Behaviouralism in Political Science focuses on understanding and explaining human behavior through observable actions, emphasizing the importance of empirical observation and scientific methods.

Behaviouralism in Political Science

Introduction

The field of political science has seen significant changes over the years, with different schools of thought shaping the way we study and understand politics. One such transformation was brought about by the emergence of behaviouralism around the 1930s in the US, a movement that aimed to make political studies more scientific by focusing on the observation of human behavior. In this article, we’ll explore the key concepts of behaviouralism and its assumptions, as well as the subsequent development of post-behaviouralism.

Behaviouralism: A Scientific Approach to Political Science

Behaviouralism as an approach emerged in the 20th century around the 1930s in the United States and later gained prominence in the 1940s and 1950s, marking a revolutionary shift in the study of politics. Behavioural approach in political science has borrowed concepts and methodology from Sociology, Anthropology, and Psychology. 

Earlier Charles Merriam advocated the idea of Behaviouralism in his book “New Aspects of Politics”, for which he is also regarded as the founder of Behavioral approach in comparative Politics. Behaviouralism focused on the individual as the primary factor or actor. It stresses upon the scientific and value free study of politics and focuses on the role of individual behaviour at various levels. Overall It sought to transform political science into a ‘science of politics’ by emphasizing empirical observation and analysis of human behavior. 

David Easton in his famous work A Framework for Political Analysis (1965) has said that the assumptions and objectives of behaviouralism lay the intellectual foundation- stones for political analysis. Behaviouralism as a protest movement revolutionized the thought system of political science in the nineteen forties and fifties.

David Easton, outlined eight intellectual foundations of behavioralism in political science to distinguish it from earlier, more traditional approaches. For him, Behavioralism aimed to make political science more empirical, scientific, and systematic, borrowing methods and assumptions from the natural sciences. Here’s a breakdown of each of the eight foundations he identified:

1. Regularities – Human political behavior follows patterns. By studying these patterns, we can make general rules about how people behave politically.
2. Verification – Ideas or theories in political science should be tested with real evidence to see if they are true.
3. Techniques – Researchers should use scientific tools and methods like surveys, statistics, and experiments to study politics.
4. Quantification – Political information should be measured using numbers so it can be analyzed more accurately.
5. Values – Political science should focus on facts and avoid mixing in personal opinions or moral judgments.
6. Systematization – All research and findings should be organized into clear and logical theories.
7. Pure Science – The goal of studying politics should be to understand it, not to promote a political view or agenda.
8. Integration – Political science should borrow ideas and methods from other fields like psychology, sociology, and economics to better understand political behavior.

These points helped shape political science into a more scientific and evidence-based discipline.

Post-Behaviouralism: A New Direction for Political Science

David Easton—who had earlier provided the intellectual foundation for the behavioural revolution—later argued that political science needed a deeper and more meaningful transformation. In his 1969 presidential address to the American Political Science Association, he famously said: “We cannot shed our values in the way we remove our coats.” With this, he called for a post-behavioural revolution, criticizing behaviouralism for becoming too technical, too abstract, and too detached from real human issues.

Easton referred to the central ideas of this new movement as the “credo of relevance” or a refined version of the “maximal image.” He believed that political science must return to action and relevance. For him, post-behaviouralism was a “genuine revolution” because the discipline had to fundamentally rethink its goals and methods. According to Easton, political science should:

• Move beyond simply collecting data and analysing behaviour,
  
• Directly address urgent social problems such as inequality, injustice, war, and political instability,
  
• Become more value-oriented, responsible, and connected to real-world issues.
  

This transformation was not just a correction—it was a complete reorientation of the field.

Easton’s Seven Key Traits of Post-Behaviouralism

1. Substance over technique
   Political research should focus on important social and political issues rather than merely using sophisticated research tools. Methods are helpful only if they contribute to solving real and urgent problems; otherwise, they lack meaning.
   
2. Emphasis on social change
   Post-behaviouralism promotes change rather than preservation. Behaviouralism was criticized for supporting stability and modest, step-by-step adjustments. In contrast, post-behaviouralism encourages reform, transformation, and a forward-looking orientation.
   
3. Stress on reality
   Behaviouralists were said to have drifted into abstraction, losing touch with actual political life. Post-behaviouralists argued that in times of crisis and conflict—even in wealthy societies—political science must address the real needs of people. Research must remain relevant and grounded in society’s problems.
   
4. Value-loaded political science
   Behaviouralists believed in value-free research, but post-behaviouralists rejected the idea that scholars can separate themselves from their values. Easton insisted that values are an inseparable part of human personality. Therefore, political research must openly acknowledge and incorporate values.
   
5. Protection of human values
   Political scientists have a responsibility to defend the basic values of civilization. Easton argued that intellectuals should not become mere technicians who “tinker” with society. Their role is to uphold human ideals and guide society ethically.
   
6. Action-oriented research
   Knowledge should lead to action. Political science must function as an applied discipline that helps solve societal problems. Easton emphasized that “to know is to bear the responsibility for acting.” Research should inspire commitment and contribute to shaping society.
   
7. Politicisation of the profession
   Behaviouralists wanted political science to remain neutral and non-political. Post-behaviouralism argued the opposite: if political scientists are expected to guide society and promote better goals, then academic institutions and professional associations must also be politically engaged.
   

Additional Dimensions of Post-Behaviouralism

Action and relevance
The movement demanded that political science directly address pressing issues such as social inequality, conflict, and political instability. It must offer practical solutions, not just academic analysis.

Departure from value-neutralism
Post-behaviouralists argued that scholars cannot avoid values and should instead take responsibility for their role in society. Political science must be committed to the public good.

Future-oriented thinking
Influenced by thinkers like Leo Strauss and Hannah Arendt, post-behaviouralism encouraged political science to look toward the future. It should respond to new societal needs and help shape emerging political realities rather than merely describe existing ones.

Post-behaviouralism was a reformist and transformative movement led by David Easton. It rejected the overly scientific, value-neutral, and detached approach of behaviouralism. Instead, it called for relevance, action, value commitment, social engagement, and responsibility to society. Easton’s message was clear: political science must serve humanity, not just academic curiosity.

Conclusion

The journey from behaviouralism to post-behaviouralism reflects the dynamic nature of political science. These shifts in methodology and focus have shaped the field and continue to influence the way we study and understand politics in our ever-changing world.

Read More:

• Delhi-NCR Winter Air Pollution Crisis
• India Positions Itself as Global AI Leader: Sovereign Models, Subsidized Compute, and Semiconductor Ambitions Unveiled at Davos 2026
• India-Pakistan Relations: A Complex Legacy
• Lancet Commission Unveils Bold Blueprint for Citizen-Centred Healthcare in India to Achieve Universal Health Coverage by 2047
• China Faces Deepening Demographic Crisis: Population Declines for Fourth Straight Year in 2025