The Debates of Methodology and Methods: Reflections on the Development of the Study of International Relations

Jul 6, 2026

Upload by Jiven

This paper explores the interplay between methods and methodologies in international relations (IR) across the field’s century-long development, focusing on how debates about methodology and methods evolved alongside changes in research practice. Using a historiography approach, it maps the chronological relationship between competing research methods and methodological frameworks. The findings argue that coexistence of alternatives defines the field, with all theories, methods, and methodologies undergoing criticism and change, and new methodologies not necessarily tracking new methods.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

Abstract

Introduction

Ontology, epistemology, and methodology in IR

The study of international relations

Core argument and guiding questions

Mapping methodological plurality

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: [https://www.emerald.com/insight/2631-3561.htm](https://www.emerald.com/insight/2631-3561.htm) The debates of methodology and methods: reﬂections on the development of the study of international relations Amira Abou Samra Department of Political Science, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to explore the interplay between methods and methodologies in the ﬁeld of international relations (IR) over the 100years of its lifetime reﬂecting on the relationship between the rise of new research methods and the rise of new methodologies. Design/methodology/approach – This paper looks in retrospect into the ﬁeld’s great debates using a historiography approach. It maps chronologically the interplay of methods and methodology throughout the stages ofthe development of the study of IR. Findings – This paper argues that inspite of narratives of triumph being common in the ﬁeld, the coexistence of competing research methods and methodologies is the deﬁning feature of the ﬁeld. All theories, all methods and all methodologies have undergone a process of criticism, self-criticism and change. New methodologies have not necessarily accompanied the rise of new research methods in the ﬁeld. Originality/value – Drawing a map of the ﬁeld’s methodologies and methods reveals necessarily its dynamism and its plurality. An honest map of the ﬁeld is one that highlights not only theoretical differences but also ontological, epistemological and methodological differences embedded in the ﬁeld’s debates. Keywords Research methods, Metatheory, Methodology, Historiography, Post-positivism Paper type Research paper Introduction International relations (IR) theorists, especially since the second half of the 20th century, had been inclined to consider concerns over ontology, epistemology and methodology to fall outside the scope of their interest, to be of concern to the ﬁeld of philosophy (Hay, 2006). Today, however, as IR theory is witnessing its “fourth debate,” quite frequently described asa “metatheoretical debate,” these concerns are no longer dismissible. There is a growing awareness that discussions over methodology have been marginalized in favour of discussions over theories and that this is something that needs to be remedied (Chernoff, 2007, p. 2). © Amira Abou Samra. Published in Review of Economics and Political Science. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence maybe seen at [http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/)[ ](http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/)legalcode The study of international relations Received 4 June 2020 Revised 12 August 2020 Accepted 18 February 2021 Review of Economics and Political Science Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2631-3561 p-ISSN: 2356-9980 DOI 10.1108/REPS-06-2020-0063 REPS This paper argues that learning about the theoretical assumptions, without paying due attention to methodological and methodical aspects behind them, leaves researchers halfway through, either blinded to the plethora of possible alternative ways available to deal with political reality or rather totally unequipped to deal with it. Whilst highlighting the methodological and methodical debates that have been going on in the ﬁeld, this paper argues that telling the history of the relationship between research methods and methodology is an important alternative way of telling the story of the ﬁeld debates, leading to the appreciation of deeper differences and similarities b

FAQs

What is the main purpose of the paper?

The paper explores how methods and methodologies interact in international relations over its 100-year history, focusing on the relationship between the rise of new research methods and new methodologies.

How does the paper approach its investigation?

It uses a historiography approach to map, chronologically, how the interplay of methods and methodology unfolded during the development of IR as a field.

What key finding does the paper argue about IR debates?

Despite narratives of triumph, competing research methods and methodologies coexist and define the field; changes come through criticism and self-criticism, and new methodologies do not necessarily appear alongside new research methods.

Jul 6, 2026

Upload by Jiven