IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pepspp/v18y2012i1n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Surprising Result Encountered in Various Extensions of the Traditional Deterrence Game

Author

Listed:
  • Carlson Lisa J.

    (University of Idaho)

  • Dacey Raymond

    (University of Idaho)

Abstract

The purpose of this note is to present a surprising result regarding crisis initiation and termination. The decision problem treated here is distilled from an extension of the two-sided incomplete information version of the traditional deterrence game. We employ a two-stage analysis of the decision problem faced by the Challenger that formally links the onset of a crisis to the decision over whether to escalate the crisis should the Challenger face resistance from the Defender. The two-part result is as follows. A crisis is more likely to be initiated by a Challenger who will ultimately back down if Defender chooses to resist than by a Challenger of the same type who will choose to escalate if Defender chooses to resist. Contrariwise, a crisis is less likely to be initiated by a Challenger who will ultimately escalate if Defender chooses to resist than by a Challenger of the same type who will choose to back down if Defender chooses to resist.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlson Lisa J. & Dacey Raymond, 2012. "A Surprising Result Encountered in Various Extensions of the Traditional Deterrence Game," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 1-13, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:18:y:2012:i:1:n:6
    DOI: 10.1515/1554-8597.1264
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/1554-8597.1264
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/1554-8597.1264?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlson Lisa J & Dacey Raymond, 2010. "A Note on Second Order Probabilities in the Traditional Deterrence Game," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 153-162, January.
    2. Raul Caruso, 2008. "Reciprocity in the shadow of threat," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 55(1), pages 91-111, April.
    3. James D. Fearon, 1994. "Signaling Versus the Balance of Power and Interests," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(2), pages 236-269, June.
    4. Lisa J. Carlson & Raymond Dacey, 2009. "The assassin and the donor as third players in the traditional deterrence game," Economics of Peace and Security Journal, EPS Publishing, vol. 4(2), pages 15-22, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lisa J. Carlson & Raymond Dacey, 2014. "The use of fear and anger to alter crisis initiation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(2), pages 168-192, April.
    2. Clayton L. Thyne, 2006. "Cheap Signals with Costly Consequences," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(6), pages 937-961, December.
    3. Paul K. Huth, 1998. "Major Power Intervention in International Crises, 1918-1988," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(6), pages 744-770, December.
    4. Raul Caruso, 2009. "Crime and Sport Participation in Itay: Evidence from Panel Data Regional Analysis over the Period 1997-2003.\," Working Papers 0904, International Association of Sports Economists;North American Association of Sports Economists.
    5. Jesse C. Johnson & Brett Ashley Leeds & Ahra Wu, 2015. "Capability, Credibility, and Extended General Deterrence," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 309-336, March.
    6. Seok Joon Kim, 2022. "Quick on the Draw: American Negativity Bias and Costly Signals in International Relations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(2), pages 246-271, February.
    7. Dacey Raymond & Carlson Lisa J, 2011. "Aspects of Peace Economics," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(2), pages 1-8, January.
    8. Kyle Beardsley & Victor Asal, 2009. "Winning with the Bomb," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(2), pages 278-301, April.
    9. Renato Corbetta, 2015. "Between indifference and coercion: Third-party intervention techniques in ongoing disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 3-27, February.
    10. Brandon J Kinne, 2014. "Does third-party trade reduce conflict? Credible signaling versus opportunity costs," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(1), pages 28-48, February.
    11. Brian Lai, 2004. "The Effects of Different Types of Military Mobilization on the Outcome of International Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(2), pages 211-229, April.
    12. Chyanda Querido, 2007. "A Game Theoretic Approach of War," EcoMod2007 23900073, EcoMod.
    13. Serdar Ş. Güner, 2004. "Aegean Territorial Waters Conflict: An Evolutionary Narrative," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(4), pages 297-312, September.
    14. Marco Serena, 2019. "A Game-Free Microfoundation of Mutual Optimism," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, September.
    15. Raul Caruso, 2012. "Contest with cooperative behavior: a note," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(2), pages 1747-1754.
    16. Raul Caruso, 2009. "Spesa pubblica e criminalità organizzata in Italia: evidenza empirica su dati Panel nel periodo 1997-2003," Economia & lavoro, Carocci editore, issue 1, pages 1-73.
    17. Valentin L. Krustev & T. Clifton Morgan, 2011. "Ending Economic Coercion: Domestic Politics and International Bargaining," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(4), pages 351-376, September.
    18. Patrick M. Regan, 1996. "Conditions of Successful Third-Party Intervention in Intrastate Conflicts," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(2), pages 336-359, June.
    19. James Meernik, 1999. "Force and Influence in International Crises," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 17(1), pages 103-131, February.
    20. Neil Narang & Rupal N. Mehta, 2019. "The Unforeseen Consequences of Extended Deterrence: Moral Hazard in a Nuclear Client State," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 218-250, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Deterrence Game;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:18:y:2012:i:1:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.