Behavioural approach (Behaviouralism)
Modern approaches:
After studying politics with the help of traditional approaches, the political thinkers
of the later stage felt the necessity to study politics from a new perspective. Thus,
to minimize the deficiencies of the traditional approaches, various new approaches
have been advocated by the new political thinkers. These new approaches are
regarded as the “modern approaches” to the study of Political Science. Modern
approaches are fact based approaches. They lay emphasis on factual study of
political events and try to arrive at scientific and definite conclusion. The aim of
modern approaches is to replace normativism with empiricism. Therefore modern
approaches are marked by empirical investigation of relevant data.
Characteristics of Modern Approaches:
• These approaches try to draw conclusion from empirical data.
• These approaches go beyond the study of political structures and its
historical analysis.
• Modern Approaches believe in inter-disciplinary study.
• They emphasize scientific methods of study and attempt to draw scientific
conclusions in Political Science.
Modern approaches include sociological approach, psychological approach,
economic approach, quantitative approach, simulation approach, system approach,
behavioural approach and Marxian approach (D. K. Sarmah, 2007).
Behavioural approach:
Among the modern empirical approach, the behavioural approach, to study
political science grabbed notable place. Most eminent exponents of this approach
are David Etson, Robert, A. Dahl, E. M. Kirkpatrick, and Heinz Eulau.
Behavioural approach is political theory which is the result of increasing attention
given to behaviour of ordinary man. Theorist, Kirkpatrick stated that traditional
approaches accepted institution as the basic unit of research but behavioural
approach consider the behaviour of individual in political situation as the basis (K.
Sarmah, 2007).
Salient Features of Behaviourism:
David Easton has pointed out certain salient features of behaviouralism which are
regarded as its intellectual foundations stones. These are:
[Link]: This approach believes that there are certain uniformities in
political behaviour which can be expressed in generalizations or theories in order
to explain and predict political phenomena. In a particular situation the Political
behaviour of individuals may be more or less similar. Such regularities of
behaviour may help the researcher to analyse a political situation as well as to
predict the future political phenomena. Study of such regularities makes Political
Science more scientific with some predictive value.
[Link]: The behaviouralists do not want to accept everything as granted.
Therefore, they emphasize testing and verifying everything. According to them,
what cannot be verified is not scientific.
[Link]: The behaviouralists put emphasis on the use of those research tools
and methods which generate valid, reliable and comparative data. A researcher
must make use of sophisticated tools like sample surveys, mathematical models,
simulation etc.
[Link]: After collecting data, the researcher should measure and
quantify those data.
[Link]: The behaviouralists have put heavy emphasis on separation of facts from
values. They believe that to do objective research one has to be value free. It means
that the researcher should not have any pre-conceived notion or a biased view.
[Link]: According to the behaviouralists, research in Political Science
must be systematic. Theory and research should go together.
[Link] Science: Another characteristic of behaviouralism has been its aim to make
Political Science a “pure science”. It believes that the study of Political Science
should be verified by evidence.
[Link]: According to the behaviouralists, Political Science should not be
separated from various other social sciences like history, sociology and economics
etc. This approach believes that political events are shaped by various other factors
in the society and therefore, it would be wrong to separate Political Science from
other disciplines.
It is recognized by theorists that with the development of behaviouralism, a new
thinking and new technique of study were evolved in the field of Political Science.
Benefits of behavioural approach are as follows:
This approach makes Political Science more scientific and brings it closer to the
day to day life of the individuals.
Behaviouralism has first explained human behaviour into the field of Political
Science and thus makes the study more relevant to the society.
This approach helps in predicting future political events.
The behavioural approach has been supported by different political thinkers as it is
scientific approach and predictable nature of political events.
Despite of merits, the Behavioural approach has been criticised for its fascination
for scienticism also. The main criticisms levelled against this approach are
mentioned below:
This has been disparaged for its dependence on practices and methods ignoring the
subject matter.
The supporters of this approach were wrong when they said that human beings
behave in similar ways in similar circumstances.
This approach focus on human behaviour but it is a difficult task to study human
behaviour and to get a definite result.
Most of the political phenomena are indeterminate. Therefore it is always difficult
to use scientific methods in the study of Political Science.
Furthermore, the scholar being a human being is not always value neutral as
believed by the behaviouralists.
Post behaviour approach:
In the mid of 1960s, behaviourism gained a dominant position in the methodology
of political science. Relevance and action were the main slogans of post
behaviourism. In modern social science, behaviourism approach has shown
increasing concern with problem solving of the prevailing problems of society. In
this way, it is largely absorbed the post behavioural orientation within its scope
(Gauba, 2009).
Distinction between behavioural and post behavioural approaches
The Issue
Behavioural Approach
Post-Behavioural Approach
Nature of inquiry
Search for pure knowledge and theory
Search for applied knowledge and practice
Purpose of inquiry
Knowledge for knowledge sake; not interested in action
Relevance of knowledge to satisfy social needs and action for problem solving
Focus of study
- Micro level analysis, focus on small units
- Process of decision making
Macro level analysis; focus on role of big units
Content of the decision
Attitude towards Values
Value Neutral
Interested in the choice of values
Attitude towards social change
Interested in status quo, not interested in social change
Interested in social change for solving social problems