IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v40y1996i4p597-616.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Empirical Test of The Audience Cost Proposition

Author

Listed:
  • Joe Eyerman
  • Robert A. Hart Jr.

    (Department of Political Science, The Florida State University)

Abstract

Fearon (1994a) concludes that democracies should be less likely to back down in crises and thus be able signal resolve more effectively than autocratic states. The authors evaluate this argument against the population of conflicts identified by the SHERFACS phase-disaggregated conflict management data set. Their findings indicate that domestic characteristics of democracies enable them to communicate intentions effectively. Between 1945 and 1984, conflicts between pairs of democratic states have been found to have fewer phases than those involving at least one autocratic state. This suggests that the information conveyed by the regime type of a state may help resolve the security dilemma by providing communication between democracies. This finding also supports an integration of existing explanations of the democratic peace.

Suggested Citation

  • Joe Eyerman & Robert A. Hart Jr., 1996. "An Empirical Test of The Audience Cost Proposition," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(4), pages 597-616, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:40:y:1996:i:4:p:597-616
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002796040004004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002796040004004
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002796040004004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James D. Fearon, 1994. "Signaling Versus the Balance of Power and Interests," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(2), pages 236-269, June.
    2. Dixon, William J., 1994. "Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 14-32, March.
    3. de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno & Siverson, Randolph M. & Woller, Gary, 1992. "War and the Fate of Regimes: A Comparative Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(3), pages 638-646, September.
    4. Cameron, A. Colin & Trivedi, Pravin K., 1990. "Regression-based tests for overdispersion in the Poisson model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 347-364, December.
    5. Doyle, Michael W., 1986. "Liberalism and World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1151-1169, December.
    6. Fearon, James D., 1994. "Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 577-592, September.
    7. Patrick James & Glenn Mitchell, 1995. "Targets of covert pressure: The hidden victims of the democratic peace," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 85-107.
    8. de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno & Siverson, Randolph M., 1995. "War and the Survival of Political Leaders: A Comparative Study of Regime Types and Political Accountability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 841-855, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robert A. Hart & William Reed, 1999. "Selection effects and dispute escalation: Democracy and status quo evaluations," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 243-263, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Suzanne Werner, 1998. "Negotiating the Terms of Settlement," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(3), pages 321-343, June.
    2. Kenneth A. Schultz, 2001. "Looking for Audience Costs," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(1), pages 32-60, February.
    3. David Brulé, 2006. "Congressional Opposition, the Economy, and U.S. Dispute Initiation, 1946-2000," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 463-483, August.
    4. Paul K. Huth, 1998. "Major Power Intervention in International Crises, 1918-1988," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(6), pages 744-770, December.
    5. Michael W. Simon & Erik Gartzke, 1996. "Political System Similarity And The Choice of Allies," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(4), pages 617-635, December.
    6. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 690-713, October.
    7. Darren Filson & Suzanne Werner, 2007. "Sensitivity to Costs of Fighting versus Sensitivity to Losing the Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(5), pages 691-714, October.
    8. Brian Lai, 2004. "The Effects of Different Types of Military Mobilization on the Outcome of International Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(2), pages 211-229, April.
    9. H.E. Goemans, 2008. "Which Way Out?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(6), pages 771-794, December.
    10. Michael J. Ireland & Scott Sigmund Gartner, 2001. "Time to Fight," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(5), pages 547-568, October.
    11. Michael Mousseau, 2000. "Market Prosperity, Democratic Consolidation, and Democratic Peace," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(4), pages 472-507, August.
    12. William D. Baker & John R. Oneal, 2001. "Patriotism or Opinion Leadership?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(5), pages 661-687, October.
    13. Ely Ratner, 2009. "Reaping What You Sow," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(3), pages 390-418, June.
    14. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell & Scott Gates & HÃ¥vard Hegre, 1999. "Evolution in Democracy-War Dynamics," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(6), pages 771-792, December.
    15. Christopher Gelpi, 2017. "Democracies in Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(9), pages 1925-1949, October.
    16. Giacomo Chiozza & Ajin Choi, 2003. "Guess Who Did What," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(3), pages 251-278, June.
    17. David Altman & Federico Rojas-de-Galarreta & Francisco Urdinez, 2021. "An interactive model of democratic peace," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 384-398, May.
    18. James D. Fearon, 1997. "Signaling Foreign Policy Interests," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(1), pages 68-90, February.
    19. Bruce Bueno De Mesquita & Michael T. Koch & Randolph M. Siverson, 2004. "Testing Competing Institutional Explanations of the Democratic Peace: The Case of Dispute Duration," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(4), pages 255-267, September.
    20. Matthew A. Baum, 2004. "Going Private," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(5), pages 603-631, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:40:y:1996:i:4:p:597-616. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.