AbstractPast studies vary widely in how they measure conflict escalation. The use of different measures of escalation is understandable because theories about escalation do not specify how the concept should be measured. But the use of different measures of escalation hinders cumulation. We contribute to the literature on conflict escalation by comparing a variety of measures of escalation. We demonstrate how few robust relationships there are across different measures of escalation. Importantly, though, we find a consistent influence of territory on escalatory processes which is insensitive to how escalation is measured.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Peace Science Society (International) in its journal Conflict Management & Peace Science.
Volume (Year): 28 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://pss.la.psu.edu/
concept measurement; conflict escalation; Militarized Interstate Disputes (MIDs); selection effects; territory;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (SAGE Publications).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.