IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v98y1999i3-4p237-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political Science and Public Choice: 1950-70

Author

Listed:
  • Mitchell, William C

Abstract

The early contributors to Public Choice did not find a sympathetic reception among political scientists. During the years 1950-70, political scientists were either indifferent to or hostile to the emerging field of rational choice in which the approach and tools of economics are applied to politics. In the essay that follows, the author attempts to explain this situation and why another revolution--the behavioral--dominated political science for more than twenty years. Despite the prominence of rational choice in some political science journals, that dominance continues, a matter he hopes to address in a subsequent article. Copyright 1999 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Mitchell, William C, 1999. "Political Science and Public Choice: 1950-70," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 98(3-4), pages 237-249, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:98:y:1999:i:3-4:p:237-49
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0048-5829/contents
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2018. "Public choice and political science: a view from Europe," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 245-257, June.
    2. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2014. "Empirical social choice: an introduction," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 297-310, March.
    3. Randy Simmons & Ryan Yonk, 2015. "The empty intersection: why so little public choice in political science?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 45-56, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:98:y:1999:i:3-4:p:237-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.