Quantitatively predictive model building has proven itself in physics and could enrich political science, which is presently addicted to postdictive approaches. As a specific example, I address the dependence of electoral volatility on the number of parties in both ways: testing falsifiable predictive models based on logical considerations, and theory-free postdictive regression. The pressure to apply regression to any and all problems harms political science by omitting one-half of the scientific method. Most numbers published in political science are dead on arrival: once printed, they are never used for anything. We can do better than that. It is not a matter of starting from scratch but widening the tool kit so as to bring to completion research that presently all too often stops just short of the pay-off stage.

Unlike theories in physics, social theories are usually tested by applying statistical hypothesis testing to observational data. This approach has more problems than commonly realised owing to false positives and model uncertainty, and it inhibits the development of social science. A better method to test a theory is by making definitive predictions that, if proved, strongly support the theory against alternative explanations.

In order to have references for discussing mathematical menus in political science, I review the most common types of mathematical formulae used in physics and chemistry, as well as some mathematical advances in economics. Several issues appear relevant: variables should be well defined and measurable; the relationships between variables may be non-linear; the direction of causality should be clearly identified and not assumed on a priori grounds. On these bases, theoretically driven equations on political matters can be validated by empirical tests and can predict observable phenomena.

In the first half of the essay we summarise the main contributions in the essays in this issue by Coleman, Colomer, and Taagepera, and identify key commonalities in their suggestions for making political science more ‘scientific’. We argue that most of their concerns are well taken, but that the remedies they propose may not be applicable in all domains within political science. In particular, it is largely in the area of voting and elections, where clearly demarcated input and output variables can be identified, that their suggestions seem the most applicable. In the second half of the essay we trace the rise and fall, over the past 100 years, of movements in the US to make political science more scientific. We conclude by identifying similarities between these essays and the recent EITM movement in US political science.

The worldwide departmental ranking by Simon Hix and national performance evaluations have dramatically shown that European political science is not sufficiently competitive at the global level. This symposium analyses why this is the case and what kind of reform measures should be introduced to move beyond this dire state of affairs. The authors detail the problems in four domains – (i) funding of teaching and research; (ii) the ‘market’ for political science education; (iii) career development, salaries, and tenure decision-making; and (iv) the publication behaviour of European political scientists. Each contribution concludes with suggestions about how the situation could be improved.

This article analyses the ways in which the research management apparatus set up by the European Commission and national-level research foundations contributes to the publication gap of European political science vis-à-vis the United States. I identify four structural problems in the allocation of money to individuals and institutions and derive two main recommendations from them. First, reviewers should be members of a merit-oriented European Academy of Political Science rather than stem from a group of arbitrarily chosen scholars. Second, the European Consortium for Political Research should seriously consider the introduction of individual membership and competitive leadership elections.

One reason for the low productivity of European political science and public administration departments could be a high level of national regulation, which shields departments from the forces of international competition. Higher education in Europe is not yet a single market in which students and staff compete for resources. In this article, I discuss a number of problems related to the current situation of limited competition and suggest ways to improve European political science and public administration. These include, among others, national deregulation of higher education and a Europe-wide system of assessment and accreditation.

Research productivity in terms of publications in international journals varies greatly across European countries. Language and country size have been discussed as factors responsible for this. However, institutional factors may be more important. The contribution analyses the institutions shaping three typical stages of career development in research: the Ph.D. phase, the post-doc phase and professorship. The incentives for publication provided by two institutional systems are compared: the Anglo-Saxon type, represented by the UK, and the continental type, represented by Germany. The author concludes that the Anglo-Saxon system has advantages over the continental European system at all three stages of a career.

European political scientists lag behind their US counterparts when it comes to publication in peer-reviewed outlets and for many established academics publication declines as they reach more advanced stages of their careers. I attribute this mainly to a lack of incentives to publish more, and through better channels. Based mainly on recent Norwegian developments, I acknowledge that efforts are being made to improve the situation, but argue that more can be done by universities, research institutes, and research councils.

In this article, I address the problem of party attitudes towards European integration and show its relevance for research on Europeanisation. I discuss the interaction between domestic parties and the European issue and propose a framework for the analysis of two alternative arguments: either Europe as an issue has been internalised by party systems and absorbed into the main patterns of party competition or, alternatively, Europe has had a disruptive impact on party systems and even resulted in forms of ‘de-partification’.

Teaching within Higher Education has traditionally been seen as a vital part of the professional apprenticeship of Politics postgraduates. Changes in UK Higher Education in the past twenty years have seen the numbers of postgraduates accepting some teaching duties while writing a Ph.D. grow. This article draws on the experience of the author and some of his Ph.D. colleagues to consider the challenges and benefits of teaching, and the status of postgraduates as educators.