Hall says that almost all area studies scholars are producing research that is applicable cross-culturally, despite grounding in a particular region.

"When we use the term area studies, it is very important to remember that an older style of area studies that focused on single countries and avoided generalizations was superseded by generalized inquiry at least 20 years ago," Hall says.

Complementary Approaches?

Many professors say the two approaches are more reconcilable than they are made out to be.

But the very way that each side characterizes this synthesis indicates the differences that remain.

In particular, rational choice theorists note that area specialists often are able to provide the data needed for them to map formal models across a number of countries.

"A graduate student might be training with Gary King [who teaches a class in advanced quantitative research methodology] and he might be sent to [Director of the Russian Research Center] Timothy Colton. Colton has access to data in post-Soviet Russia which we couldn't get otherwise," Shepsle says.

Colton also does not see the approaches as incompatible, but for different reasons. He says they both try to address the same questions using different means.

"[Rational choice] is a natural way of studying comparative politics, but it's not the only way," says Colton, who is also Feldberg Professor of Government and Russian Studies. "I don't see why [rational choice] is at cross-purposes... with the multi-culture studies that we have built since the end of the war."

Hall also believes that the rational choice approaches have much to add to the debate but formal theorists often overstate their importance.

"There is no doubt that some scholars, although not necessarily at Harvard, believe that rational choice has proven to be a master key that can unify the discourse and render it more scientific," Hall says. "Despite my own interest in rational choice analysis I'm skeptical of that view. It has yet to be proven, and that's why I attach great value to scholarly pluralism, to debate among a wide range of views."

Effect on Students

Graduate students, as the future political scientists for America, often serve as the battleground for many of these debates.

Most students say they see a division more between quantitative versus qualitative methods than between the similar area studies versus rational choice debate.

One student who did not want to be identified says about half of her classmates took five of their 10 required courses in either quantitative methods or formal modeling.

"There is little room for your major field if you take all these methodological courses encouraged by the current regime," says the international relations student.