What subfield are these interests?

[rustytrix]

So, ok I need to find out exactly what subfields in poli sci my interests belong to since I did not study poli sci as an undergrad student. First, I am interested in doing research on democracy (civil liberties, institutions, so on) and human rights. Specifically, I want to study how various "negative" events like conflicts, terrorism etc. as well as "positive" factors like natural resource abundance, foreign aid and so on can affect democracy, human rights and rule of law in the concerned countries. I want to base my research on strong quantitative methods (wherever feasible) and qualitative methods where a quanti. approach is not practical. Finally, I am also very much interested in studying the historical evolution of democracy and rule of law, alternate political systems (which might or might not be in existence), other aspects of political philosophy etc. which i believe falls in the category of Political theory.

So would it be safe to say that my subfields are: Comparative, Quantitative and Political Theory (Philosophy)? I am not sure if the "Comparative" part applies to me..

[seraphita]

Are you trying to figure out your subfield so that you can gain admission to a PhD program?

If so, you should probably do an MA first, simply because most PhD programs will be wary of accepting someone without a poli sci bachelor's and some research in the field. It sounds like you're interested in being a comparativist, but don't get too attached to your research project as of yet--it will change dramatically once you start to read published work in the field. Some people even switch subfields, not just research interests, in grad school.

[rustytrix]

Are you trying to figure out your subfield so that you can gain admission to a PhD program?

If so, you should probably do an MA first, simply because most PhD programs will be wary of accepting someone without a poli sci bachelor's and some research in the field. It sounds like you're interested in being a comparativist, but don't get too attached to your research project as of yet--it will change dramatically once you start to read published work in the field. Some people even switch subfields, not just research interests, in grad school.

Thanks for the suggestion but an MA is beyond my financial situation.

[expensivemarket]

I think you can go ahead and apply for PhD programs in political science and not a masters. I don't have my undergrad degree in political science and I took very few classes labeled as politics. I didn't list any research either. I got into a few programs and will probably be heading to OSU to study comparative politics or international relations. I think your advanced math will be a bonus for you wherever you apply.

[polisci]

Comparative, occasionally bordering on IR, with political theory coming in at the end. Think long and hard about what you really want to study. By all means apply for PhD programs (apply widely, and look for places that are good at BOTH quant-oriented comparative and pol theory), but make sure you can write a more concise statement of academic purpose for the application.

[IRdreams]

I echo the need to be very concise about your research interests in the application. Selling too many to a school in your SOP will look unfocused and is the singe leading cause of MA admission offers instead of PhD admission offers. So do your research about where you can to do both, but write about one in your application to these schools. I will note that it might be more difficult for you to gain admission than average because of strange overlap in interests. My interests for example border on comparative and IR, but I applied to mostly IR programs. While I've been successful, I probably would have been more successful if I had sold my self as a comparativist rather than IR person. Unfortunately, political science departments are not quite ready to handle ecumenical interests in various subfields and this hurts us in the "does this kid fit us?" portion of the review process.

[seraphita]

I agree that you should be concise about your research interests in your SOP. But, once you're in a program, studying theory without actually majoring in it shouldn't be difficult. Some programs allow you a minor as well as a major field, so you could still take classes and even test in it. If there's no minor at your school, just take a bunch of theory electives.

There's also no reason why you can't address theoretical concerns in your work, even as a comparativist. Fukuyama and Huntington primarily worked in international politics, not theory, yet are known for addressing normative political issues.

[rustytrix]

Thanks all for the very helpful suggestions. So I guess I fall in the comparative category. I will also seriously take into account the need to keep my SOP focused. Once again, thanks a bunch everyone!

[natofone]

Before you apply, make sure that you have a decent command of the literature pertaining to your interests (political economy of development, democratization, etc.). If you don't like this literature or can't fit yourself into a specific literature, then it'll be hard to craft a SOP that will illustrate how you fit within these sub-fields.

If you specifically want to combine theory/ideas/philosophy with more of an applied approach to your questions, then you might want to look up some of the constructivism literature within international relations. Wendt and crew seem to look at more of the security side of these issues, but some scholars on the other side of international relations do some interesting things with norms, ideas, etc. For example, Keck and Sikkink's Activists Beyond Borders: http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/cup_detail.taf?ti_id=3056. Minnesota, WashU, and Northwestern are all strong in constructivism and might have good overlap with your interest in development and its concomitant sub-fields.

I would pick one direction and go with that, at least in terms of your application. Either apply as a comparativist or a theoretician.

[FuzzyDunlop]

You are essentially a comparativist that will do some work close to the comparative/IR line.

Even if want to do a lot of quantitative cross-national work, you should signal a region of interest for your qualitative work and try to show that you know something about that region or can pose your interests in terms of some countries in that region. To win admission, you need somebody on the faculty to fight for you and generally what happens is that the Africa CP faculty will look at the Africanist candidates and make a priority list, the East Asia CP faculty will do the same, etc. So if you don't fall naturally into one of these groups and you don't stand out so much in some other way that the general admissions committee decides you are a must-admit, then you may end up being shit out of luck.

[expatbayern]

I'm going to push back against some of these suggestions. I agree you want to describe your interests in a coherent way, but I think it's totally fine to say they are cross-subfield. Essentially everyone does IR/CP or CP/IR--it's where both literatures are headed and I think admissions committees will respond well to SOPs that recognize that fact. Saying you want to look at a "second image reversed" question about how conflict impacts democracy is going to be really appealing to people in both subfields, particularly those who see it as an interesting twist on/counterpoint to a democratic peace literature that has nearly run its full course. And it's perfectly fine to say you have interests in theory as well and want to explore how they intersect with the substantive subfields. Yes, you need one person on the committee to really like you and push for you, but it's much easier for them to build a winning coalition behind your admission/funding if the theorists want you to come, too.

[procrastinatrice]

I'm going to push back against some of these suggestions. I agree you want to describe your interests in a coherent way, but I think it's totally fine to say they are cross-subfield. Essentially everyone does IR/CP or CP/IR--it's where both literatures are headed and I think admissions committees will respond well to SOPs that recognize that fact. Saying you want to look at a "second image reversed" question about how conflict impacts democracy is going to be really appealing to people in both subfields, particularly those who see it as an interesting twist on/counterpoint to a democratic peace literature that has nearly run its full course. And it's perfectly fine to say you have interests in theory as well and want to explore how they intersect with the substantive subfields. Yes, you need one person on the committee to really like you and push for you, but it's much easier for them to build a winning coalition behind your admission/funding if the theorists want you to come, too.

That was really well said, expatbayern. I definitely couldn't put that so coherently I really think most departments appreciate cross-subfield research interests, when they are well-articulated.

[natofone]

I completely agree with you (expat) about IR/CP approach, but I don't think that same logic applies as well with CP/theory. I think that it would be a challenge to illustrate how all of the sub-fields, research areas, and methodologies mentioned fit well together.

[rustytrix]

lol ok now im confused...so my interests are CP/IR cross rite...so what do u guys mean when i shoud take a combined approach? i mean i will describe my research interests, of course, but how do i "cross" those...if that makes any sense ....and finally, is it good or bad or to include my theory interests in SOP..some seem to think its good and some think its bad so if others have opinions then please share..thanks

[natofone]

I think that it is a bad idea to include political theory/philosophy if you're applying to programs for IR and CP. It seems like your interests fall largely into comparative politics camp, but IR scholars cover many of those same topics. I would suggest looking up some syllabi for different graduate seminars at top schools and reading through some of the titles on them. You'll then get a good idea as to how you really want to cover these topics. You should just try to figure out which literature you think your interests fit into best. Plus, this will help you answer this question yourself and give you information to work with on your personal statement.

[doctoraldude]

you might also read up some research on theories of contention (Tilly & Tarrow) ...

anyway it's the ideas that matter and not how you roll them out in a neat typology in your SOP

[dysmetria]

You sound like IR Quant to me, given the current state of the literature. I agree that comparative and IR are converging, with quant as the driver (think Fearon.) I also agree that you should ditch the theory, especially as it seems tangential (like something else you are interested in.) If it is incredibly important to think about this stuff, do it on your own (as theory is not too difficult to teach to yourself) or as a second minor.

Constructivism in IR is kind of a dead-end these days, as far as I can tell.