| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines writing as the last link in the epistemology-theory-methodology alignment. Although political scientists dedicate a great deal of their time to writing, conversations on this topic remain scarce within international relations and political science overall. Notably absent are analyses of the actual writing choices scholars make and what these mean for the knowledge they produce. This article uses the tools of literary analysis to take a closer look at the mechanics of three published academic articles in the fields of international relations and comparative politics. It focuses on how qualitative interviews are written, demonstrates how authors can conceal or reveal the dialogical dimension, and examines how they deal with the conundrum of the representation of research participants. This kind of reflexive analysis reveals the epistemological foundations of a given research article and can be used to identify instances of misrepresentation and misalignment. As such, it is an important tool for the improvement of academic writing.
|