Comment on Behavioural Approach to Political Science [UPSC 2024/10m/150w/1a]

The Behavioural Approach to Political Science emerged in the mid-20th century as a response to the limitations of traditional approaches, emphasizing empirical research, scientific methods, and the study of observable political behavior. It marked a paradigm shift, focusing on individual and group dynamics rather than abstract philosophical or normative theories.

This post offers a concise commentary on the Behavioural Approach, tailored for the UPSC Mains 2024 exam. It highlights the key principles, critiques, and relevance of this approach in contemporary political analysis, providing insights to effectively address the 10-mark question within the word limit of 150 words.

Brief Outline

1. Introduction

• Definition of the behavioural approach in political science.
• Shift from traditional, normative methods to scientific, empirical analysis.
• Context of its emergence: Response to the perceived irrelevance of traditional political science in addressing social issues.

2. Key Contributors

• Charles Merriam: Advocate for systematic, evidence-based study of political processes.
• David Easton: Expanded behaviouralism by identifying its eight key features, aiming to make political science “scientific.”

3. Core Principles of Behavioural Approach

• Use of empirical and quantitative methods.
• Focus on observable, measurable political behaviour.
• Emphasis on objectivity, regularity, and verification in research.
• Goal of making political science policy-relevant and practically applicable.

4. Applications of the Behavioural Approach

• Study of electoral behaviour, voting patterns, and decision-making processes.
• Analysis of political socialization and citizen participation.

5. Criticism of Behavioural Approach

• Overemphasis on empirical techniques, sidelining normative aspects like justice, rights, and liberty.
• Neglect of philosophical inquiry central to political thought.

6. Emergence of Post-Behaviouralism

• Critique of behaviouralism’s lack of social relevance.
• David Easton’s “Credo of Relevance”: Call for action-oriented, value-driven research.
• Reintroduction of normative concerns and social purpose into political studies.

7. Conclusion

• Behaviouralism as a movement rather than a mere approach.
• Temporary prominence that reformed political science, making it more empirical and systematic.
• Subsequent shift to post-behaviouralism to balance empirical analysis with normative relevance.

Sample Answer

The behavioural approach in political science represents a shift towards scientific inquiry, emphasizing empirical methods over traditional, normative approaches. It emerged in response to the perceived inability of conventional political science to address real-world social issues. Pioneered by scholars like Charles Merriam, this approach advocated for systematic, evidence-based analysis of political behaviour.

David Easton further refined the approach by identifying eight key features of behaviouralism, such as regularity, verification, and quantification, aimed at making political science a “pure science.” This approach sought to enhance the discipline’s relevance by focusing on measurable, verifiable phenomena, facilitating the study of electoral behaviour, political socialization, and decision-making processes.

However, critics argued that behaviouralism’s excessive reliance on empirical techniques overlooked normative concepts like justice, rights, and liberty, which are central to political thought. This critique led to the emergence of post-behaviouralism, where scholars like Easton emphasized the “Credo of Relevance,” calling for research to be value-driven, action-oriented, and socially relevant.

In retrospect, behaviouralism was more than just an approach — it was a movement that temporarily reshaped political science, rendering it more scientific and empirical before its limitations necessitated a broader, more balanced framework.

Comment on the Sample Answer

The Sample Answer is well-structured, logical, and comprehensive. It effectively captures the essence of the behavioural approach while maintaining a clear flow of ideas. Here are some key observations:

1. Strengths:
   • Logical Flow: The transition from the introduction to the key contributors, principles, applications, and criticisms is seamless. This provides clarity and ensures that the reader understands the evolution of the behavioural approach.
   • Coverage of Key Aspects: The inclusion of important scholars (Charles Merriam, David Easton) and concepts like Easton’s “Credo of Relevance” highlights the depth of analysis.
   • Balanced Perspective: The outline discusses both the strengths (scientific approach, practical relevance) and criticisms (overemphasis on empiricism, neglect of normative issues). This provides a holistic view.
2. Areas for Improvement:
   • More Specificity: The “Eight Features of Behaviouralism” mentioned under Easton’s contributions could be briefly listed or summarized for clarity.
   • Critical Reflection: While the outline mentions criticisms and post-behaviouralism, it could emphasize why behaviouralism failed to sustain its dominance (e.g., over-reliance on quantitative data, lack of relevance to real-world social issues).
   • Conclusion: The conclusion is concise but could be more assertive by emphasizing the lasting legacy of behaviouralism in modern political science research methods.
3. Overall Assessment:
   The outline is clear, concise, and comprehensive, touching on all major aspects of behaviouralism. It demonstrates a balanced understanding of the topic. With slight elaboration on key features and a stronger conclusion, it would be an excellent foundation for a full-length answer.

Rating: 9/10 (Excellent, with minor room for improvement).