Methodology Matters: Emplotting Interpretivism in Contemporary Political Science and International Studies

Abstract The visibility and adoption of interpretive research approaches in the post-Perestroika period have increased in the United States, yet common knowledge within political science (PS) and international studies (IS) departments still signals their marginality. This paper stems from the observation that interpretive scholars often share autobiographical narratives or “journey stories” describing how they came to embrace interpretive research despite socio-institutional obstacles. Based on semi-structured interviews and participant observation, it asks: What do the journey stories of both new and established scholars engaged in interpretivism reveal about the sociology of PS and IS academies? Our findings reveal a widespread perception that interpretivism is gaining a foothold in the United States while intimating the spread of neopositivist hegemony, to some degree, to academies abroad. We show how scholars make use of the label “interpretivism” and identify key diffusion pathways responsible for interpretivism’s wider recognition today. In addition, we find that despite shared assumptions of neopositivist hegemony, our interlocutors pursue interpretive research because it provides them with epistemological and experiential congruence. Their journey stories, we argue, point toward an evolving methodological landscape in PS and IS, which in turn shapes what forms of knowledge production are considered legitimate and valuable.