When and whom to join: The expansion of ongoing violent interstate conflicts

Kyle A. Joyce, Faten Yasser Halawi-Ghosn, Reşat Bayer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The opportunity and willingness framework has received much attention in research on interstate conflict expansion. This framework is extended here by examining when and what side third parties join during ongoing conflicts. It is maintained that without examining both timing and side selection, understanding of conflict expansion is limited. The timing and side joined in interstate disputes between 1816 and 2001 are analysed using a competing risks duration model. The findings contribute novel insights into many key debates in conflict research such as balancing versus bandwagoning, as well as alliance reliability and the democratic peace. The results also indicate that relying on statistical models that do not distinguish between which side a third party can join may produce misleading results.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-238
Number of pages34
JournalBritish Journal of Political Science
Volume44
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2014

Fingerprint

conflict research
peace

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

When and whom to join : The expansion of ongoing violent interstate conflicts. / Joyce, Kyle A.; Halawi-Ghosn, Faten Yasser; Bayer, Reşat.

In: British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 44, No. 1, 01.2014, p. 205-238.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2296b425385846ad9b8b8230019303cd,
title = "When and whom to join: The expansion of ongoing violent interstate conflicts",
abstract = "The opportunity and willingness framework has received much attention in research on interstate conflict expansion. This framework is extended here by examining when and what side third parties join during ongoing conflicts. It is maintained that without examining both timing and side selection, understanding of conflict expansion is limited. The timing and side joined in interstate disputes between 1816 and 2001 are analysed using a competing risks duration model. The findings contribute novel insights into many key debates in conflict research such as balancing versus bandwagoning, as well as alliance reliability and the democratic peace. The results also indicate that relying on statistical models that do not distinguish between which side a third party can join may produce misleading results.",
author = "Joyce, {Kyle A.} and Halawi-Ghosn, {Faten Yasser} and Reşat Bayer",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S0007123412000506",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "205--238",
journal = "British Journal of Political Science",
issn = "0007-1234",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - When and whom to join

T2 - The expansion of ongoing violent interstate conflicts

AU - Joyce, Kyle A.

AU - Halawi-Ghosn, Faten Yasser

AU - Bayer, Reşat

PY - 2014/1

Y1 - 2014/1

N2 - The opportunity and willingness framework has received much attention in research on interstate conflict expansion. This framework is extended here by examining when and what side third parties join during ongoing conflicts. It is maintained that without examining both timing and side selection, understanding of conflict expansion is limited. The timing and side joined in interstate disputes between 1816 and 2001 are analysed using a competing risks duration model. The findings contribute novel insights into many key debates in conflict research such as balancing versus bandwagoning, as well as alliance reliability and the democratic peace. The results also indicate that relying on statistical models that do not distinguish between which side a third party can join may produce misleading results.

AB - The opportunity and willingness framework has received much attention in research on interstate conflict expansion. This framework is extended here by examining when and what side third parties join during ongoing conflicts. It is maintained that without examining both timing and side selection, understanding of conflict expansion is limited. The timing and side joined in interstate disputes between 1816 and 2001 are analysed using a competing risks duration model. The findings contribute novel insights into many key debates in conflict research such as balancing versus bandwagoning, as well as alliance reliability and the democratic peace. The results also indicate that relying on statistical models that do not distinguish between which side a third party can join may produce misleading results.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890259053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890259053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0007123412000506

DO - 10.1017/S0007123412000506

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84890259053

VL - 44

SP - 205

EP - 238

JO - British Journal of Political Science

JF - British Journal of Political Science

SN - 0007-1234

IS - 1

ER -