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

Roslyn Simowitz and Matthew C. Sheffer
Additional contact information
Matthew C. Sheffer: Department of Political Science, University of Texas at Arlington

Journal of Peace Research, 1998, vol. 35, issue 2, 238-244

Abstract: 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.

Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/35/2/238.abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:joupea:v:35:y:1998:i:2:p:238-244

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Peace Research from Peace Research Institute Oslo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().