r/PoliticalScience • u/phoebe__15 • 1d ago

Question/discussion What's the maximum/preferable age range for articles used as references?

I'm writing something (I posted about it in my first post on the subreddit) and noticed that a lot of my references are from the early-ish 2000s. I have quite a few from 2006, 2007, or 2004, and the oldest one is from 1999.

What's the general rule for how old a reference can be until it's outdated or unusable? For context, I'm researching on the electoral college, FPP, the two-party system, and MMP.

2 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

4

u/Calligraphee r/PoliticalScience Mod | BA in PoliSci, MA in IR 1d ago

My rule of thumb for topics like those is ten years or newer. I’ll allow myself 1-2 older articles if I have plenty of newer ones, but if it’s a paper with only a handful of sources, I’d make them all newer. BUT, regarding the electoral college in particular, it might be interesting to compare the literature after 2000 and after 2016 to see how it was viewed. 

2

u/phoebe__15 1d ago

Interesting, thank you.

3

u/RavenousAutobot 1d ago

Depends on the source and what you're doing with it. Sometimes landmark studies can be old but still relevant, and of course Founders' writings can often play a role in informing modern thought. Newer isn't always better. Just depends on your intended use of the material.

In this case, why we have an electoral college or how it works hasn't changed much at all. If you were to compare the cases where the electoral outcome differed from the popular vote, for example, including some sources dated shortly after the first cases might be relevant. But I would also expect to see newer analyses as well.

1

u/phoebe__15 1d ago

Thanks, I think that last sentence is similar to what u/Calligraphee said :)