and J. Tanenhaus (1964) American Political Science: Profile of a Discipline. New York: Atherton.
34.
Sundquist, J.L.
(1988) `Needed: A Political Theory for the New Era of Coalition Government in the United States', Political Science Quarterly103: 613-635.
35.
Verba, Sidney
(1967) `Some Dilemmas in Comparative Research', World Politics20: 112-127.
