Testing competing institutional explanations of the democratic peace: The case of dispute duration

Conflict Management and Peace Science

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 255-267

  Bueno De Mesquita, Bruce ^a,b   Koch, Michael T ^c   Siverson, Randolph M ^c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Democratic peace; Dispute duration; Institutions; Power disparity

Indexed keywords

EID: 11144254089     PISSN: 07388942     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07388940490882532     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bennett, D. S. 1999. Parametric models, duration dependence, and time-varying data revisited. American Journal of Political Science 43(1): 256-270.
2. Bennett, D. S., and A. C. Stam. 1996. The duration of interstate wars, 1816-1985. American Political Science Review 90(2): 239-257.
3. Bennett, D. S., and A. C. Stam. 2000. EUGene: A conceptual manual. International Interactions 26(2): 179-204. (Website: http://eugenesoftware.org)
4. Bueno de Mesquita, B. 1981. The war trap. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
5. Bueno de Mesquita, B., J. D. Morrow, R. M. Siverson, and A. Smith. 1999. An institutional explanation of the democratic peace. American Political Science Review 93(4): 791-808.
6. Bueno de Mesquita, B., J. D. Morrow, R. M. Siverson, and A. Smith. 2004. Testing hypotheses about political institutions and war fighting. Unpublished paper.
7. Bueno de Mesquita, B., and R. M. Siverson. 1995. War and the survival of political leaders: A comparative study of regime types and political accountability. American Political Science Review 89(4): 841-855.
8. Bueno de Mesquita, B., A. Smith, R. M. Siverson, and J. D. Morrow. 2003. The logic of political survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Clark, D. H., and R. A. Hart, Jr. 1998. Controlling duration dependence in conflict analyses: A replication and extension of "Regime Types and Status Quo Evaluations." American Journal of Political Science 42(4): 1335-1336.
10. Diehl, P. F., and G. Goertz. 1992. Territorial changes and international conflict. New York and London: Routledge.
11. Dixon, W. J. 1994. Democracy and the peaceful settlement of international conflict. American Political Science Review 88(1): 14-32.
12. Fearon, J. 1994. Domestic political audiences and the escalation of international disputes. American Political Science Review 88(2): 577-592.
13. Fearon, J. 1995. Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization 49: 379-414.
14. George, A. L. 1980. Domestic constraints on regime change in U.S. foreign policy: The need for policy legitimacy. In Change in the International System, eds. Ole R. Holsti, Randolph M. Siverson, and Alexander L. George. Boulder, CO: Westview.
15. Holsti, K. J. 1991. Peace and war: Armed conflicts and the international order 1648-1989. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Huth, P. K. 1996. Standing your ground: Territorial disputes and international conflict. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
17. Jaggers, K., and Gurr, T. R. 1996. POLITY III: Regime change and political authority, 1800-1994. [computer file] Study no. 6695. Second ICPSR verson. Boulder, CO.
18. Jones, D. M., S. A. Bremer, and J. D. Singer. 1996. Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, coding rules, and empirical patterns. Conflict Management and Peace Science 15(2): 163-213.
19. Kam, C. D., and R. J. Franzese, Jr. 2003. Modeling and interpreting interactive hypotheses in regression analyses: A brief refresher and some practical advice. Typescript, Department of Political Science, University of Michigan.
20. Maoz, Z., and B. M. Russett, 1993. Normative and structural causes of the democratic peace, 1946-1986. American Political Science Review 87(3): 624-638.
21. Morrow, J. D., R. M. Siverson, and T. Tabares, 1998. The political determinants of international trade: The major powers, 1907-1990. American Political Science Review 92(September 1998): 649-661.
22. Partell, P., and G. Palmer. 1999. Audience costs and interstate crises: An empirical assessment of Fearon's model of dispute outcomes. International Studies Quarterly 43(2): 389-405.
23. Ray, J. Lee. 2003. Explaining interstate conflict and war: What should be controlled for? Conflict Management and Peace Science 20: 1-32.
24. Reiter, D., and A. C. Stam. 2002. Democracies at war. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25. Rubinstein, A. 1982. Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica 50(1): 97-109.
26. Russett, B. M. 1993. Grasping the democratic peace: Principles for a post-Cold Warworld. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
27. Russett, B. M., and J. Oneal. 2000. Triangulating peace. New York: Norton.
28. Schultz, K. 2001. Looking for audience costs. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(2): 32-60.
29. Senese, P. D. 1997. Between dispute and war: The effect of joint democracy on interstate conflict escalation. Journal of Politics 59(1): 1-27.
30. Singer, J. D. 1972. The "Correlates of War" project: Interim report and rationale. World Politics 24(1): 243-270.
31. Singer, J. D., S. Bremer, and J. Stuckey. 1972. Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820-1965. In Peace, War and Numbers, ed. Bruce Russett. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
32. Siverson, R. M., and J. Emmons. 1991. Birds of a feather: Democratic political systems and alliance choices in the twentieth century. Journal of Conflict Resolution 35(2): 285-307.
33. Werner, S. 1999. The precarious nature of peace: Resolving the issues, enforcing the settlement, and renegotiating the terms. American Journal of Political Science 43(3): 912-934.
34. Wittman, D. 1979. How a war ends: A rational model approach. Journal of Conflict Resolution 23: 743-763.