What is wrong with APSR's new editorial team?

2 years - 14 posts - Latest - RSS
OP: 6 Goods vs 3 No Goods
Thread: 63 Goods vs 36 No Goods

Political Science Rumors » Political Science » Research / Journals

What is wrong with APSR's new editorial team?

Simone

"We aim to diversify the subfields, geographic foci, and methodological approaches represented in the APSR." https://twitter.com/apsrjournal/status/1319790888453918722

From website: "we bring substantive strengths in the domestic and international politics of race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality—areas that have been traditionally underrepresented, both among the editors and in the pages of the APSR."

Effects on distribution of submissions by field so far:

- Normative -> UP by 25%
- Critical theory -> UP by 6%
- Experimental -> UP by 1.27%

- Formal theory -> DOWN by 10.34%
- Statistical/Observ. -> DOWN by 2.83%

Great way to "diversify the subfields (...) and methodological approaches represented in the APSR"

2 years ago # QUOTE 6 YEA 3 NAY !
Keynes

Formal theory is a shame and shouldn't be published anywhere.

There's a general trend against observational and toward experimental, so that says nothing.

Normative is not a methodological approach, it's an op-ed and should not be published in a journal with the name "science" in it.

Critical theory is one of the most white privilege nonsense ridden fields in academia. Many of their supposedly anti-colonial theories are orientalism, through and through or complete and utter nonsense.

2 years ago # QUOTE 15 YEA 16 NAY !
Kasey

You can take some solace knowing that an APSR critical theory or normative article will still not get you a job that doesn't exist. It will only help the internal promotions of those that already have jobs. It will not lead to much movement in the job market.

2 years ago # QUOTE 9 YEA 0 NAY !
Phyllis

Formal theory is a shame and shouldn't be published anywhere.
There's a general trend against observational and toward experimental, so that says nothing.
Normative is not a methodological approach, it's an op-ed and should not be published in a journal with the name "science" in it.
Critical theory is one of the most white privilege nonsense ridden fields in academia. Many of their supposedly anti-colonial theories are orientalism, through and through or complete and utter nonsense.

So we can call it American Op-ed Review

2 years ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY !
Rainier

They seem fine. Wait until they start putting out articles before you whine.

2 years ago # QUOTE 1 YEA 3 NAY !
Praise

"We aim to diversify the subfields, geographic foci, and methodological approaches represented in the APSR." https://twitter.com/apsrjournal/status/1319790888453918722
From website: "we bring substantive strengths in the domestic and international politics of race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality—areas that have been traditionally underrepresented, both among the editors and in the pages of the APSR."
Effects on distribution of submissions by field so far:
- Normative -> UP by 25%
- Critical theory -> UP by 6%
- Experimental -> UP by 1.27%
- Formal theory -> DOWN by 10.34%
- Statistical/Observ. -> DOWN by 2.83%
Great way to "diversify the subfields (...) and methodological approaches represented in the APSR"

These aren't very large shifts, especially considering the small sample size for the new team. Experimental work went from 15.8% of submissions to 16% of submissions. Critical theory went from 1.5% of submissions to 1.6% of submissions. This isn't exactly a paradigm shift.

And this is submission data, not acceptance data.

2 years ago # QUOTE 9 YEA 1 NAY !
Dixie

Formal theory is a shame and shouldn't be published anywhere.
There's a general trend against observational and toward experimental, so that says nothing.
Normative is not a methodological approach, it's an op-ed and should not be published in a journal with the name "science" in it.
Critical theory is one of the most white privilege nonsense ridden fields in academia. Many of their supposedly anti-colonial theories are orientalism, through and through or complete and utter nonsense.

Normative has laid the groundwork for your sh!try empiricism for centuries now. When you lab techs can start thinking for yourselves, then you too will see the value in normative research.

2 years ago # QUOTE 6 YEA 7 NAY !
Praise

Formal theory is a shame and shouldn't be published anywhere.
There's a general trend against observational and toward experimental, so that says nothing.
Normative is not a methodological approach, it's an op-ed and should not be published in a journal with the name "science" in it.
Critical theory is one of the most white privilege nonsense ridden fields in academia. Many of their supposedly anti-colonial theories are orientalism, through and through or complete and utter nonsense.

Normative has laid the groundwork for your sh!try empiricism for centuries now. When you lab techs can start thinking for yourselves, then you too will see the value in normative research.

There is value in both normative and formal theory, but their practitioners often purposefully distance themselves from empiricists, and I think that is problematic.

But, yes, that was an ignorant comment.

2 years ago # QUOTE 4 YEA 0 NAY !
Keynes

Formal theory is a shame and shouldn't be published anywhere.
There's a general trend against observational and toward experimental, so that says nothing.
Normative is not a methodological approach, it's an op-ed and should not be published in a journal with the name "science" in it.
Critical theory is one of the most white privilege nonsense ridden fields in academia. Many of their supposedly anti-colonial theories are orientalism, through and through or complete and utter nonsense.
Normative has laid the groundwork for your sh!try empiricism for centuries now. When you lab techs can start thinking for yourselves, then you too will see the value in normative research.

There is value in both normative and formal theory, but their practitioners often purposefully distance themselves from empiricists, and I think that is problematic.
But, yes, that was an ignorant comment.

No, it was not an ignorant comment. We're not talking about Descartes submitting to the APSR here. We're talking about some failson with an investment banker daddy telling us about how if only we made society like they did at his Berkeley commune, everything would be peachy.

2 years ago # QUOTE 4 YEA 5 NAY !
Dixie

You're not qualified to even approach Descartes, much less read him. You need bigger brains to tell you how to think.

2 years ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY !
Ernest

A lot of negativity here. US elections approaching upsetting y’all

2 years ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 0 NAY !
Tristin

"We aim to diversify the subfields, geographic foci, and methodological approaches represented in the APSR." https://twitter.com/apsrjournal/status/1319790888453918722
From website: "we bring substantive strengths in the domestic and international politics of race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality—areas that have been traditionally underrepresented, both among the editors and in the pages of the APSR."
Effects on distribution of submissions by field so far:
- Normative -> UP by 25%
- Critical theory -> UP by 6%
- Experimental -> UP by 1.27%
- Formal theory -> DOWN by 10.34%
- Statistical/Observ. -> DOWN by 2.83%
Great way to "diversify the subfields (...) and methodological approaches represented in the APSR"

Someone needs to learn about "sorting at the margin"...

2 years ago # QUOTE 1 YEA 1 NAY !
Betty

T"O^W`S?

2 years ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY !
Leonard

No, it was not an ignorant comment. We're not talking about Descartes submitting to the APSR here. We're talking about some failson with an investment banker daddy telling us about how if only we made society like they did at his Berkeley commune, everything would be peachy.

Interesting theory. So how about you act like an empiricist and name one active theorist who fits this description.

2 years ago # QUOTE 4 YEA 0 NAY !

What is wrong with APSR's new editorial team?

Reply