1 / 17

David L. Rousseau Department of Political Science University of Pennsylvania 17 November 2003

Belief Systems and Information Search in International Relations: An Experimental “Information Board” Study. David L. Rousseau Department of Political Science University of Pennsylvania 17 November 2003. Threat Perception In International Relations. Realism Liberalism Constructivism.

nashr
Download Presentation

David L. Rousseau Department of Political Science University of Pennsylvania 17 November 2003

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Belief Systems and Information Search in International Relations: An Experimental “Information Board” Study David L. Rousseau Department of Political Science University of Pennsylvania 17 November 2003

  2. Threat Perception In International Relations • Realism • Liberalism • Constructivism Do both ideas and material factors matter? If so, can you determine the relative power of each?

  3. No Q1: Do we have different identities? High None Yes No Q2: Do they have the capacity to hurt my country? Yes Medium Low Q2: Do they have the capacity to hurt my country? Yes No Q3: Do our countries have a history of armed conflict? No Low Medium Yes Q3: Do our countries have a history of armed conflict? Yes No None High Yes Q1: Do we have different identities? No Sequential Decision Strategies Version A Version B

  4. Hypotheses (+) H1: Strong Realist Beliefs Threat Perception (+) H2: Strong Realist Beliefs Seek Material Information (+) H3: Strong Realist Beliefs Seek Balance of Forces Info (+) H4: Non-Realist Beliefs Seek Regime Type Info (+) H5a: Strong Realist Beliefs Exit After Balance of Forces Info (+) H5b: Non-Realist Beliefs Exit After Regime Type Info (+) H6: Averaging Decision Rule Number of Panels Viewed (-) H7: Sequential Decision Rule Updating After the First Panel

  5. Beliefs in International Relations: Liberals vs. Realists • Utility of Military Force • Unilateralism vs. Multilateralism • States: Aggressive vs. Status Quo • Goals: Competing vs. Complementary • Effectiveness of International Organizations • Trustworthiness of States • Equitable vs. Power Maximizing Solutions • Fungibility of Power

  6. Liberal-Realist Index From Survey • 10 Survey Questions Administered Two Weeks Prior • Theoretic Range: -20 to +20 • Mean: -2 • Sensitivity Analysis: ¼, ⅓, and ½

  7. Decision Boards A1: Contain- ment A2: Do Nothing A3: Sanctions A4: Use of Force D1: Political D2: Military D3: Economic D4: Diplomatic From Mintz et al. 1997

  8. Results for H1

  9. Results for H2

  10. Results for H3

  11. Results for H4

  12. Results for H5, H6, and H7 H5a: Reject: Strong Realists do not exit immediately after Power. H5b: Reject: Non-Realists do not exit immediately after Regime Type. H6: Strong Support: Subjects visit the same panels. H7: Weak Support: First panel is important but not decisive.

  13. Problems with Current Study • Need More Pressing Time Constraints • Information Search is Too Manageable • Explore with Non-Computer Format • Remove Radio Buttons From Update Panel • Vary Information Using Split Ballot Design

  14. Conclusions • No Support for Sequential Model • Both Ideas and Material Factors Used in Decision • Interim Report: More Extensive Testing Required

More Related