Journal Article - European Journal of International Relations

Leaving Theory Behind: Why Simplistic Hypothesis Testing is Bad for International Relations

| September 2013


Theory creating and hypothesis testing are both critical components of social science, but the former is ultimately more important. Yet, in recent years, International Relations scholars have devoted less effort to creating and refining theories or using theory to guide empirical research. Instead, they increasingly focus on 'simplistic hypothesis testing,' which emphasizes discovering well-verified empirical regularities. Privileging simplistic hypothesis testing is a mistake, however, because insufficient attention to theory leads to misspecified empirical models or misleading measures of key concepts. In addition, the poor quality of much of the data in International Relations makes it less likely that these efforts will produce cumulative knowledge. This shift away from theory and toward simplistic hypothesis testing reflects a long-standing desire to professionalize and expand the International Relations field as well as the short-term career incentives of individual scholars. This tendency is also widening the gap between the ivory tower and the real world, making International Relations scholarship less useful to policymakers and concerned citizens. Unfortunately, this trend is likely to continue unless there is a collective decision to alter prevailing academic incentives.

Read the article here (log in may be required):

For more information on this publication: Please contact International Security
For Academic Citation: Mearsheimer, John J. and Stephen M. Walt. Leaving Theory Behind: Why Simplistic Hypothesis Testing is Bad for International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations, vol. 19. no. 3. (September 2013):

The Authors

Stephen Walt