IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v57y2020i6p669-678.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovations in concepts and measurement for the study of peace and conflict

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher J Fariss

    (Department of Political Science, 1259University of Michigan)

  • James Lo

    (Department of Political Science and International Relations, 5116University of Southern California)

Abstract

The observation, measurement, and analysis of violent and contentious processes are essential parts of the scientific study of peace and conflict. However, concepts such as the level of repression, the number of individuals killed during a civil war, or the perception of members of an out-group, are often by definition difficult to observe directly. This is because governments, non-state groups, NGOs, international organizations, monitoring organizations, and other actors are not incentivized to make information about their actions systematically observable to analysts. In this context, latent variable models can play a valuable role by aggregating various behavioral indicators and signals together to help measure latent concepts of interest that would not otherwise be directly observable. Each of the articles in this special issue uses some form of a latent variable model or related measurement model to bring together observable pieces of information and estimate a set of values for the underlying theoretical concept of interest. Each of the articles pays special attention to the processes that make the observation of peace and conflict processes so challenging. As we highlight throughout this introductory article, the unifying framework we present in this special issue is validation. Though the substantive content of each of the articles in this special issue varies, they represent the diversity of substantive interests that span the study of peace and conflict, broadly conceived. Overall, we hope that the special issue becomes a standard reference for scholars interested in developing and validating new measurement models for the study of peace and conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher J Fariss & James Lo, 2020. "Innovations in concepts and measurement for the study of peace and conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 669-678, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:57:y:2020:i:6:p:669-678
    DOI: 10.1177/0022343320975200
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022343320975200
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022343320975200?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. repec:cup:apsrev:v:113:y:2019:i:03:p:868-881_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Benoit, Kenneth & Conway, Drew & Lauderdale, Benjamin E. & Laver, Michael & Mikhaylov, Slava, 2016. "Crowd-sourced Text Analysis: Reproducible and Agile Production of Political Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(2), pages 278-295, May.
    3. Rebecca Cordell & Kristian Skrede Gleditsch & Florian G Kern & Laura Saavedra-Lux, 2020. "Measuring institutional variation across American Indian constitutions using automated content analysis," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 777-788, November.
    4. Christopher Hare & David A. Armstrong & Ryan Bakker & Royce Carroll & Keith T. Poole, 2015. "Using Bayesian Aldrich‐McKelvey Scaling to Study Citizens' Ideological Preferences and Perceptions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 59(3), pages 759-774, July.
    5. Fariss, Christopher J. & Jones, Zachary M., 2018. "Enhancing Validity in Observational Settings When Replication is Not Possible," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 365-380, April.
    6. Karsten Donnay & Eric T. Dunford & Erin C. McGrath & David Backer & David E. Cunningham, 2019. "Integrating Conflict Event Data," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(5), pages 1337-1364, May.
    7. Adcock, Robert & Collier, David, 2001. "Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(3), pages 529-546, September.
    8. Bond, Robert & Messing, Solomon, 2015. "Quantifying Social Media’s Political Space: Estimating Ideology from Publicly Revealed Preferences on Facebook," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(1), pages 62-78, February.
    9. Voeten, Erik, 2000. "Clashes in the Assembly," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(2), pages 185-215, April.
    10. Sobolev, Anton & Chen, M. Keith & Joo, Jungseock & Steinert-Threlkeld, Zachary C., 2020. "News and Geolocated Social Media Accurately Measure Protest Size Variation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(4), pages 1343-1351, November.
    11. Lo, James & Proksch, Sven-Oliver & Slapin, Jonathan B., 2016. "Ideological Clarity in Multiparty Competition: A New Measure and Test Using Election Manifestos," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 591-610, July.
    12. Howard Rosenthal & Erik Voeten, 2004. "Analyzing Roll Calls with Perfect Spatial Voting: France 1946–1958," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 620-632, July.
    13. Miriam Barnum & James Lo, 2020. "Is the NPT unraveling? Evidence from text analysis of review conference statements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 740-751, November.
    14. Quinn, Kevin M., 2004. "Bayesian Factor Analysis for Mixed Ordinal and Continuous Responses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 338-353.
    15. Lo, James & Proksch, Sven-Oliver & Gschwend, Thomas, 2014. "A Common Left-Right Scale for Voters and Parties in Europe," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 205-223, April.
    16. Schnakenberg, Keith E. & Fariss, Christopher J., 2014. "Dynamic Patterns of Human Rights Practices," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 1-31, April.
    17. Baskaran, Thushyanthan & Min, Brian & Uppal, Yogesh, 2015. "Election cycles and electricity provision: Evidence from a quasi-experiment with Indian special elections," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 64-73.
    18. Therese Anders, 2020. "Territorial control in civil wars: Theory and measurement using machine learning," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 701-714, November.
    19. Fariss, Christopher J., 2019. "Yes, Human Rights Practices Are Improving Over Time," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(3), pages 868-881, August.
    20. Florencia Montal & Carly Potz-Nielsen & Jane Lawrence Sumner, 2020. "What states want: Estimating ideal points from international investment treaty content," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 679-691, November.
    21. Lauderdale, Benjamin E., 2010. "Unpredictable Voters in Ideal Point Estimation," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 151-171, April.
    22. R Joseph Huddleston, 2020. "Continuous recognition: A latent variable approach to measuring international sovereignty of self-determination movements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 789-800, November.
    23. Pemstein, Daniel & Meserve, Stephen A. & Melton, James, 2010. "Democratic Compromise: A Latent Variable Analysis of Ten Measures of Regime Type," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 426-449.
    24. Shawn Treier & Simon Jackman, 2008. "Democracy as a Latent Variable," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 201-217, January.
    25. K Chad Clay & Ryan Bakker & Anne-Marie Brook & Daniel W Hill Jr & Amanda Murdie, 2020. "Using practitioner surveys to measure human rights: The Human Rights Measurement Initiative’s civil and political rights metrics," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 715-727, November.
    26. Kyle L Marquardt, 2020. "How and how much does expert error matter? Implications for quantitative peace research," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 692-700, November.
    27. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2002. "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 134-153, April.
    28. Fariss, Christopher J., 2014. "Respect for Human Rights has Improved Over Time: Modeling the Changing Standard of Accountability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(2), pages 297-318, May.
    29. Stephen A Meserve & Daniel Pemstein, 2020. "Terrorism and internet censorship," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 752-763, November.
    30. 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.
    31. Reuning, Kevin & Kenwick, Michael R. & Fariss, Christopher J., 2019. "Exploring the Dynamics of Latent Variable Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 503-517, October.
    32. Clinton, Joshua & Jackman, Simon & Rivers, Douglas, 2004. "The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 355-370, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christopher J Fariss & Michael R Kenwick & Kevin Reuning, 2020. "Estimating one-sided-killings from a robust measurement model of human rights," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 801-814, November.
    2. Jule Krüger & Ragnhild Nordås, 2020. "A latent variable approach to measuring wartime sexual violence," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 728-739, November.
    3. Florencia Montal & Carly Potz-Nielsen & Jane Lawrence Sumner, 2020. "What states want: Estimating ideal points from international investment treaty content," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 679-691, November.
    4. Christopher Hare & Keith T. Poole, 2015. "Measuring ideology in Congress," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 18, pages 327-346, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Miriam Barnum & James Lo, 2020. "Is the NPT unraveling? Evidence from text analysis of review conference statements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 740-751, November.
    6. Brett V. Benson & Joshua D. Clinton, 2016. "Assessing the Variation of Formal Military Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(5), pages 866-898, August.
    7. Cindy Cheng & Joan Barcelo & Allison Spencer Hartnett & Robert Kubinec & Luca Messerschmidt, 2020. "CoronaNet: A Dyadic Dataset of Government Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic," Working Papers 20200042, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Apr 2020.
    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. R Joseph Huddleston, 2020. "Continuous recognition: A latent variable approach to measuring international sovereignty of self-determination movements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 789-800, November.
    10. Scott J. LaCombe, 2021. "Measuring Institutional Design in U.S. States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1511-1533, July.
    11. Sara Hagemann, 2007. "Applying Ideal Point Estimation Methods to the Council of Ministers," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(2), pages 279-296, June.
    12. Kyle L Marquardt, 2020. "How and how much does expert error matter? Implications for quantitative peace research," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 692-700, November.
    13. Bradley C. Smith & William Spaniel, 2020. "Introducing ν-CLEAR: a latent variable approach to measuring nuclear proficiency," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(2), pages 232-256, March.
    14. Eijffinger, Sylvester & Mahieu, Ronald & Raes, Louis, 2018. "Inferring hawks and doves from voting records," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 107-120.
    15. James Lo, 2018. "Dynamic ideal point estimation for the European Parliament, 1980–2009," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 229-246, July.
    16. Mario Quaranta, 2018. "The Meaning of Democracy to Citizens Across European Countries and the Factors Involved," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 859-880, April.
    17. Christopher Hare & Tzu-Ping Liu & Robert N. Lupton, 2018. "What Ordered Optimal Classification reveals about ideological structure, cleavages, and polarization in the American mass public," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 57-78, July.
    18. Julia Gray & Jonathan Slapin, 2012. "How effective are preferential trade agreements? Ask the experts," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 309-333, September.
    19. Cindy Cheng & Joan Barceló & Allison Spencer Hartnett & Robert Kubinec & Luca Messerschmidt, 2020. "COVID-19 Government Response Event Dataset (CoronaNet v.1.0)," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(7), pages 756-768, July.
    20. Svend-Erik Skaaning, 2018. "Different Types of Data and the Validity of Democracy Measures," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 105-116.

    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:joupea:v:57:y:2020:i:6:p:669-678. 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://www.prio.no/ .

    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.