‘Mind the Gap’: Assessing Differences between Brazilian and Mainstream IR Journals in Methodological Approaches

Abstract In this article, we assess the methodological approaches employed in articles published in Brazilian and global mainstream IR journals in order to observe the differences between the two. To this end, we compare the methodological tools applied in research articles published in the top two Brazilian journals (Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional and Contexto Internacional) vis-à-vis two other top international influential mainstream publications (International Organization and World Politics), from the year 2009 to 2019. By undertaking a Systematic Literature Review, we surveyed a total of 955 articles. Our research concluded that Brazilian IR scholarship differs from the mainstream literature because (1) most articles do not mention the mobilized methods during their analyses, (2) the field of IR presents more non- and post-positivist approaches, and (3) contrary to the mainstream outlets, quantitative methods are rarely employed in Brazil.