This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Oneal, J. R. Articles by Russett, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Rule of Three, Let It Be? When More Really Is Better

Department of Political Science University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA, joneal{at}tenhoor.as.ua.edu

Bruce Russett

Department of Political Science Yale University New Haven Connecticut, USA

Jim Ray and others in this issue question customary procedures for the quantitative analysis of theoretically complex questions in the social sciences. In this article we address Ray's use of research on the Kantian peace to illustrate his points. We discuss his five guidelines for research, indicating how we agree and disagree, and take up five substantive issues he has raised about our research. With new analyses to supplement our previous work, we show that none of his reservations is well founded. We discuss the costs as well as the benefits of rigid insistence on reducing the number of independent variables in a regression equation.

Key Words: causes of war • democratic peace • liberal peace • economic interdependence

Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 22, No. 4, 293-310 (2005)
DOI: 10.1080/07388940500339209


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. M. Russett Democracy, War and Expansion through Historical Lenses European Journal of International Relations, March 1, 2009; 15(1): 9 - 36. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. Hegre Trade Dependence or Size Dependence?: The Gravity Model of Trade and the Liberal Peace Conflict Management and Peace Science, February 1, 2009; 26(1): 26 - 45. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. Hegre Gravitating toward War: Preponderance May Pacify, but Power Kills Journal of Conflict Resolution, August 1, 2008; 52(4): 566 - 589. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Snidal Commentary on the Special Issue Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2008; 52(2): 326 - 333. [PDF]

				Jun Xiang, Xiaohong Xu, and G. Keteku Power: The Missing Link in the Trade Conflict Relationship Journal of Conflict Resolution, August 1, 2007; 51(4): 646 - 663. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Bussmann and J. R. Oneal Do Hegemons Distribute Private Goods?: A Test of Power-Transition Theory Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2007; 51(1): 88 - 111. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Z. Maoz, R. D. Kuperman, L. Terris, and I. Talmud Structural Equivalence and International Conflict: A Social Networks Analysis Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2006; 50(5): 664 - 689. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. H. Achen Let's Put Garbage-Can Regressions and Garbage-Can Probits Where They Belong Conflict Management and Peace Science, September 1, 2005; 22(4): 327 - 339. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. A. Clarke The Phantom Menace: Omitted Variable Bias in Econometric Research Conflict Management and Peace Science, September 1, 2005; 22(4): 341 - 352. [Abstract] [PDF]