TY - JOUR
T1 - Coercion and Provocation
AU - Dafoe, Allan
AU - Hatz, Sophia
AU - Zhang, Baobao
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors can be reached at allan.dafoe@politics.ox.ax.uk, sophia.hatz@pcr.uu.se, and baobaozhangresearch@gmail.com. The replication data and code are found at https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/0BFI9L. For helpful input we thank Tyler Bowen, Devin Caughey, Matthew Cebul, Kristine Eck, Guy Grossman, Håvard Hegre, Susan Hyde, Simon Hug, Josh Kertzer, Deborah Larson, Jason Lyall, Ed Mansfield, Zeev Maoz, Rose McDermott, Nuno Monteiro, Magnus Öberg, Jon Pevehouse, Brian Rathbun, Jonathan Renshon, Milan Svolik, Gerald Schneider, Nina von Uexküll, Steve Weber, Jessica Weiss, Remco Zwetsloot, the attendees of the 4th East Asian Peace conference, the UCLA Conference on Preferences for Conflict, ISA 2015, ENCORE 2015, the Browne Center Speaker Series at the University of Pennsylvania, and especially Ken Schultz, Stein Tønnesson, Robert Trager, and Jessica Weiss. The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2020.
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Threats and force, by increasing expected costs, should reduce the target’s resolve. However, they often seem to increase resolve. We label this phenomenon provocation. We review instances of apparent provocation in interstate relations and offer a theory based on the logic of reputation and honor. We also consider alternative explanations: confounding or mis-imputation of resolve; revelation of information, character, or capabilities; or generalized sunk cost reasoning. Using survey experiments, we systematically evaluate whether provocation exists and what may account for it. We employ design-based causal inference techniques—a hypothetical natural experiment, a placebo treatment, and ruling out mediators—to evaluate our key hypotheses. We find strong evidence of provocation and suggestive evidence that it arises from considerations of honor, vengeance, and reputation. Our experimental design minimizes the risk that this result arises from our alternative explanations.
AB - Threats and force, by increasing expected costs, should reduce the target’s resolve. However, they often seem to increase resolve. We label this phenomenon provocation. We review instances of apparent provocation in interstate relations and offer a theory based on the logic of reputation and honor. We also consider alternative explanations: confounding or mis-imputation of resolve; revelation of information, character, or capabilities; or generalized sunk cost reasoning. Using survey experiments, we systematically evaluate whether provocation exists and what may account for it. We employ design-based causal inference techniques—a hypothetical natural experiment, a placebo treatment, and ruling out mediators—to evaluate our key hypotheses. We find strong evidence of provocation and suggestive evidence that it arises from considerations of honor, vengeance, and reputation. Our experimental design minimizes the risk that this result arises from our alternative explanations.
KW - international security
KW - interstate conflict
KW - militarized interstate disputes
KW - use of force
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091726021&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85091726021&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0022002720957078
DO - 10.1177/0022002720957078
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85091726021
SN - 0022-0027
VL - 65
SP - 372
EP - 402
JO - Journal of Conflict Resolution
JF - Journal of Conflict Resolution
IS - 2-3
ER -