IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v32y2015i2p222-242.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The MID4 dataset, 2002–2010: Procedures, coding rules and description

Author

Listed:
  • Glenn Palmer

    (Department of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, USA)

  • Vito D’Orazio

    (Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University, USA)

  • Michael Kenwick

    (Department of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, USA)

  • Matthew Lane

    (Department of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, USA)

Abstract

Understanding the causes of interstate conflict continues to be a primary goal of the field of international relations. To that end, scholars continue to rely on large datasets of conflict in the international system. This paper introduces the latest iteration in the most widely used dataset on interstate conflicts, the Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID) 4 data. In this paper we first outline the updated data-collection process for the MID4 data. Second, we present some minor changes and clarifications to the coding rules for the MID4 datasets, as well as pointing out how the MID coding procedures affect several notable “close call†cases. Third, we introduce updates to the existing MID datasets for the years 2002–2010 and provide descriptive statistics that allow comparisons of the newer MID data to prior versions. We also offer some best practices and point out several ways in which the new MID data can contribute to research in international conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Glenn Palmer & Vito D’Orazio & Michael Kenwick & Matthew Lane, 2015. "The MID4 dataset, 2002–2010: Procedures, coding rules and description," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(2), pages 222-242, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:32:y:2015:i:2:p:222-242
    DOI: 10.1177/0738894214559680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894214559680
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0738894214559680?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. D'Orazio, Vito & Landis, Steven T. & Palmer, Glenn & Schrodt, Philip, 2014. "Separating the Wheat from the Chaff: Applications of Automated Document Classification Using Support Vector Machines," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 224-242, April.
    2. D. Scott Bennett & Allan C. Stam, 2000. "Research Design and Estimator Choices in the Analysis of Interstate Dyads," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(5), pages 653-685, October.
    3. Glenn Palmer & Tamar London & Patrick Regan, 2004. "What's Stopping You?: The Sources of Political Constraints on International Conflict Behavior in Parliamentary Democracies," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 1-24, January.
    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. Travis Sharp, 2019. "Wars, presidents, and punctuated equilibriums in US defense spending," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(3), pages 367-396, September.
    2. Isa Camyar, 2019. "Parliamentary and semi-presidential advantages in the sovereign credit market: democratic institutional design and sovereign credibility," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 383-406, December.

    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. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2011. "Disaggregated Trade Flows and International Conflict," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2006. "Power Positions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 3-27, February.
    3. James Lee Ray, 2005. "Constructing Multivariate Analyses (of Dangerous Dyads)," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(4), pages 277-292, September.
    4. Alex Braithwaite & Douglas Lemke, 2011. "Unpacking Escalation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(2), pages 111-123, April.
    5. Andrew Bertoli & Allan Dafoe & Robert F. Trager, 2019. "Is There a War Party? Party Change, the Left–Right Divide, and International Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(4), pages 950-975, April.
    6. Brender, Agnes, 2018. "Government Ideology and Arms Exports," ILE Working Paper Series 21, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    7. Strüver, Georg & Wegenast, Tim, 2011. "Ex oleo bellare? The Impact of Oil on the Outbreak of Militarized Interstate Disputes," GIGA Working Papers 162, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    8. Zhanna Terechshenko, 2020. "Hot under the collar: A latent measure of interstate hostility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 764-776, November.
    9. Edward D. Mansfield & Brian M. Pollins, 2001. "The Study of Interdependence and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(6), pages 834-859, December.
    10. Johann Park, 2013. "Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the Cold War," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(2), pages 178-194, April.
    11. Luo, Shali & Miller, J. Isaac, 2014. "On the spatial correlation of international conflict initiation and other binary and dyadic dependent variables," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 107-118.
    12. D. Scott Bennett, 2011. "Is EUGene a Collective Bad?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(4), pages 315-330, September.
    13. Havard Hegre, 2005. "Identifying How Trade Matters in Empirical Studies of Interstate Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(3), pages 217-224, July.
    14. Vito D’Orazio & Michael Kenwick & Matthew Lane & Glenn Palmer & David Reitter, 2016. "Crowdsourcing the Measurement of Interstate Conflict," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, June.
    15. Halvard Buhaug, 2005. "Dangerous Dyads Revisited: Democracies May Not Be That Peaceful After All," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(2), pages 95-111, April.
    16. Richard Hanania, 2019. "Are Liberal Governments More Cooperative? Voting Trends at the UN in Five Anglophone Democracies," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(6), pages 1403-1432, July.
    17. Cathy Xuanxuan Wu & Scott Wolford, 2018. "Leaders, States, and Reputations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(10), pages 2087-2117, November.
    18. David J. Brulé & Bryan W. Marshall & Brandon C. Prins, 2010. "Opportunities and Presidential Uses of Force," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(5), pages 486-510, November.
    19. Colton Heffington & Brandon Beomseob Park & Laron K Williams, 2019. "The “Most Important Problem†Dataset (MIPD): a new dataset on American issue importance," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(3), pages 312-335, May.
    20. Sandra Wankmüller, 2023. "A comparison of approaches for imbalanced classification problems in the context of retrieving relevant documents for an analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 91-163, April.

    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:compsc:v:32:y:2015:i:2:p:222-242. 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.