2022
DOI: 10.20991/allazimuth.1060190
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Methodological Nationalism in International Relations: A Quantitative Assessment of Academia in Turkey (2015-2019)

Abstract: This article seeks to expand the discussion on Methodological Nationalism (MN) within the discipline of International Relations (IR), to contribute to MN literature from the perspective of IR studies and to evaluate the prevalence of MN in the field by the quantification of selected works. To achieve these goals, the article, firstly, recapitulates the general MN literature and critically evaluates this discussion in IR. Later, it identifies the forms of MN as they appear in IR with two faces: Level of analysi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 42 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While progress has been made in relation to the above-mentioned areas of research, the same methodological concerns persist among the studies we reviewed between 2016–2022 – an issue that is by no means unique to the field of applied linguistics in Turkey (Aydınlı, 2022; Sula, 2022; Tetik, 2022). For instance, two of the concerns we raised in our previous review were the lack of genuine mixed-method research and lack of a genuine gap statement/discussion (Aydınlı & Ortaçtepe, 2018).…”
Section: Discussion: An Outlook For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…While progress has been made in relation to the above-mentioned areas of research, the same methodological concerns persist among the studies we reviewed between 2016–2022 – an issue that is by no means unique to the field of applied linguistics in Turkey (Aydınlı, 2022; Sula, 2022; Tetik, 2022). For instance, two of the concerns we raised in our previous review were the lack of genuine mixed-method research and lack of a genuine gap statement/discussion (Aydınlı & Ortaçtepe, 2018).…”
Section: Discussion: An Outlook For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 97%