Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security
Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies
Abstract
In recent years rational choice theory has experienced a surge in popularity among political scientists. Its usefulness, however, remains highly controversial. In our lead article, Stephen Walt of the University of Chicago argues that the outcome of this debate will have deep and long-lasting consequences for scholarly discourse. Given that the stakes are so high, Walt contends that if rational choice theory is to achieve general acceptance, it must be "precise, logically consistent, original, and empirically valid." Applying these criteria to several prominent formal theory works in security studies, Walt concludes that in general rational choice methods fail to offer new insights into the study of security issues.
For more information on this publication:
Please contact
International Security
For Academic Citation:
Stephen M. Walt. “Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies.” Quarterly Journal: International Security, vol. 23. no. 4. (Spring 1999): 5-48 .
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions
- Project Syndicate
Eight Lessons from the Ukraine War
Analysis & Opinions
- Foreign Policy
Why Do People Hate Realism So Much?
Analysis & Opinions
- Foreign Policy
Will Teaching Aggressors a Lesson Deter Future Wars?
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Geopolitics of Digital Standards
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Ideal Qualities of a Successful Diplomat
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Great Economic Rivalry: China vs the U.S.
Abstract
In recent years rational choice theory has experienced a surge in popularity among political scientists. Its usefulness, however, remains highly controversial. In our lead article, Stephen Walt of the University of Chicago argues that the outcome of this debate will have deep and long-lasting consequences for scholarly discourse. Given that the stakes are so high, Walt contends that if rational choice theory is to achieve general acceptance, it must be "precise, logically consistent, original, and empirically valid." Applying these criteria to several prominent formal theory works in security studies, Walt concludes that in general rational choice methods fail to offer new insights into the study of security issues.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate
Eight Lessons from the Ukraine War
Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Policy
Why Do People Hate Realism So Much?
Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Policy
Will Teaching Aggressors a Lesson Deter Future Wars?
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Geopolitics of Digital Standards
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Ideal Qualities of a Successful Diplomat
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Great Economic Rivalry: China vs the U.S.