Singer's+Levels+of+Analysis

**Singer's Levels of Analysis**
====J. David Singer, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan, weighs the merits and limitations of the state and system levels of analysis in his essay "The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations." He assesses these levels on their effectiveness in //describing//, //explaining//, and //predicting// phenomena. Below is a brief summary of his basic views on each level:====

International System Level of Analysis

 * the most comprehensive level of analysis -- "encompassing the totality of interactions which take place within the system and environment"
 * more holistic analysis
 * more deterministic in nature
 * Effectiveness in //describing//:
 * primary advantages lie in its comprehensiveness
 * disadvantages lie in its lack of detail
 * Effectiveness in //explaining//:
 * disadvantage: exaggerates the impact of the system upon the actors and discounts the impact of the actors upon the system
 * disadvantage: requires that "we postulate a high degree of uniformity in the foreign political operational codes of our national actors" → thus we assume that all national actors "think and act in terms of interest defined as power"; however, nations may differ to a large extent in the nature and substance of their national interests → creation of "black box" concept of national actors
 * advantage: adequate for making not //causal// but //correlative// statements based on general system level trends
 * advantage: "singularly manageable model"
 * Effectiveness in //predicting//:
 * advantage: "reasonably satisfactory as a basis for prediction"
 * disadvantage: predictions can only be made in gross and general terms

National State Level of Analysis

 * traditional focus of western students
 * Effectiveness in //describing://
 * advantage: does not attribute great similarity to all actors and allows for differentiation → thus greater detail and less homogenization
 * disadvantage: may produce an exaggeration of differences among sub-systemic actors → //over//differentiation
 * Effectiveness in //explaining//:
 * uses the "decision-making" approach
 * advantage: factors goals, motivation, and purpose of national policies into interpretation and explanation
 * advantage: able to question how and why certain nations pursue specific goals
 * disadvantage: "goals and motivations are both dependent and independent variables" → muddles explanation to a certain extent
 * disadvantage: introduces issue of national perception of objective factors vs. simply "objective factors" as causation for phenomena
 * danger: this overdifferentiation may produce Ptolmaic parochialism
 * what is this?? tendency to attribute these differences as virtues of one's own nation and vices of others (eps. adversary at time)
 * e.g. "we-they" interpretation during Cold War period in America
 * Effectiveness in //predicting//:
 * "predictive power would appear no greater than the systematic orientation"

====Concluding words: utilization of either system depends not on value, but on the purpose of one's research; "one [level of analysis] may well be corollary of the other, but they are not immediately combinable;" the synthesis of both levels of analysis is crucial to the progress and growth of the theory of international relations====

//World Politics//, Vol. 14, No. 1, The International System: Theoretical Essays. (Oct., 1961), pp. 77-92.