英语翻译Only further research can reveal their full empirical po

英语翻译
Only further research can reveal their full empirical power;
yet existing studies-from explanations of the democratic peace toendogenous tariff theory to theories relating domestic institutions and ideasto foreign policy-suggest
considerable promise.Third,a liberal theory of state preferences is themost fundamental
type of IR theory.Hypotheses that endogenize changes in state preferences
deserve equal treatment in monocausal explanations and analytical priorityin multicausal
ones,because liberal theory defines the theoretical and empirical domainsin
which it is appropriate even to consider realist and institutionalistclaims.Thus those
who ignore liberal theory do not simply sacrifice comprehensiveness; theyundermine
valid empirical evaluation of their own theories.Only by building onthese
three conclusions can liberals and their critics supplant debates overlabels with
debates over data.
We have seen that even monocausal
empirical tests of realist and institutionalist theories must control reliably for variation
in underlying preferences (not just strategies) of states.This requires precisely
the same detailed research into domestic politics.Such a baseline control is,moreover,
most reliable where backed by an explicit and generalizable theory of domestic
preference formation,that is,a liberal theory.In short,research into domestic preference
formation is unavoidable.

只有进一步的研究才能揭示他们的全部经验主义能量；然而,目前的研究---从民主和平到内生关税理论的阐释,到与国内机构有关理论的阐释,到对外政策思想的阐释---却表明很有希望.第三,国家偏好的自由理论是国际关系理论中最基本的类型.引发国家偏好内生变化的假说需要同样地进行单一因果关系阐释和多重因果关系的优先分析,因为自由理论规范了理论领域和经验领域,在这些领域中,即使是考虑现实主义和机构主义的主张也是合适的.因此,忽略自由理论的人不仅仅牺牲了广泛性；他们同时也低估了他们自己理论的有效经验价值.只有以这三个结论为基础,自由派及其批评者才能用针对数据的辩论来取代针对标签的辩论.我们已经观察到,在构成国家偏好（不仅仅是战略）时,即使是现实主义和机构主义理论的单一因果关系经验测试也必须可靠地控制变量.这就需要完全同样地详细研究国内政治.另外,如果有明确的和广义的国内偏好形成理论（即自由理论）支持时,这种基线控制是最为可靠的.简言之,对国内偏好形成的研究是不可回避的.