In this study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of Thomson Reuters’ Web of Knowledge (WoK): Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI), and Journal Citation Reports (JCR) focusing on political science publications about Turkey from 1900 to 2016. We found a total of 1280 publications: articles (65.20%) and book reviews (26.33%). Most of the publications were single-authored, were written in English (88.2%) followed by German (9.61%), were cited four times, and gave references to 27 publications on average. The words that frequently appeared in the 2000–2010 period (e.g., Cypriot, Greek, consolidation, military, armed, Islam) were related to important aspects of Turkish politics, particularly to Turkey–EU relations. Moreover, the words that frequently appeared in the 2011–2016 period (e.g., shift, Islamic, religious, party, hegemonic, AKP, CHP) were mostly related to Turkey’s domestic politics and the rule of the governing party, AKP. Based on these findings, we predict that the number of political science publications about Turkey and their impact will continue increasing in the next decade.
Nowhere is that relationship more fraught than in the United States, where the need to win votes can trump scientific evidence on issues such as climate change and public health - and where scientists may have little sympathy for political give and take.
Nurse identified support for the National Health Service, the need for an immigration policy that attracts foreign scientists, and inspirational science teaching in primary education as some of the priorities for British scientists. The consequences of imagining that science can remain aloof from politics became acutely apparent in Germany in 1933, when the consensus view that politics was, as Heisenberg put it, an unseemly "money business" meant that most scientists saw no reason to mount concerted resistance to the expulsion of Jewish colleagues - regarded as a political rather than a moral matter.
Clearly, the American public is unsatisfied with some aspect of the way Congress is serving the people. Because the legislative branch deals with a variety of issues, one specific issue will be focused on and evaluated for efficiency and effectiveness. Once that is established, Congress' response to gun violence can be compared to the response the public saw when it came to Zika. Since all government funding travels through Congress, the primary ways in which Congress can deal with a threat are by funding research into the topic, prevention efforts, and relief. [...]these approaches may also predict the extent to which sustainable and beneficial results desired by the humanitarian and development field will be realized.
Prospect theory is the most influential behavioral theory of choice in the social sciences. Its creators won a Nobel Prize in economics, and it is largely responsible for the booming field of behavioral economics. Although international relations theorists who study security have used prospect theory extensively, Americanists, comparativists, and political economists have shown little interest in it. The dominant explanation for political scientists' tepid response focuses on the theoretical problems with extending a theory devised in the lab to explain political decisions in the field. This essay focuses on these problems and reviews suggested solutions. It suggests that prospect theory's failure to ignite the imagination of more political scientists probably results from their aversion to behavioral assumptions and not from problems unique to prospect theory.