Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:58:08.834Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Converging paths: bounded rationality, practice theory and the study of change in historical international relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2020

Quentin Bruneau Open the ORCID record for Quentin Bruneau [Opens in a new window]
Quentin Bruneau*
Affiliation:
Department of Politics, New School for Social Research, 79 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY10003, USA
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: bruneauq@newschool.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bounded rationality and practice theory have both become popular theories of action for major strands of work in constructivist and rationalist International Relations (IR). Based on this observation, I make two arguments. The first is that although they underpin what are generally seen as opposed theoretical camps in IR, bounded rationality and practice theory share two fundamental assumptions. They both accept that how agents process information and make decisions depends on where they are situated in social space, and where they stand in historical time. In turn, these shared assumptions imply that they agree on the existence of a common type of change: change in terms of how groups of people process information and make decisions over time. My second argument is that by studying this type of change, it is possible to shed new light on major transformations of international relations, and that one way of engaging in this type of research is to study international practitioners' education over substantial time periods. With these arguments, this article makes a methodological contribution to the study of change in historical international relations and charts a practical course for pluralist dialogue in IR.

Keywords

bounded rationalitypractice theoryhistorical changeeducationHerbert SimonPierre Bourdieu
Type
Research Article
Information
International Theory , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 2022 , pp. 88 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, Emanuel. 2005. Communitarian International Relations: The Epistemic Foundations of International Relations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Adler, Emanuel, and Pouliot, Vincent, eds. 2011. International Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, ed. 2013. Bourdieu in International Relations: Rethinking Key Concepts in IR. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Alexander, Jeffrey C. 1988. Action and Its Environments: Toward a New Synthesis. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Allais, Maurice. 1953. “Le Comportement de L'homme Rationnel Devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de l’école Américaine.” Econometrica 21 (4): 503–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Graham T. 1971. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co.Google Scholar
Allison, Graham, and Zelikow, Philip. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Pearson.Google Scholar
Anderson, Matthew S. 1993. The Rise of Modern Diplomacy 1450–1919. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Batja, Mesquita, and Frijda, Nico H.. 1992. “Cultural Variations in Emotions: A Review.” Psychology Bulletin 112 (2): 179–204.Google Scholar
Bendor, Jonathan. 2010. Bounded Rationality and Politics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bendor, Jonathan, and Hammond, Thomas H.. 1992. “Rethinking Allison's Models.” The American Political Science Review 86 (2): 301–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Peter L., and Luckmann, Thomas. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Berling, Trine Villumsen. 2012. “Bourdieu, International Relations, and European Security.” Theory and Society 41 (5): 451–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berling, Trine Villumsen. 2015. The International Political Sociology of Security: Rethinking Theory and Practice. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1980. Le Sens Pratique. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Homo Academicus. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1989. La Noblesse d'Etat: Grandes Écoles et Esprit de Corps. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1996. Raisons Pratiques: Sur la Théorie de L'action. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2000a. Esquisse D'une Theorie de la Pratique: Précédé de Trois Études D'ethnologie Kabyle. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2000b. Les Structures Sociales de L’économie. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2003. Si le Monde Social M'est Supportable, c'est parce que je Peux M'indigner. La Tour d'Aigues: Aube.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Passeron, Jean-Claude. 1964. Les Héritiers: Les Étudiants et la Culture. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Passeron, Jean-Claude. 1970. La Reproduction: Eléments pour une Théorie du Système D'enseignement. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bouwsma, William J. 1973. “Lawyers and Early Modern Culture.” The American Historical Review 78 (2): 303–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueger, Christian. 2015. “Making Things Known: Epistemic Practices, the United Nations, and the Translation of Piracy.” International Political Sociology 9 (1): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueger, Christian, and Gadinger, Frank. 2014. International Practice Theory: New Perspectives. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bueger, Christian, and Gadinger, Frank. 2015. “The Play of International Practice.” International Studies Quarterly 59 (3): 449–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bukovansky, Mlada, and Keene, Edward. forthcoming. “Introduction: Modernity and Granularity in the History of International Relations.” In Mlada Bukovansky, Edward Keene, Christian Reus-Smit, Maja Spanu (eds.) Oxford Handbook on History and International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bukovansky, Mlada, Keene, Edward, Reus-Smit, Christian, and Spanu, Maja, eds. forthcoming. Oxford Handbook of History and International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley. 2002. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Bulle, Nathalie. 2008. “Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002).” L'Année Sociologique 52 (2): 231–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busch, Marc L., Reinhardt, Eric, and Shaffer, Gregory. 2009. “Does Legal Capacity Matter? A Survey of WTO Members.” World Trade Review 8 (4): 559–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterfield, Herbert. 1966. “The New Diplomacy and Historical Diplomacy.” In Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics, edited by Wight, Martin and Butterfield, Herbert, 181–92. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Certeau, Michel de. 1990. L'invention du Quotidien, Tome 1: Arts de Faire. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Cetina, Karin Knorr, Schatzki, Theodore R., and von Savigny, Eike, eds. 2005. The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Checkel, Jeffrey T. 1998. “The Constructive Turn in International Relations Theory.” World Politics 50 (2): 324–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clavin, Patricia. 2013. Securing the World Economy: The Reinvention of the League of Nations, 1920–1946. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, James S. 1986. “Social Theory, Social Research, and a Theory of Action.” American Journal of Sociology 91 (6): 1309–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, James S. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Collet, Francois. 2009. “Does Habitus Matter? A Comparative Review of Bourdieu's Habitus and Simon's Bounded Rationality with Some Implications for Economic Sociology.” Sociological Theory 27 (4): 419–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cookson, John E. 1983. “Political Arithmetic and War in Britain, 1793–1815.” War & Society 1 (2): 37–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooley, Alexander, and Spruyt, Hendrik. 2009. Contracting States: Sovereign Transfers in International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornut, Jérémie. 2015. “To be a Diplomat Abroad: Diplomatic Practice at Embassies.” Cooperation and Conflict 50 (3): 385–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis Cross, Mai'a K. 2013. “Rethinking Epistemic Communities Twenty Years Later.” Review of International Studies 39 (1): 137–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Carvalho, Benjamin, Costa-Lopez, Julia, and Leira, Halvard, eds. forthcoming. Routledge Handbook of Historical International Relations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Desrosières, Alain. 2002. The Politics of Large Numbers: A History of Statistical Reasoning. Translated by Camille Naish. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dezalay, Yves, and Garth, Bryant G.. 2002. The Internationalization of Palace Wars: Lawyers, Economists, and the Contest to Transform Latin American States. Chicago, IL: University Of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duchhardt, Heinz. 1976. Gleichgewicht der Kräfte, Convenance, europäisches Konzert: Friedenskongresse u. Friedensschlüsse vom Zeitalter Ludwigs XIV. bis zum Wiener Kongress. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Dunlop, Claire A. 2012. “Epistemic Communities.” In Routledge Handbook of Public Policy, edited by Araral, Eduardo Jr, Fritzen, Scott, Howlett, Michael, Ramesh, M., and Wu, Xun, 229–43. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 2000. The Civilizing Process. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Elms, Deborah Kay. 2008. “New Directions for IPE: Drawing from Behavioral Economics.” International Studies Review 10 (2): 239–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James, and Wendt, Alexander. 2002. “Rationalism v. Constructivism: A Skeptical View.” In Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, Beth A. Simmons (eds.) Handbook of International Relations, 52–72. London: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandes, Ronald, and Simon, Herbert A.. 1999. “A Study of how Individuals Solve complex and Ill-Structured Problems.” Policy Sciences 32 (3): 225–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1966. Les Mots et les Choses: Une Archéologie des Sciences Humaines. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1993. Surveiller et Punir: Naissance de la Prison. Paris: Gallimard.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1999. Histoire de la Folie à l’âge Classique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Gergen, Kenneth J. 1973. “Social Psychology as History.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 26 (2): 309–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2004. “Fast and Frugal Heuristics: The Tools of Bounded Rationality.” In Blackwell Handbook of Judgement and Decision Making, edited by Koehler, Derek J. and Harvey, Nigel, 62–88. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldmann, Kjell. 2005. “Appropriateness and Consequences: The Logic of Neo-Institutionalism.” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 18 (1): 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1985. The Theory of Communicative Action, 2 vols. Translated by Thomas McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1984. The Emergence of Probability: A Philosophical Study of Early Ideas about Probability, Introduction and Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1990. The Taming of Chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., Haggard, Stephan, Lake, David A., and Victor, David G.. 2017. “The Behavioral Revolution and International Relations.” International Organization 71 (S1): S1–S31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Lene. 2006. Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Henrich, Joseph, Heine, Steven J., and Norenzayan, Ara. 2010. “The Weirdest People in the World?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2–3): 61–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herrera, Yoshiko M. 2004. Imagined Economies: The Sources of Russian Regionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homans, George C. 1964. “Bringing Men Back In.” American Sociological Review 29 (6): 809–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopf, Ted. 2018. “Change in International Practices.” European Journal of International Relations 24 (3): 687–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, C. Stephen. 1985. The Origins of Courtliness: Civilizing Trends and the Formation of Courtly Ideals, 939–1210. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1968. “Hypotheses on Misperception.” World Politics 20 (3): 454–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 2017. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Bryan D. 1999. “Bounded Rationality.” Annual Review of Political Science 2 (1): 297–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Bryan D. 2001. Politics and the Architecture of Choice: Bounded Rationality and Governance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Bryan D., and Baumgartner, Frank R.. 2005. The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jupille, Joseph, Mattli, Walter, and Snidal, Duncan. 2013. Institutional Choice and Global Commerce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Organization. 2017. Special Issue “The Behavioral Revolution”. International Organization 71 (S1): S1–S277.Google Scholar
Kahler, Miles. 1998. “Rationality in International Relations.” International Organization 52 (4): 919–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.” Econometrica 47 (2): 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, Slovic, Paul, and Tversky, Amos, eds. 1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keene, Edward. 2008. “The English School and British Historians.” Millennium – Journal of International Studies 37 (2): 381–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keene, Edward. 2013. “The Naming of Powers.” Cooperation and Conflict 48 (2): 268–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keens-Soper, H. M. A. 1972. “The French Political Academy, 1712: A School for Ambassadors. European History Quarterly 2 (4): 329–55.Google Scholar
Kendall, M. G. 1970. “Where Shall the History of Statistics Begin?” In Studies in the History of Statistics and Probability, edited by Pearson, E. S. and Kendall, M. G., 45–46. London: Griffin.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Klüber, Johann Ludwig. 1832. Acten des Wiener congresses, in den jahren 1814 und 1815. Erlangen J.J. Palm und E. Enke.Google Scholar
Klueting, Harm. 1986. Die Lehre von der Macht der Staaten: Das Aussenpolitische Machtproblem in der ‘Politischen Wissenschaft’ und in der Praktischen Politik im 18. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2004. The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2008. “Into Positivism: Georg Friedrich von Martens (1756–1821) and Modern International Law.” Constellations 15 (2): 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahire, Bernard. 2006. L'Homme Pluriel. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
Lawson, John, and Silver, Harold. 2013. A Social History of Education in England. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul F. 1961. “Notes on the History of Quantification in Sociology – Trends, Sources and Problems.” Isis 52 (2): 277–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leander, Anna. 2011. “The Promises, Problems, and Potentials of a Bourdieu-Inspired Staging of International Relations.” International Political Sociology 5 (3): 294–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lechner, Silviya, and Frost, Mervyn. 2018. Practice Theory and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesaffer, Randall. 2014. “The Peace of Utrecht, the Balance of Power, and the Law of Nations.” Tilburg Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series (No. 05/2014): 1–35.Google Scholar
Little, Richard. 2011. “Britain's Response to the Spanish Civil War: Investigating the Implications of Foregrounding Practice for English School Thinking.” In International Practices, edited by Adler, Emanuel and Pouliot, Vincent, 174–99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, James G, and Olsen, Johan P. 1989. Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
March, James G., and Olsen, Johan P.. 1998. “The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders.” International Organization 52 (4): 943–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, Hazel Rose, and Kitayama, Shinobu. 1995. “Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation.” Psychological Review 98 (2): 224–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martines, Lauro. 1968. Lawyers and Statecraft in Renaissance Florence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mérand, Frédéric, and Forget, Amélie. 2013. “Strategy: Strategizing about Strategy.” In Bourdieu in International Relations: Rethinking Key Concepts in IR, edited by Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, 93–113. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Neumann, Iver B., and Pouliot, Vincent. 2011. “Untimely Russia: Hysteresis in Russian-Western Relations over the Past Millennium.” Security Studies 20 (1): 105–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolson, Harold. 1946. The Congress of Vienna: A Study in Allied Unity, 1812–1822. New York, NY: Grove Press.Google Scholar
Nisbett, Richard E., Peng, Kaiping, Choi, Incheol, and Norenzayan, Ara. 2001. “Culture and Systems of Thought: Holistic Versus Analytic Cognition.” Psychological Review 108 (2): 291–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norenzayan, Ara, and Heine, Steven J.. 2005. “Psychological Universals: What Are They and How Can We Know?” Psychological Bulletin 131 (5): 763–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odell, John. 2002. Bounded Rationality and the World Political Economy. In Governing the World's Money, edited by Andrews, David M., Randall Henning, C., and Pauly, Louis W., 168–93. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott. 1937. The Structure of Social Action, 2 vols. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Perrot, Jean-Claude, and Woolf, Stuart Joseph. 1984. State and Statistics in France, 1789–1815. London: Harwood.Google Scholar
Pouliot, Vincent. 2008. “The Logic of Practicality: A Theory of Practice of Security Communities.” International Organization 62 (2): 257–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouliot, Vincent. 2010. International Security in Practice: The Politics of NATO-Russia Diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulsen, Lauge N. Skovgaard. 2014. “Bounded Rationality and the Diffusion of Modern Investment Treaties.” International Studies Quarterly 58 (1): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulsen, Lauge N. Skovgaard. 2015. Bounded Rationality and Economic Diplomacy: The Politics of Investment Treaties in Developing Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulsen, Lauge N. Skovgaard, and Aisbett, Emma. 2013. “When the Claim Hits: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bounded Rational Learning.” World Politics 65 (2): 273–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, Robert. 2017. “Research Bets and Behavioral IR.” International Organization 71 (S1): S265–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rengger, Nicholas. 2015. “Pluralism in International Relations Theory: Three Questions.” International Studies Perspectives 16 (1): 32–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian. 1999. The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity, and Institutional Rationality in International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas. 2000. “‘Let's Argue!’: Communicative Action in World Politics.” International Organization 54 (1): 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggie, John Gerard. 1993. “Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in International Relations.” International Organization 47 (1): 139–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggie, John Gerard. 1998. “What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge.” International Organization 52 (4): 855–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scaglione, Aldo. 1992. Knights at Court: Courtliness, Chivalry, and Courtesy from Ottonian Germany to the Italian Renaissance. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Schlag, Pierre. 1998. The Enchantment of Reason. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Paul W. 1992. “Did the Vienna Settlement Rest on a Balance of Power?” The American Historical Review 97 (3): 683–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, Hamish. 2014. The Birth of a Great Power System, 1740–1815. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David O. 1986. “College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influences of a Narrow Data Base on Social Psychology's View of Human Nature.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (3): 515–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sending, Ole Jacob. 2002. “Constitution, Choice and Change: Problems with the ‘Logic of Appropriateness’ and its Use in Constructivist Theory.” European Journal of International Relations 8 (4): 443–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sewell, William H. 1987. “Theory of Action, Dialectic, and History: Comment on Coleman.” American Journal of Sociology 93 (1): 166–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siemann, Wolfram. 2019. Metternich: Strategist and Visionary. Translated by Daniel Steuer. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1979. “Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations.” American Economic Review 69 (4): 493–513.Google Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1982. Models of Bounded Rationality, 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1990. “Invariants of Human Behavior.” Annual Review of Psychology 41: 1–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, Herbert A. 1997. Administrative Behavior. 4th ed. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. 1998. “Economics as A Historical Science.” Theoria: An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science 13 (2(32)): 241–60.Google Scholar
Steinmetz, George. 2011. “Bourdieu, Historicity, and Historical Sociology.” Cultural Sociology 5 (1): 45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolleis, Michael. 1992. “Zur Rezeption von Giovanni Botero in Deutschland.” In Botero e la ‘Ragion di Stato’: Atti del Convegno in Memoria di Luigi Firpo (Turin, 8-10 March 1990), edited by A. Enzo Baldini, 405–16. Florence: Olschki.Google Scholar
Sue, Stanley. 1999. “Science, Ethnicity, and Bias: Where Have we Gone Wrong.” American Psychologist 54 (12): 1070–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sylvester, Christine. 2007. “Whither the International at the End of IR.” Millennium 35 (3): 551–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tooze, Adam. 2001. Statistics and the German State, 1900–1945: The Making of Modern Economic Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tribe, Keith. 1988. Governing Economy: The Reformation of German Economic Discourse, 1750–1840. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1973. “Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability.” Cognitive Psychology 5 (2): 207–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.” Science 185 (4157): 1124–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vergerio, Claire. 2019. “Context, Reception, and the Study of Great Thinkers in International Relations.” International Theory 11 (1): 110–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallenius, Tomas. 2019. “The Case for a History of Global Legal Practices.” European Journal of International Relations 25 (1): 108–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, Donald Cameron. 1975. Too Serious a Business: European Armed Forces and the Approach to the Second World War. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, Donald Cameron. 1983. What about the People? Abstraction and Reality in History and the Social Sciences: An Inaugural Lecture. London: The London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
Watt, Donald Cameron. 1984. Succeeding John Bull: America in Britain's Place, 1900–1975. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, Max. 1978. “Status Groups and Classes” In Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Edited by Roth, Guenther and Wittich, Claus. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press pp. 301–307.Google Scholar
Wenger, Etienne. 1999. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weyland, Kurt G. 2006. Bounded Rationality and Policy Diffusion Social Sector Reform in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weyland, Kurt G. 2009. “The Diffusion of Revolution: ‘1848’ in Europe and Latin America.” International Organization 63 (3): 391–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weyland, Kurt G. 2010. “The Diffusion of Regime Contention in European Democratization, 1830–1940.” Comparative Political Studies 43 (8–9): 1148–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Michael. 2006. Culture and Security: Symbolic Power and the Politics of International Security. Abingdon, Oxon, England; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar