Harold Guetzkow Research Articles

Simulations as Rhetorical and Discursive Exercises: Memories of Guetzkow

This article describes some of the highlights of the author’s work with Harold Guetzkow while he was a doctoral student in political science at Northwestern University in the mid-1960s. Harold was a model of professionalism and the author had the great opportunity to learn about the profession during their publication of the Inter-Nation Simulation Kit. This is a brief report of some of his fond memories of Harold.

Biography and Discipline: Key Players in Simulation/Gaming

This issue of S&G is devoted to people—to the gamers who have made and are making the exciting discipline of simulation gaming possible. All disciplines that hope for a bright future must record their origins and development. This is particularity the case for a field as fuzzy and interdisciplinary as simulation/gaming. The symposium dedicated to Harold Guetzkow traces the early days of simulation/gaming and pays homage to one of the discipline’s founding fathers and a highly respected and influential scholar. The autobiographies by prominent gamers recount developments first-hand. They too have played roles as founding fathers; the discipline owes much to their pioneering work. Their accounts make for exciting reading and provide wonderful insights into the development of the discipline as well as point ways forward for future developments.

Remembering Harold Guetzkow

This article provides an overview of the tributes to follow. Written from the perspective of each author’s experience with Harold Guetzkow, this set includes junior colleagues, graduate students, and third-generation scholars who were influenced by Harold. Through these lenses, Harold is seen as a multifaceted social scientist. His synthetic, holistic vision of scholarship is complemented by important influence on the careers of many colleagues and students. That vision is reflected also in his innovative contributions to the science and art of simulating. For Harold, the Inter-Nation Simulation was viewed as a device for integrating diverse island of theories in international relations and social psychology. The contributions are lasting. The person is missed.

A Mentor’s Mentor: Remembering Harold Guetzkow

This article describes the important ways in which Harold Guetzkow mentored his student, helping him to develop conceptual and methodological skills and to become a rigorous thinker. While the path was sometimes difficult and stressful, the intellectual skills transmitted from Harold Guetzkow were vital to the teaching and research skills of his student.

Harold Guetzkow: A Scholar’s Scholar

During our 14 years together at Northwestern University, Harold Guetzkow was at the same time my colleague, creative teacher, and helpful personal friend. I used his simulation in my undergraduate courses. His research and personal suggestions provided creative insights for my research at UN Headquarters. He provided younger colleagues with opportunities to be fellow collaborators. He encouraged our families to have shared experiences. After I departed from Northwestern University, we maintained contact and friendship throughout his life.

My Mentored Relationship With Harold Guetzkow

Harold Guetzkow’s guidance of research on foreign policy decision making was driven by a core concern: the avoidance of nuclear war and preservation of peace. He aimed to do this by supporting the creation and distribution of new knowledge through experiments aimed at simulating the processes and conditions hypothesized to influence such decisions. This article outlines the progress of his simulation design efforts and their transformations under many whom he mentored as research assistants in this work. It also touches on his beliefs.

A Scholar and a Simulation Ahead of Their Time: Memories of Harold Guetzkow

Research on international relations at Northwestern University in the 1960s and 1970s revolved around Harold Gueztkow’s pioneering work on the simulation of international processes. As a beginning faculty member, I benefited from the insights and excitement of that special time and place. As a participant in one of his events, I experienced the challenges he faced in carrying off the complex operation of man-machine simulation, when the machines consisted of typewriters, thermofax machines, and a mainframe computers with punch-card input. As a beneficiary of the revolution introduced by networked microcomputers, I realized that Guetzkow’s successes would have been multiplied many times over if the proper technology had been available to him.

The Influence of Harold Guetzkow: Scholarship and Values

In this article, I recount the many ways in which Harold Guetzkow influenced my career. From the beginning of my graduate studies at Northwestern University in the 1960s into the next century, Harold’s guidance has been indispensable. His idea of bridging islands of theory has provided many of us with a broad, integrated vision of social science. His workman-like approach to scholarship has provided us with the tools needed to contribute to the field. As a broad theorist, Harold inspired us to devote a lifetime in pursuit of knowledge. As a mentor, he imparted the essential skills of writing for publication, presenting at professional meetings, teaching and advising, and contributing to the profession. Above all, his values of interdisciplinary and responsible scholarship have been a hallmark of my own research and project leadership. My work on simulation reflects these values as well, with regard to research platforms and classroom learning. Indeed, a recent article in this journal owes much to Harold’s influence (Druckman & Ebner, 2008).

Harold Guetzkow’s Legacy

Harold Guetzkow displayed great determination and a remarkable ability to push boundaries. In this article, I describe how these features have had an impact across generations, both in the social sciences and at Northwestern University. In so doing, I touch on the development of experiments in political science and the rise of political psychology.

Working With Harold Guetzkow: Reflections From a Last Link in the Chain

In 2001, Harold Guetzkow reached out to Kent Kille, a scholar beginning his academic career, and subsequently helped inspire and support a project that culminated in the publication of the edited volume The UN Secretary-General and Moral Authority: Ethics and Religion in International Leadership. This article recounts the project, which would turn out to be the final research engagement by Guetzkow at the end of a long and storied academic career, and presents impressions from the author of Guetzkow’s ongoing search for knowledge, his supportive mentoring role, and his conscientious commitment to the place of ethics in global affairs.

HAROLD S. GUETZKOW

Dr. Harold Guetzkow, professor emeritus of political science, psychology, and sociology at Northwestern University, passed away on Novermber 11, 2008, in San Jose, California, at age 93. His wife, Lauris, whom he had married in 1944, preceded him in death. He is survived by sons James (Charolette) and Daniel (Diana) Guetzkow, and his daughter Gay (Howard) Ben Tré. In his seven decades of active scholarship, he distinguished himself as a vibrant and path-breaking scholar as well as an incredibly talented mentor.

Stuart Bremer and the Inductive-Deductive Issue in the Correlates of War Project, 1970?2002

Seven years after the launching of the Correlates of War project there, Stuart Bremer joined the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan and shortly thereafter began attending the project's weekly research seminar. At his death, thirty-two years later, Stuart had been Director of the project for 2 years and Chairman of the COW Council for 5 years; the Council was his invention and its leadership his enthusiastic self-selection. Such a history might suggest that from start to finish he was in full accord with the premises, research program, and overall trajectory of the enterprise. Never has a social science institution had so rigorous, dedicated, and capable a supporter, but rarely have we seen so constructive and lively a critic. As founder and director of the project from 1963 until my retirement in 2000, it is my pleasure to record this fascinating tale. As coordinator of the World Politics program in the Department of Political Science, I first learned about this Michigan State graduate student from his dissertation chairman Rufus Browning and then from Harold Guetzkow with whom Stuart was doing a post-doctoral stint at Northwestern. I invited him to visit with a few of my colleagues and several weeks later invited him to come back and give the standard academic “job talk.” We found his intelligence, breadth, and charm irresistible, and not long thereafter offered him a position in our department. Worth emphasizing is how different he was from the rest of the World Politics faculty; like me and no one else, he was clearly of a …

Software Reviews : Inter-Nation Simulation IV

Inter-Nation Simulation IV ( INS4) is a dynamic microcomputer model of the international system based on Harold Guetzkow's work at Northwestern University in the 1950s. About six decision making teams are assigned to prototype nations with defined characteristics concerning internal satisfaction with domestic and foreign policy, population and natural resources, research and development, military capability and defense, capital formation and depreciation, political structure, and national budget. A standard simulation run consists of a briefing, a trial period, several decision sessions dealing with a particular issue (four alternative scenarios are provided), and a debriefing.

Simulated International Processes: Theories and Research in Global Modeling. Edited By Harold Guetzkow and Joseph J. Valadez. (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1981. Pp. 400. $29.95.)

Simulated International Processes: Theories and Research in Global Modeling. Edited By Harold Guetzkow and Joseph J. Valadez. (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1981. Pp. 400. $29.95.) - Volume 76 Issue 1

Toward a Theory of Policy Implementation: An Organizational Perspective

John Wiley & Sons, 1958), pp. 26-27. 14. Harold Guetzkow, Interagency Committee Usage, Public Administration Review, Vol. 10, No. 3, Summer 1950, p. 190. 15. Gulick and Urwick, op. cit. 16. program is described in some detail in Allen Barton, et al., Decentralizing City Government (Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath/Lexington Books, 1977). 17. John Lindsay, Program for the Decentralized Administration of Municipal Services in New York City Communities, Office of the Mayor, December 1971. 18. Community schools and elementary schools are not truly separate field services, but their relationship is more complex than different levels of the same field service. elementary school principal reports to the community school superintendent, who is responsible to both the Board of Education and the local Community School Board. This relationship does not affect our findings because only one response category was used for public schools. 19. number of factors extracted from a factor analysis is normally determined by the minimum eigenvalue specification. Following accepted conventions, only factors with an eigenvalue of 1.0 or greater were extracted. 20. Tom Burns and G. M. Stalker, Management of Innovation (London: Tavistock Publications, 1966), pp. 5-6. 21. For an application of this approach to administrative duplication, see: Martin Landau, Redundancy, Rationality, and the Problem of Duplication and Overlap, Public Administration Review, Vol. 29, No. 4, July/August 1969, pp. 346-358. 22. seminal article suggesting that the multiplicity of political units may be necessary to satisfy a multiplicity of different interests is: Vincent Ostrom, Charles Tiebout and Robert Warren, The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry, American Political Science Review, Vol. 60, No. 4, December 1961, pp. 831-842.

Subject-Coded Versus Researcher-Coded TST Protocols: Some Methodological Implications

Roose, Kenneth D. 1969 Observations on interdisciplinary work in the social sciences. Pp. 323-327 in Muzafer Sherif and Carolyn M. Sherif (eds.), Interdisciplinary Relationships in the Sciences. Chicago: Aldine. Schnore, L. F. 1958 Social morphology and human ecology. American Journal of Sociology 63 (May): 620-634. Starr, C. 1969 Social benefit versus technological risk. Science 165 (September 19):1232-1238. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare 1969 Toward a Report. Washington, D.C. Zelditch, Morris and William M. Evan 1962 Simulated bureaucracies: a methodological analysis. Pp. 48-60 in Harold Guetzkow (ed.), Simulation in Science: Readings. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

A Review and Comparison of Simple Statistical Tests for Scalogram Analysis

Wager, L. Wesley and Ernest G. Palola. 1964 The miniature replica model and its use in laboratory experiments of complex organizations. Social Forces, 42 (May, 1964) :418-429. Warriner, Charles K. 1956 Groups are real: a reaffirmation. American Sociological Review 21 (October, 1956):549-554. Weick, Karl E. 1965 Laboratory experimentation with organizations. Pp. 194-260 in James G. March (ed.), Handbook of Organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally. 1967 Organizations in the laboratory. Pp. 1-49 in Victor H. Vroom (ed.), Methods of Organizational Research. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Whyte, William F. 1959 An interaction approach to the theory of organizations. Pp. 155-183 in Mason Haire (ed.), Modern Organization Theory. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Zelditch, Morris, Jr. and William M. Evan. 1962 Simulated bureaucracies: a methodological analysis. Pp. 48-60 in Harold Guetzkow (ed.), Simulation in Social Science: Readings. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Realism in Laboratory Simulation: Myth or Method?

By asking the question What is it that makes an experiment 'realistic' ? we seek to recast previous discussions focused on versus artificiality. It is suggested that relationships between variables may vary under different experimental conditions. degree of realism is used as a means of identifying experimental characteristics. This analysis of the concept of realism provides a meaningful alternative for future synthesis of small group research, both field and laboratory. Characteristics of a research method labeled realistic are also identified. T here is increasing interest in laboratory simulation by sociologists.1 A wide range of research efforts have been categorized as simulations which on the surface appear to have little similarity. Some researchers have restricted their efforts to computer programming, e.g., simulation of voting behavior and other social processes.2 Efforts also have been made to combine the use of computers and human subjects in a variety of *Revision of a paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Chicago, Illinois, September 1965. Financial support for this research was provided by United States Air Force Grant #AF-AFOSR-572-65, monitored by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research of the Office of Aero Space Research. 1 It is of special interest that a recent introductory methods text includes a chapter on simulation; see Bernard S. Phillips, Social Research: Strategy and Tactics (New York: Macmillan Co., 1966), pp. 145-152. 2 Ithiel De Sola Pool and Robert Anderson, The Simulmatics Project, Simulation in Social Science, (ed.) Harold Guetzkow (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1962), pp. 70-81. such papers were presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, September 1965, Chicago, Illinois, in a section entitled Three Models Work and its Discontents: Raymond Breton, Output Norms and Productive Behavior In Non-Cooperative Work Groups (Johns Hopkins University); R. R. RiHi and C. P. Fair, Simulating the Behavioral Consequences of Changes In Organizational Systems (IBM, Armonk); and John T. Gullahorn and Jeanne E. Gullahorn, Computer Simulation of Role Conflict Resolution (Michigan State University). This content downloaded from 157.55.39.163 on Wed, 21 Sep 2016 04:50:40 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Inter-Nation Simulation and Contemporary Theories of International Relations

The purpose of this article is to compare the Inter-Nation Simulation (INS)—developed by Harold Guetzkow and his colleagues at North-western University and now employed in a number of universities throughout the country—to verbal theories of international relations. It will not be a discussion of the methodological foundations of the simulation but an analytical comparison, primarily on the level of middle-range theory, of the substantive assumptions contained in INS with contemporary international relations theory.Although the primary purpose of this article is to compare the two bodies of theory, it will inevitably raise questions concerning the validity of the Inter-Nation Simulation model and the value of simulation as a general approach to theory. In terms of the former question, it is necessary to remember that the simulators themselves are theorists, albeit a special type. Consequently, the comparison is more a reliability check on simulation and verbal theorists than a validity check on either. The lack of congruence between the assumptions of the simulation and the assumptions of the verbal theorists does not necessarily indicate that the simulation model lacks validity, since the verbal theorist has no monopoly on valid hypotheses.If the author's assumption that simulation is a way of theorizing about international relations is correct, the following comparison should yield some idea about the value of simulation in building a firm theoretical basis for a science of international relations. Forced to be abstract as well as explicit and parsimonious, those using simulation must approach the task of theorizing with a different operational code than the verbal theorists.

Book Reviews : A Social Psychology of Group Processes for Decision-Making by Barry E. Collins and Harold Guetzkow. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1964. Pp. x + 254

Book Reviews : A Social Psychology of Group Processes for Decision-Making by Barry E. Collins and Harold Guetzkow. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1964. Pp. x + 254