{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01882845188284519, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.355481727574751, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comment: Problems in Research on the Diffusion of Policy Innovations

Diffusion theory has been an important tool for analysis by geographers, sociologists and economists, but the diffusion of diffusion theory among political scientists, so far, definitely does not approximate an S-shaped curve! In fact, as far as I know, Professor Gray's is only the second article in The Review that employs the word "diffusion" in its title.' The obstacles to the spread of diffusion theory among political scientists do not exist in the essential nature of political phenomena. The American federal system can usefully be conceived as an elaborate diffusion process, as Gray's article demonstrates, and many other cases where distinctive approaches to policy have evolved within some part of the governmental system might better be understood if seen as examples of diffusion. The reasons for political scientists' neglect of diffusion theory, of course, lie not in the peculiarities of their subject matter, but in the prevailing division of labor among scholarly disciplines in American universities. The various branches of learning stake out their special preserves and claim exclusive jurisdiction over certain variables, research problems, and explanatory theoriesdiffusion processes have been centrally important for anthropologists but have rarely been employed by students of politics. There is no good intellectual justification for restricting the use of any explanatory scheme to a limited class of social problems. All the social sciences need as much theoretical help as they can get. Certainly, Gray's article, with its references to material from several disciplines, is a model of the ecumenical spirit and a good example of the progress that can be made through judicious borrowing from other scholarly traditions. Professor Gray set out in her article to "extend in a more rigorous fashion the investiga-