Table of Contents
Introduction:
The Behavioural Movement, also known as Behaviouralism, emerged as a significant trend in political science during the mid-20th century. It marked a shift from the traditional, normative approaches to a more empirical and scientific analysis of political behavior. This movement aimed to make political science more systematic, rigorous, and aligned with the methods of natural sciences.
Historical Context:
The Behavioural Movement gained momentum in the United States after World War II, during a period when social sciences were being transformed by the desire to create objective, quantifiable knowledge. This movement was a response to the perceived limitations of traditional political science, which was often criticized for being too descriptive, speculative, and focused on institutions rather than actual political behavior.
1. Key Characteristics of the Behavioural Movement:
Empirical Research:
Behavioural Movement emphasized the collection and analysis of empirical data. Political scientists were encouraged to conduct field studies, surveys, and experiments to gather data on political behavior.
The focus shifted from normative questions, such as, what ought to be, to empirical questions, such as what is.
Interdisciplinary Approach:
The Behaviouralists borrowed methods and theories from other social sciences, particularly psychology, sociology and economics. This interdisciplinary approach helped in understanding political behavior from various perspectives.
Concepts like attitude, opinion, and personality, often studied in psychology, were applied to political behavior.
Quantitative Methods:
The movement heavily relied on quantitative methods, including statistical analysis, to test hypotheses and theories.
The use of mathematical models and computer simulations became common, aiming to predict political behavior-based on data.
Focus on the Individual:
Unlike traditional approaches that focused on institutions and legal frameworks, Behavioural Movement emphasized the study of individual political behavior.
Topics such as voting behavior, public opinion, political participation, and leadership were central to behavioural analysis.
Value-neutrality:
Behaviouralists advocated for value-neutral research, meaning that political scientists should avoid making value judgements and instead focus on objective analysis.
This approach aimed to make political science a ‘pure’ science, similar to neutral sciences.
2. Key Theorists and Contributions:
David Easton:
Easton was a key proponent of the Behavioural Movement. He emphasized the need for political science to become more scientific and developed a systems theory of political science that focused on inputs (demands) and outputs (policies) within the political system.
Robert A. Dahl:
Dhal’s work on pluralism and democracy was rooted in the behavioural approach. He conducted empirical studies on political power and participation, contributing significantly to the understanding of democracy in practice.
Gabriel Almond:
Almond introduced the concept of political culture, highlighting the role of individual beliefs, attitudes, and values in shaping political systems. His comparative studies of political systems were groundbreaking in the behavioral tradition.
3. Criticisms of the Behavioural Movement:
Overemphasis on Quantification:
Critics argue that the Behavioural Movement’s focus on quantitative methods often led to oversimplification of complex political phenomena. Not all aspects of political behavior can be quantified.
Neglect of Normative Concerns:
The emphasis on empirical research and value-neutrality led to the neglect of normative questions, such as justice, ethics, and political philosophy, which are essential to understanding political systems.
Cultural Bias:
Some scholars criticized the movement of its Western-centric approach, as many of the theories and models developed were based on the political systems of Western democracies and did not always apply to non-Western contexts.
Detachment from Real-World Politics:
The focus on abstract models and theories sometimes led to a detachment from real-world political issues and struggles, reducing the relevance of political science to practical politics.
Conclusion:
The Behavioural Movement revolutionized political science by introducing scientific rigor and empirical methods to the study of politics. While it has faced criticisms, its impact on the discipline is undeniable. Behaviouralism laid the foundation for subsequent developments in political science, such as rational choice theory and public choice theory. Today, political scientists continue to draw on the insights of the Behavioural Movement while also addressing its limitations by integrating both empirical and normative approaches.
FAQs:
1. What is the behavioural movement in political science?
The behavioural movement is an approach in political science that focuses on the empirical and scientific study of political behaviors of individuals and groups, using quantitative and qualitative methods.
2. Who are the key proponents of the behavioural movement?
Key proponents include Charles E. Merriam, who championed the scientific approach, and David Easton, who provided a theoretical framework for the movement.
3. How does the behavioural movement differ from traditional political science?
Traditional political science often focused on legal and institutional analysis, while the behavioural movement emphasized observable human behavior and empirical data.
4. What are the main criticisms of the behavioural movement?
The main criticisms include its overemphasis on qualification, neglect of normative issues, western-centric bias, and reductionist tendencies.
5. How did the behavioural movement influence modern political science?
It introduced empirical research methods, statistical tools, and a focus on human behavior, which have become integral to contemporary political analysis.
6. What is the post-behavioural movement?
The post-behavioural movement emerged as a critique of the behavioural approach, advocating for the inclusion of normative and ethical considerations in political science research.