Evaluating the monadic democratic peace

Conflict Management and Peace Science

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 268-285

  Quackenbush, Stephen L ^a   Rudy, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Democracy; Democratic peace; Militarized interstate disputes; Unit of analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650805816     PISSN: 07388942     EISSN: 15499219     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0738894209104554     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Babst, Dean V. 1972. A force for peace. Industrial Research 14: 55-58.
2. Beck, Nathaniel. 1996. Reporting heteroskedasticity consistent standard errors. The Political Methodologist 7 (Spring): 4-6.
3. Beck, Nathaniel, Jonathan Katz, and Richard Tucker. 1998. Taking time seriously. American Journal of Political Science 42 (4). 1260-88.
4. Bennett, D. Scott. 2006. Toward a continuous specification of the democracy-autocracy connection. International Studies Quarterly 50 (2). 313-38.
5. Bennett, D. Scott, and Allan C. Stam. 2000 a. EUGene: A conceptual manual. International Interactions 26 (August): 179-204.
6. Bennett, D. Scott, and Allan C. Stam. 2000 b. A universal test of an expected utility theory of war. International Studies Quarterly 44 (3). 451-80.
7. Bennett, D. Scott, and Allan C. Stam. 2000 c. Research design and estimator choices in the analysis of interstate dyads. Journal of Conflict Resolution 44 (5). 653-85.
8. Bennett, D. Scott, and Allan Stam. 2004. The behavioral origins of war. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
9. Benoit, Kenneth. 1996. Democracies really are more pacific (in general): Reexamining regime type and war involvement. Journal of Conflict Resolution 40 (4). 636-57.
10. Braumoeller, Bear, and Gary Goertz. 2000. The methodology of necessary conditions. American Journal of Political Science 44 (4). 844-858.
11. Bremer, Stuart. 1992. Dangerous dyads. Journal of Conflict Resolution 36 (2). 309-41.
12. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, and David Lalman. 1992. War and reason: Domestic and international imperatives. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, James D. Morrow, Randolph M. Siverson, and Alastair Smith. 1999. An institutional explanation of the democratic peace. American Political Science Review 93 (4). 791-807.
14. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, Alastair Smith, Randolph M. Siverson, and James D. Morrow. 2003. The logic of political survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Buhaug, Halvard. 2005. Dangerous dyads revisited: Democracies may not be that peaceful after all. Conflict Management and Peace Science 22 (2). 95-111.
16. Caprioli, Mary, and Peter F. Trumbore. 2006. First use of violent force in militarized interstate disputes, 1980-2001. Journal of Peace Research 43 (6). 741-49.
17. Casper, Gretchen, and Claudiu Tufis. 2003. Correlation versus interchangeability:The limited robustness of empirical findings on democracy using highly correlated data sets. Political Analysis 11 (2). 196-203. (Pubitemid 36571839)
18. Chan, Steve. 1984. Mirror, mirror on the war ĝ€■ Are democracies more pacific? Journal of Conflict Resolution 28 (4). 617-48.
19. Chan, Steve. 1997. In search of democratic peace: Problems and promise. Mershon International Studies Review 41 (2). 59-91.
20. Cheibub, Jose, and Jennifer Gandhi. 2004. A six fold measure of democracies and dictatorship. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.
21. Cox, Dan G., and A. Cooper Drury. 2006. Democratic sanctions:The connection between the democratic peace and economic sanctions. Journal of Peace Research 43 (6). 709-722.
22. Dixon, William J. 1994. Democracy and the peaceful settlement of international conflict. American Political Science Review 88 (March): 1-17.
23. Doyle, Michael. 1983. Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs, Part I. Philosophy and Public Affairs 12 (Summer): 205-35.
24. Freedom House. 2008. Freedom House country ratings. (Available from http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=5 )
25. Gartzke, Erik. 1998. Kant we all just get along?: Opportunity, willingness, and the origins of the democratic peace. American Journal of Political Science 42 (1). 1-27.
26. Gartzke, Erik. 2000. Preferences and the democratic peace. International Studies Quarterly 44 (2). 191-212.
27. Geva, Nehemia, Karl DeRouen, and Alex Mintz. 1993. The political incentive explanation of the "democratic peace ". International Interactions 18 (3). 215-29.
28. Ghosn, Faten, Glenn Palmer, and Stuart A. Bremer. 2004. The MID3 data set, 1993-2001. Conflict Management and Peace Science 21 (2). 133-54.
29. Huth, Paul K., and Todd L. Allee. 2002. The democratic peace and territorial conflict in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Kilgour, D. Marc. 1991. Domestic political structure and war behavior: A game-theoretic approach. Journal of Conflict Resolution 35 (June): 266-84.
31. Lake, David A. 1992. Powerful pacifists. American Political Science Review 86 (1). 24-37.
32. Leeds, Brett Ashley, and David R. Davis. 1999. Beneath the surface: Regime type and international interaction, 1953-78. Journal of Peace Research 36 (1). 5-21.
33. MacMillan, John. 1998. On liberal peace. London: Tauris.
34. MacMillan, John. 2003. Beyond the separate democratic peace. Journal of Peace Research 40 (2). 233-43.
35. Maoz, Zeev, and Nasrin Abdolali. 1989. Regime types and international conflict, 1816-1976. Journal of Conflict Resolution 33 (1). 3-35.
36. Maoz, Zeev, and Bruce Russett. 1993. Normative and structural causes of democratic peace, 1946-1986. American Political Science Review 87 (3). 624-38.
37. Marshall, Monty G., and Keith Jaggers. 2002. Polity IV Project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2002. (Available from http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm )
38. Morgan, T. Clifton, and Sally Howard Campbell. 1991. Domestic structure, decisional constraints, and war: So why Kant democracies fight? Journal of Conflict Resolution 35 (June): 187-211.
39. Most, Benjamin A., and Harvey Starr. 1989. Inquiry, logic and international politics. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
40. Oneal, John, and James Lee Ray. 1997. New tests of the democratic peace: Controlling for economic interdependence, 1950-1985. Political Research Quarterly 50 (4). 751-75.
41. Oneal, John R., and Bruce M. Russett. 1997. The classical liberals were right: Democracy, interdependence, and conflict, 1950-1985. International Studies Quarterly 41 (2). 267-94.
42. Pickering, Jeffrey. 2002. Give me shelter. International Interactions 28 (4). 293-324.
43. Quackenbush, Stephen L. 2006. Identifying opportunity for conflict: Politically active dyads. Conflict Management and Peace Science 23 (1). 37-51.
44. Ray, James Lee. 2000. On the level(s), does democracy correlate with peace? In What do we know about war? ed. John Vasquez, pp. 299-316. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
45. Reed, William. 2000. A unified model of conflict onset and escalation. American Journal of Political Science 44 (1). 84-93.
46. Rioux, Jean-Sebastien. 1998. A crisis based evaluation of the democratic peace proposition. Canadian Journal of Political Science 31 (2). 263-83.
47. Rousseau, David L., Christopher Gelpi, Dan Reiter, and Paul K. Huth. 1996. Assessing the dyadic nature of the democratic peace, 1918-88. American Political Science Review 90 (3). 512-33.
48. Rummell, R.J. 1979. Understanding conflict and war. Vol. 4, War, power, peace. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
49. Rummell, R.J. 1983. Libertarianism and international violence. Journal of Conflict Resolution 27 (1) 27-71.
50. Rummell, R.J. 1985. Libertarian propositions on violence within and between nations: A test against published research results. Journal of Conflict Resolution 29 (3). 419-55.
51. Rummell, R.J. 1995. Democracies ARE less warlike than other regimes. European Journal of International Relations 1 (4). 457-79.
52. Rummell, R.J. 1997. Power kills. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
53. Russett, Bruce, and John Oneal. 2001. Triangulating peace. New York: Norton.
54. Russett, Bruce, and Harvey Starr. 2000. From democratic peace to Kantian peace: Democracy and conflict in the international system. In Handbook of war studies, 2 nd edn, ed. Manus Midlarsky, pp. 93-128. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
55. Senese, Paul. 1997. Between disputes and war: The effect of joint democracy on interstate conflict escalation. Journal of Politics 59 (1). 1-27.
56. Signorino, Curtis, and Jeffrey Ritter 1999. Tau-b or not tau-b: Measuring the similarity of foreign policy positions. International Studies Quarterly 43 (1). 115-144. (Pubitemid 29257370)
57. Singer, J. David, Stuart Bremer, and John Stuckey. 1972. Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820-1965. In Peace, war, and numbers, ed. Bruce M. Russett, pp. 19-48. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
58. Small, Melvin, and J. David Singer. 1976. The war proneness of democratic regimes. Jerusalem Journal of International Relations 1 (1). 50-69.
59. Souva, Mark, and Brandon Prins. 2006. The liberal peace revisited: The role of democracy, dependence, and development in militarized interstate dispute initiation, 1950-1999. International Interactions 32 (2). 183-200. (Pubitemid 43862313)
60. Starr, Harvey. 1992. Why don't democracies fight each other? Evaluating the theory-findings feedback loop. Jerusalem Journal of International Relations 14 (4). 41-59.
61. Vanhanen, Tatu. 2000. A new dataset for measuring democracy, 1810-1998. Journal of Peace Research 37 (2). 251-265. (Available from http://new.prio.no/ CSCW-Datasets/Data-on-Governance/The-Polyarchy-dataset/ )
62. Weede, Erich. 1992. Some simple calculations on democracy and war involvement. Journal of Peace Research 29 (4). 377-83.
63. Werner, Suzanne. 2000. The effects of political similarity on the onset of militarized disputes, 1816-1985. Political Science Quarterly 53 (2). 343-74.
64. Wright, Quincy. 1942. A study of war, Vols I-II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.