Paradigms in comparative politics:
Structural, rational actor and cultural perspectives
Comparative Perspectives
Marek Rybář

Paradigms in comparative research
lrational actor: reasons
lculture: rules
lstructure: relations

Rational Actor: Reasons 1/4
lOntology:
lmethodological individualism
lThe world consists of individuals, actors who act, make preferences, decide etc. lTheir activities
are always intentional and serve a specific  purpose: lActors choose optimal strategies to
accomplish their goals (profit maximization)

Rational Actor: Reasons 2/4
lStudy of collective processes and decisions that are deliberate and carefully chosen li.e. they
are the results of individual’s rational choice lHowever, individual rationality may lead to
collectively suboptimal outcomes
l
l
l

Rational Actor: Reasons 3/4
lMethodology:
lActors activities are influenced by material constraints of objectively existing external
environment lWhen the external environment changes, so do actors‘ strategies lRational choice
theorists seek to formulate universally valid law-like generalizations

Rational Actor: Reasons 4/4
lThe goals of comparative analysis:
lTo arrive at generalizations, universally valid in all times and places
lQuantitative research techniques and positivist philosophy are typically employed
l

Culture: Rules 1/5
lOntology:
lIndividuals firmly entrenched in a unique culture
lThe follow social rules (norms) that make up their individual as well as collective identities
lNorms are intersubjective or transindividual
lA group of people interprets the world around them on the basis of symbols, norms, values and
patterns of behavior

Culture: Rules 2/5
lTheir perceptions are analytically more important than objective material conditions
lCulture involves common knowledge about the construction of reality (iss, not shoulds)
lIndividual‘s interests are not given a priori
lRationality is neither universal nor necessary
lRather, it is conditional and varies depending on the dominant culture (culturally bounded)
l

Culture: Rules 3/5
lculture: a system of meanings and identities that explains how (and why) people act (the ways they
do)
lCulture and community are the bases of social control: our roles dictate standards of social
respect, recognition, reputation and status

Culture: Rules 4/5
lMethodology:
lHOWs, not WHYs (understanding, not explanation of social phenomena) lWe need to look beyond
material causal relations to identify the inner meaning of actors’ decisions lCulture is both
external (materially real and transmitted from the past individuals) and internal (individuals are
socialized into it)

Culture: Rules 5/5
lStrategies of comparison:
lParticipant’s understanding may not be the same as scientist’s understanding of the situation lThe
norms, forms and practices of one’s culture are relevant lThe parts must be understood in terms of
the whole (and the other way around) lComprehending the material world is not the same as
comprehending the social world (we need to seek the internal meaning of actions)

Structure: Relations 1/4
lOntology:
lA holistic approach: Networks, linkages, interdependencies and interactions among the parts of
some systems
lRelationships among individuals, collectivities, institutions and organizations
lReject focus on the individuals themselves
lWhat matters is the structural conditions, not individuals’ determination

Structure: Relations 2/4
lStructuralists emphasize structural conditions and activities that are not in the hands of these
actors
lThese structural conditions influence or even determine activities of individuals
lMethodology:
lObjects and structures are real, e.g. the state is real (it exists beyond coercive apparatus),
international state systems is real (it exists beyond the UN)

Structure: Relations 3/4
lSocial structures are real and social scientists should search for social kinds such as
revolutions, social classes, social movements, etc.
lThese social kinds have causal powers, we need to study the historical dynamics of real social
types

Structure: Relations 4/4
lStrategies of comparison:
lClassify cases into categories and then they investigate the historical dynamics associated with
each class
lSimilar processes, sequences and laws occur in similar structures; different processes…in
different structures
lOne can identify a small number of typical paths
lThis typological approach limits the generalizability of one‘s findings to the type of classes
examined

Basketball for extra credit
lThe oral debriefing questions:
l1. What happened?
l2. Is the game fair?
l3. Did the "ability" of the student matter? Why? Why not? l4. Which CP theory best describes what
you have observed during the game, and why?
l

The Ultimatum Game
lThe oral debriefing questions:
l 1. Would you accept the offer of XX to YY?
l2. Why? Why not?
l3. What is the driving factor for the original offer? l4. What is (are) the driving factor(s) for
accepting or refusing the offer? l5. Which CP theory best describes what you have observed during
the game, and why?
l

Drop the ball game
(The Button, Button Game)
l1. Are the volunteers truly rational actors? Did they always make rational calculations that were
based on cost-benefit analysis? l2. What were the cost-benefit analyses the volunteers made to
arrive at their decisions? l3. Did non-material factors influence the participants' decisions? Why
or why not? l4. Which CP theory best describes what you have observed during the game, any why?
l