Revision summary
The behavioural approach studied observable political behaviour instead of legal form alone. Easton’s systems model and Dahl’s decision studies were its theoretical core. It professionalised comparison and survey, which was its importance. Decline followed Easton’s post-behavioural turn and the return of values, Vietnam, and social movements. Marx, Pateman, Kothari, and Jaffrelot show why attitude data could not exhaust political theory.
Model answer
Introduction
The behavioural approach, spelled that way in the American science of the 1950s and 1960s, tried to make political theory a study of observable behaviour, not of legal texts and ought-statements alone. David Easton was its organiser and later its critic.
Body
Importance
- It shifted the question from “what does the constitution say?” to “what do voters, legislators, and groups actually do?”
- Easton defined politics as the authoritative allocation of values and mapped inputs, conversion, outputs, and feedback.
- Robert Dahl asked who governs in observable decisions, which disciplined elite speculation.
- Survey research, statistical correlation, and comparative indicators let new states after decolonisation be studied without waiting for a Westminster replica.
- For political theory, the gain was empirical discipline: concepts such as power, support, and participation had to meet data.
What it refused
- Classical Aristotle, Mill, and Rawls ask what is just. Behaviouralism postponed that as metaphysics.
- Legal-institutional study of offices was called formal and dead.
- The importance was real as a purge of untested sermon. It was costly as a purge of justice.
What led to decline
- Easton’s 1969 post-behavioural credo admitted relevance, values, and the political crisis of the American 1960s: Vietnam, race, and campus revolt.
- The approach described equilibrium better than it explained Marx’s class, Pateman’s gendered exclusion, or Lukes’s silent power.
- Rational-choice and later interpretivism, feminism, and critical theory took the next generation.
- Indian politics of caste, Mandal, and language could not be read as attitude items alone; Rajni Kothari and Jaffrelot needed institutions and social structure.
- Decline was not disappearance. Methods remain. The claim to be the whole of political theory did not survive.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD B[Behavioural approach] --> E[Easton allocation] B --> D[Dahl decisions] B --> DEC[Decline] DEC --> PB[Post-behavioural relevance] DEC --> C[Class gender caste justice]
Conclusion
Behaviouralism mattered because it forced political theory to face observable allocation, support, and decisions, with Easton and Dahl as the teaching names. It declined when Easton himself called for relevance, and when justice, class, gender, and caste returned as unavoidable questions. It remains a method, not a monopoly.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Can there be universal conception of human rights? Give your arguments
Next question in the 2021 paper (Q2). View answer →
-
Is behavioural the same as behaviourist psychology?
Related in the stress on observables, but political behaviouralism was a research movement about voters and systems, not Pavlov.
-
Did it die in India?
Indian political science still uses surveys. Kothari’s institutional and social analysis never let it be the only school.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2022 · Q1(a) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Systems Approach. -
2022 · Q1(b) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Cultural Relativism. -
2022 · Q1(c) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
"Revolution in Permanence". -
2022 · Q1(d) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Bases of Power. -
2021 · Q1(d) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Tools of legitimation of the State. -
2021 · Q1(e) · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
J. S. Mill's ideas on women suffrage. -
2021 · Q4(b) · PSIR GS 1 · 15 marks
Marx's concept of alienation is an essential part of the reality in capitalism. Explain -
2021 · Q4(c) · PSIR GS 1 · 15 marks
"Free and fair deliberation is key to the foundation of democracy." Explain
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Feminist critique of the State.
Theories of the State
Feminists treat the state as gendered, not as a neutral referee. Pateman locates a sexual contract beneath the social contract. MacKinnon reads law as organised around male power. The public–private split hid household domination from liberal theory. Indian Article 15, Vishaka, and the 73rd Amendment are incomplete replies.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Affirmative action.
Equality
Affirmative action gives extra access to historically excluded groups. Ambedkar treated it as necessary for equal citizenship in a caste order. Champakam Dorairajan forced the First Amendment and Article 15(4). Mandal and Indra Sawhney framed OBC policy and the creamy layer. Jaffrelot shows the same tool as a political identity, not only a welfare device.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2021 · PSIR GS 1 · 10 marks
Equality of outcome as a political idea.
Equality
Equality of outcome is a political test of actual conditions, not of legal form alone. Marx’s classless society is a strong version; Ambedkar’s status equality is a civic version. Rawls allows unequal outcomes under the difference principle. Hayek and Nozick reject patterned end-states as unfreedom. Indian Parts III and IV mix rights with a drive toward less unequal results.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.