This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Simowitz, R. Articles by Sheffer, M. C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Cumulation, Evaluation and the Research Process: A Response to Starr & Siverson

Matthew C. Sheffer

Department of Political Science, University of Texas at Arlington

The overarching objective of the original article was to apply a well-defined set of measures in a systematic and objective way to evaluate the extent of scientific progress within a given research program. The measures chosen were identified and defined by major philosophers of science. These measures were then applied to the empirical studies on the diffusion of war. Starr and Siverson claim to find problems in my analysis that undermined the conclusions I reach. This reply argues that each of their claims is unfounded. Moreover, they fail to refute the conclusion that the marginal progressiveness of their program is a significant reason for reduced interest in this topic.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 35, No. 2, 238-244 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343398035002006


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?