Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Conflict Management and Peace Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Croco, S. E.
Right arrow Articles by Teo, T. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Assessing the Dyadic Approach to Interstate Conflict Processes: A.k.a. "Dangerous" Dyad-Years

Sarah E. Croco

Department of Political Science University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Tze Kwang Teo

Department of Political Science University of Illinois Urbana, Illinois, USA, tzeteo{at}uiuc.edu

The "dyad" has become the analytical cornerstone of quantitative interstate conflict studies. Stuart Bremer, in no small part due to his "Dangerous Dyads" article, has been identified with the dyadic/dyad-year approach. We think this has come at the expense of his interest in "process models" of interstate conflict. Our examination of his writings on The Process of War indicate that multilateral conflict processes are most probably misspecified by a dyadic approach. We draw on examples such as alliance coalition formation, extended deterrence, economic sanctions, and especially war expansion, to elaborate upon and support our claim. We conclude our assessment of the dyadic/dyad-year approach by suggesting some areas for our colleagues to consider before adopting a dyadic approach in their own research.

Key Words: dyadic approach • dyad-years • research design • interstate conflict processes • quantitative international conflict

Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 22, No. 1, 5-18 (2005)
DOI: 10.1080/07388940590915291
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Conflict Management and Peace ScienceHome page
C. R. Boehmer
A Reassessment of Democratic Pacifism at the Monadic Level of Analysis
Conflict Management and Peace Science, February 1, 2008; 25(1): 81 - 94.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 INT RELAT ASIA PACHome page
A. Tago
Why do states join US-led military coalitions?: The compulsion of the coalition's missions and legitimacy
International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, May 1, 2007; 7(2): 179 - 202.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]