Abstract
In the study of power structures, whether of the local community or the national society, three main approaches have been proposed: the reputational, the sociology of leadership and the issue approaches. Of these the least popular in practice is the last-named, which would attempt to discover ‘who rules?’ through an analysis of actual decision-making in a series of issues. This is particularly true of studies of national power, where evidence on how high-level political decisions were made is cited only to illustrate or exemplify an argument.² Although some studies of local community power have relied primarily on the issue method, studies of national power have almost invariably utilized the sociology of leadership method,³ and no systematic comparative analysis of a sample of national issues has been made. Since even those writers like Bachrach and Baratz who have raised objections to ‘the assumption that power is totally embodied and fully
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference90 articles.
1. Parkinson , Labour Party and Secondary Education, p. 81.
2. Parliament and Foreign Affairs
3. Beveridge , Beveridge and his Plan; Cantril, Public Opinion, p. 362.
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Healthcare reforms, inertia polarization and group influence;Health Policy;2018-09
2. References;The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology;2012-07-20
3. Bibliography;The Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology;2008-03-25
4. The Opinion-Policy Nexus in Germany;Public Opinion Quarterly;1990
5. Public Opinion and the Welfare State: The United States in Comparative Perspective;Political Science Quarterly;1989