Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:45:43.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theory and the advancement of knowledge about war: a reply*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Scientific research, because it requires the explicit, rigorous specification of hypotheses and the equally rigorous, explicit empirical investigation of those hypotheses, facilitates and invites penetrating examination, empirical replication, and intelligent criticism. Yuen Foong Khong's (hereafter Khong) commentary on The War Trap is an able, sincere effort at exactly such examination, replication, and criticism. He has raised important questions, the response to which may help to further communication and understanding between what Khong calls the behavioralists and the traditionalists. Indeed, if Khong's essay succeeds in re-establishing serious communication and cross fertilization between the ‘traditionalists’ and the ‘behavioralists’ he will have made an important, and hopefully lasting, contribution.

Type
Discussions
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , January 1984 , pp. 65 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1984

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

1. Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de, ‘The War Trap Revisited: A Revised Expected Utility Model’Google Scholar, (hereafter referred to as TWTR) a paper presented at 1983 annual meetings of the Institute for the Study of Conflict theory and International Security, UCLA, June 23–25.

2. Hildebrand, David, Laing, James and Rosenthal, Howard, ‘Prediction analysis in Political Research’, American Political Science Review (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Altfeld, Michael and Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de, ‘Choosing Sides in Wars’, International Studies Quarterly (March, 1979), pp. 87–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de, ‘Risk, Power Distributions, and the Likelihood of War’, International Studies Quarterly (December, 1981), pp. 541–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de and Riker, William H., ‘Assessing the Merits of Selective Nuclear Proliferation’, Journal of Conflict Resolution (June, 1982), pp. 283–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, ‘TWTR’, op. cit.

4. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, ‘TWTR’, op. cit.

5. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, ‘TWTR’, op. cit.; Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, ‘An Expected Utility Explanation of Conflict Escalation’, forthcoming, Denver Monograph Series.

6. Lakatos, Imre, ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A., (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge, 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Michael Altfeld and Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, op. cit.

8. Newman, David, ‘Security and Alliances: A Theoretical Study of Alliance Formation’Google Scholar, a paper presented at the 1982 annual meetings of the International Studies Association.

9. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and William H. Riker, op. cit.

10. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, ‘TWTR’, op. cit., and Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, ‘An Expected Utility Explanation of Conflict Escalation’, op. cit.

11. Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de, ‘The Costs of War: A Rational Expectations Approach’, American Political Science Review (June, 1983).Google Scholar

12. Organski, A. F. K., World Politics (New York, 1958)Google Scholar; and Organski, A. F. K. and Kugler, Jacek, The War Ledger (Chicago, 1980).Google Scholar