Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:42:17.752Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The War Trap Revisited: A Revised Expected Utility Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 1985

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The expected utility framework developed in The War Trap is revised to correct several deficiencies. Risk-taking orientations are now treated as an integral part of the model by introducing concavity or convexity into the utility functions. The zero-sum properties of the theory are largely eliminated, and the tendency toward interpersonal comparisons of utility is removed. Several earlier results are replicated with the new model, and with annual capabilities data. New propositions are deduced that identify important limitations on conflict initiation, and relationships resulting from differences in perceptions are tested. Support is found for the contention that the revised version of the theory, of which the original model is a special case, is a powerful tool for integrating many extant hypotheses about conflict and for explaining a substantial portion of the tendency for some threats to escalate to violence or warfare and for others to be resolved peacefully.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , March 1985 , pp. 156 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altfeld, M., & Bueno de Mesquita, B. Choosing sides in wars. International Studies Quarterly, 1979, 23, 87–112.10.2307/2600275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, D., & Bueno de Mesquita, B. Forecasting policy decisions: An expected utility approach. In Andriole, S. (Ed.), Corporate crisis management. Princeton, N.J.: Petrocelli Books, 1984.Google Scholar
Berkowitz, B. Realignment in international treaty organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 1983, 27, 77–96.10.2307/2600620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. The costs of war: A rational expectations approach. American Political Science Review, 1983, 77, 347–357.10.2307/1958920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. The escalation of international conflict: A preliminary analysis. Denver: Denver Monograph Series, in press.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. Forecasting policy decisions: An expected utility approach to post-Khomeini Iran. PS, 1984, 17, 226–236.10.2307/418786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. Risk, power distributions and the likelihood of war. International Studies Quarterly, 1981, 25, 541–568. (b)10.2307/2600512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. Systemic polarization and the occurrence and duration of war. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1978, 22, 241–267.10.1177/002200277802200203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, B. The war trap. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981. (a)Google Scholar
Claude, I. Power and international politics. New York: Knopf, 1962.Google Scholar
Deutsch, K., & Singer, J. D. Multipolar power systems and international stability. In Rosenau, J. (Ed.), International politics and foreign policy (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press, 1969, pp. 317–318.Google Scholar
Gochman, C., & Maoz, Z. Dispute dataset codebook. 1982.Google Scholar
Huth, P., & Russett, B. What makes deterrence work; Cases from 1900 to 1980. World Politics, in press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, M. System and process in international politics. New York: Wiley, 1957.Google Scholar
Maoz, A. The expected utility of international conflict: Some theoretical problems and empirical surprises in The war trap. Haifa: University of Haifa (Mimeo), 1983.Google Scholar
Morgenthau, H. Politics among nations. New York: Knopf, 1973.Google Scholar
Morrow, J. A theory of optimal foreign policy. Presented at the Annual Meetings of the International Studies Association, 1982.Google Scholar
Newman, D. Security and alliances: A theoretical study of alliance formation. Presented at the Annual Meetings of the International Studies Association, 1982.Google Scholar
Organski, A. F. K., & Kugler, J. The war ledger. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.10.7208/chicago/9780226351841.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, W. Decisions during crisis: Exploring conflict outcomes with an analytic model. Presented at the Annual Meetings of the International Studies Association, 1983.Google Scholar
Vasquez, J. The power of power politics: A critique. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Waltz, K. The stability of a bipolar world. Daedalus, 1964, 93, 881–909.Google Scholar
Wittman, D. How a war ends: A rational model approach. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1979, 23, 743–763.10.1177/002200277902300408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zagare, F. Review of The war trap . American Political Science Review, 1982, 76, 738–739.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.