The article argues that International Relations, and especially those approaches that are informed by the epistemological and methodological premises of reflexivity, would benefit from a more diversified range of comparative methodologies other than those deriving from the work of J.S. Mill and more recent developments within the neopositivist canon. While discussions of methodology in International Relations have become open to a diversity of approaches in recent years, scholars have often been less prone to formulate explicit methodological guidance, especially in the form of practical guidance for alternative comparative research designs. Building on but further developing existing work on reflexivity and methodology, the article thus aims to open up methodological possibilities for reflexive IR by delineating three comparative strategies: defamiliarizing discursive comparison, contrapuntal comparison, and vernacular comparison. Each of the strategies is explained with reference to its theoretical and methodological background in existing scholarship, two key stages for its practical application, as well as examples. The article concludes by highlighting the importance and urgency of methodological innovation in IR––especially when it comes to approaches inspired by reflexivity.

中文翻译：

---

通过反身性重新构想国际关系中的比较


文章认为，国际关系，尤其是那些以反身性的认识论和方法论前提为依据的方法，将受益于更多样化的比较方法，而不是那些源自 J.S. Mill 的工作和新实证主义经典中的最新发展的方法。虽然近年来对国际关系方法论的讨论对多种方法持开放态度，但学者们往往不太倾向于制定明确的方法论指导，尤其是以替代比较研究设计的实践指导的形式。因此，本文基于但进一步发展了关于反身性和方法论的现有工作，旨在通过描述三种比较策略来为反身 IR 开辟方法论的可能性：陌生化话语比较、对位比较和白话比较。每种策略都参考了现有学术中的理论和方法论背景、实际应用的两个关键阶段以及示例进行了解释。文章最后强调了 IR 方法创新的重要性和紧迫性——尤其是当涉及到受反身性启发的方法时。