IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v55y2001i02p497-507_44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proper Nouns and Methodological Propriety: Pooling Dyads in International Relations Data

Author

Listed:
  • King, Gary

Abstract

This article provides a concluding comment on the symposium focusing on Donald P. Green, Soo Yeon Kim, and David H. Yoon's “Dirty Pool.” Although the perspectives offered by the three sets of authors participating in the symposium differ starkly, my view (supported by conversations with the authors and additional analyses and debates among all involved) is that there is now a large area of underlying agreement. I describe this agreement by first illuminating Green, Kim, and Yoon's fundamental contribution in understanding and high lighting the role of heterogeneity in dyad-level studies of international conflict. I then describe the limitations in their revised analytic strategy, including those raised by John R. Oneal and Bruce Russett and by Nathaniel Beck and Jonathan N. Katz. I also offer suggestions for future researchers, methodologists, and data collectors.

Suggested Citation

  • King, Gary, 2001. "Proper Nouns and Methodological Propriety: Pooling Dyads in International Relations Data," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 497-507, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:55:y:2001:i:02:p:497-507_44
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818301441312/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John R. Oneal & Bruce Russett, 2005. "Rule of Three, Let It Be? When More Really Is Better," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(4), pages 293-310, September.
    2. Serhan Cevik & João Tovar Jalles, 2022. "An Apocalypse Foretold: Climate Shocks and Sovereign Defaults," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 89-108, February.
    3. Larry G Epstein & Yoram Halevy, 2019. "Ambiguous Correlation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(2), pages 668-693.
    4. Charles R. Boehmer & Bernadette M.E. Jungblut & Richard J. Stoll, 2011. "Tradeoffs in Trade Data," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(2), pages 145-167, April.
    5. João Tovar Jalles & Luiz de Mello, 2019. "Cross‐country evidence on the determinants of inclusive growth episodes," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 1818-1839, November.
    6. Jun Xiang, 2017. "Dyadic Effects, Relevance, and the Empirical Assessment of the Kantian Peace," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 248-271, March.
    7. Jacob Ausderan, 2018. "Reassessing the democratic advantage in interstate wars using k-adic datasets," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(5), pages 451-473, September.
    8. Brian Lai, 2007. "“Draining the Swamp†: An Empirical Examination of the Production of International Terrorism, 1968—1998," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(4), pages 297-310, September.
    9. Luo, Shali & Miller, J. Isaac, 2014. "On the spatial correlation of international conflict initiation and other binary and dyadic dependent variables," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 107-118.
    10. Epstein, Larry G. & Halevy, Yoram, 2014. "No Two Experiments are Identical," Microeconomics.ca working papers yoram_halevy-2014-9, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 15 Feb 2017.
    11. Kyungwon Suh, 2023. "Does the Bomb Really Embolden? Revisiting the Statistical Evidence for the Nuclear Emboldenment Thesis," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(6), pages 1067-1094, July.
    12. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2008. "Power or Plenty," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(2), pages 213-242, April.
    13. Katharina Holzinger, 2006. "Methodological Pitfalls of Convergence Analysis," European Union Politics, , vol. 7(2), pages 271-287, June.
    14. Patrick E. Shea & Charlotte Christian, 2017. "The Impact of Women Legislators on Humanitarian Military Interventions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(10), pages 2043-2073, November.
    15. Sanjeev Gupta & João Tovar Jalles, 2020. "On the Political Economy Determinants of Tax Reforms: Evidence from Developing Countries," Working Papers REM 2020/0151, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    16. James Lee Ray, 2003. "Explaining Interstate Conflict and War: What Should Be Controlled for?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 20(2), pages 1-31, September.
    17. Fabrizio Gilardi, 2010. "Who Learns from What in Policy Diffusion Processes?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 650-666, July.
    18. David B. Carter & Paul Poast, 2017. "Why Do States Build Walls? Political Economy, Security, and Border Stability," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(2), pages 239-270, February.
    19. Julia Gray & Jonathan Slapin, 2012. "How effective are preferential trade agreements? Ask the experts," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 309-333, September.
    20. Gudrun Østby, 2013. "Inequality and political violence: A review of the literature," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 16(2), pages 206-231, June.
    21. Nam Kyu Kim, 2018. "Are Military Regimes Really Belligerent?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(6), pages 1151-1178, July.

    More about this item

    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:cup:intorg:v:55:y:2001:i:02:p:497-507_44. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    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.