
doi: 10.2307/3234746
The study of Chinese politics has been faulted for its shortcomings as social science, but for the most part its critics have ignored what this article argues is the crucial methodological weakness: the absence of an appropriately defined domain of inquiry. The author finds institutional definitions of domains of inquiry inadequate, shows how they have hampered studies of China, and suggests an alternative.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
