Abstract
Framing the necessary purpose of theory building as a choice between grand theory or particularism poses two unsound extremes. The application of rational choice has made contributions, but it has also generated conclusions that are inaccurate, duplicative of long-standing and well-known research, and unnecessarily adversarial. The most productive approach to theory building in the study of the presidency relies on “middle-level” concepts and research, producing theoretical extension by climbing the abstraction ladder to identify similarities and sufficient analytic intention to avoid unnecessary declines in precision and accuracy.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 771-780 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Presidential Studies Quarterly |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 2009 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2009 Center for the Study of the Presidency.