Overtilled and Undertilled Fields in American Politics

Abstract

Two questions about the research agendas of scholars who study American politics merit attention. First, what are the events, behaviors, and institutions that political scientists should endeavor to explain? Second, how should they allocate their collective scholarly resources among the various research tasks? In his recent article in Political Science Quarterly, Nelson Polsby addresses the first of these questions. ' His list of major in contemporary American politics is insightful and comprehensive. There is no doubt that these small and medium sized transformations belong on scholars' research agendas, presumably alongside the lesser variations, fluctuations, and incidents that keep them fully employed even in times of great stability. This ever-growing research agenda, coupled with a stable supply of scholarly labor, makes it even more important to consider how best to deploy collective resources among the various chores to achieve greater understanding of American politics generally. The allocation of scholarly labor takes place in a delightfully free market; each social scientist studies whatever he or she chooses. But all must live with the consequences of everyone else's decisions. What I know about American politics is largely determined by what others have chosen to study. Thus, although scholars can marvel at a system that gives each of them the freedom to manage their own lives, they cannot be indifferent to how others manage theirs.