Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:33:02.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hawkish Biases and Group Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2022

Joshua D. Kertzer Open the ORCID record for Joshua D. Kertzer [Opens in a new window] ,
Marcus Holmes Open the ORCID record for Marcus Holmes [Opens in a new window] ,
Brad L. LeVeck Open the ORCID record for Brad L. LeVeck [Opens in a new window]  and
Carly Wayne Open the ORCID record for Carly Wayne [Opens in a new window]
Get access

Abstract

How do cognitive biases relevant to foreign policy decision making aggregate in groups? Many tendencies identified in the behavioral decision-making literature—such as reactive devaluation, the intentionality bias, and risk seeking in the domain of losses—have been linked to hawkishness in foreign policy choices, potentially increasing the risk of conflict, but how these “hawkish biases” operate in the small-group contexts in which foreign policy decisions are often made is unknown. We field three large-scale group experiments to test how these biases aggregate in groups. We find that groups are just as susceptible as individuals to these canonical biases, with neither hierarchical nor horizontal group decision-making structures significantly attenuating the magnitude of bias. Moreover, diverse groups perform similarly to more homogeneous ones, exhibiting similar degrees of bias and marginally increased risk of dissension. These results suggest that at least with these types of biases, the “aggregation problem” may be less problematic for psychological theories in international relations than some critics have argued. This has important implications for understanding foreign policy decision making, the role of group processes, and the behavioral revolution in international relations.

Keywords

Political psychologyforeign policy decision makingaggregation problemgroup processescognitive biases
Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , Summer 2022 , pp. 513 - 548
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The IO Foundation.

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

Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, and Pouliot, Vincent. 2014. Power in Practice: Negotiating the International Intervention in Libya. European Journal of International Relations 20 (4):889–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Graham. 1971. Essence of Decision. Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Antheunis, Marjolijn L., Valkenburg, Patti M., and Peter, Jochen. 2007. Computer-Mediated Communication and Interpersonal Attraction: An Experimental Test of Two Explanatory Hypotheses. Cyberpsychology and Behavior 10 (6):831–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arrow, Kenneth J. 1950. A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare. Journal of Political Economy 58 (4):328–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asch, Solomon E. 1951. Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments. In Groups, Leadership and Men: Research in Human Relations, edited by Guetzkow, Harold, 177–90. Carnegie PressGoogle Scholar
Ashmore, Richard D., Bird, David, Del Boca, Frances K., and Vanderet, Robert C.. 1979. An Experimental Investigation of the Double Standard in the Perception of International Affairs. Political Behavior 1 (2): 123–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausderan, Jacob Thomas. 2013. International Conflict and the Strategic Selection of Foreign Policy Advisors. PhD diss., Florida State University.Google Scholar
Austen-Smith, David, and Banks, Jeffrey S.. 1996. Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem. American Political Science Review 90 (1):34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badie, Dina. 2010. Groupthink, Iraq, and the War on Terror: Explaining US Policy Shift Toward Iraq. Foreign Policy Analysis 6 (4):277–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baekgaard, Martin, Christensen, Julian, Dahlmann, Casper Mondrup, Mathiasen, Asbjørn, and Petersen, Niels Bjørn Grund. 2019. The Role of Evidence in Politics: Motivated Reasoning and Persuasion Among Politicians. British Journal of Political Science 49 (3):1117–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdahl, Andrew, Torney, Colin J., Ioannou, Christos C., Faria, Jolyon J., and Couzin, Iain D.. 2013. Emergent Sensing of Complex Environments by Mobile Animal Groups. Science 339 (6119):574–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernstein, Ethan, Shore, Jesse, and Lazer, David. 2018. How Intermittent Breaks in Interaction Improve Collective Intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (35):8734–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brehm, Sharon S., and Brehm, Jack W.. 2013. Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and Control. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Brooks, Sarah M., Cunha, Raphael, and Mosley, Layna. 2015. Categories, Creditworthiness, and Contagion: How Investors’ Shortcuts Affect Sovereign Debt Markets. International Studies Quarterly 59 (3):587–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brutger, Ryan. 2021. The Power of Compromise: Proposal Power, Partisanship, and Public Support in International Bargaining. World Politics 73 (1):128–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brutger, Ryan, and Kertzer, Joshua D.. 2018. A Dispositional Theory of Reputation Costs. International Organization 72 (3):693–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, Jonathan, Holmes, Marcus, and Traven, David. 2021. Intentions from Consequences: How Moral Judgments Shape Citizen Perceptions of Wartime Conduct. Journal of Experimental Political Science 8 (2):203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, James W., and McDermott, Rose. 2021. The Past, Present, and Future of Behavioral IR. International Organization 75 (1):147–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DellaVigna, Stefano. 2009. Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field. Journal of Economic Literature 47 (2):315–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, Dennis J., Clayton, Laura D., Dunford, Benjamin B., Seying, Rasmy, and Pryce, Jennifer. 2001. Jury Decision Making: Forty-five Years of Empirical Research on Deliberating Groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 7 (3):622–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esser, James K. 1998. Alive and Well After Twenty-five Years: A Review of Groupthink Research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 73 (2–3):116–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etheredge, Lloyd S. 1978. Personality Effects on American Foreign Policy, 1898–1968: A Test of Interpersonal Generalization Theory. American Political Science Review 72 (2):434–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, Alexander L. 1969. The “Operational Code”: A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision Making. International Studies Quarterly 13 (2):190–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, Alexander L. 1972. The Case for Multiple Advocacy in Making Foreign Policy. American Political Science Review 66 (3):751–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd, and Gaissmaier, Wolfgang. 2011. Heuristic Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology 62:451–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gildea, Ross James. 2020. Psychology and Aggregation in International Relations. European Journal of International Relations 26 (S1):166–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenstein, Fred I. 1969. Personality and Politics: Problems of Evidence, Inference, and Conceptualization. Markham.Google Scholar
Grynaviski, Eric. 2014. Constructive Illusions: Misperceiving the Origins of International Cooperation. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., Haggard, Stephan, Lake, David A., and Victor, David G.. 2017. The Behavioral Revolution and International Relations. International Organization 71 (S1):S1–S31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halfhill, Terry, Sundstrom, Eric, Lahner, Jessica, Calderone, Wilma, and Nielsen, Tjai M.. 2005. Group Personality Composition and Group Effectiveness: An Integrative Review of Empirical Research. Small Group Research 36 (1):83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harden, John P. 2021. All the World's a Stage: US Presidential Narcissism and International Conflict. International Studies Quarterly 65 (3):825–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, Paul ’t, Stern, Eric, and Sundelius, Bengt. 1997. Beyond Groupthink: Political Group Dynamics and Foreign Policy-Making. University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermann, Margaret G. 1980. Explaining Foreign Policy Behavior Using the Personal Characteristics of Political Leaders. International Studies Quarterly 24 (1):7–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermann, Margaret G. 2001. How Decision Units Shape Foreign Policy: A Theoretical Framework. International Studies Review 3 (2):47–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermann, Margaret G., and Preston, Thomas. 1994. Presidents, Advisers, and Foreign Policy: The Effect of Leadership Style on Executive Arrangements. Political Psychology 15 (1):75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Marcus. 2018. Face-to-Face Diplomacy: Social Neuroscience and International Relations. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Michael, Stewart, Brandon M., Tingley, Dustin, Bishop, Michael, Samotin, Laura Resnick, Roberts, Margaret, Chang, Welton, Mellers, Barbara, and Tetlock, Philip. 2019. What Makes Foreign Policy Teams Tick: Explaining Variation in Group Performance at Geopolitical Forecasting. Journal of Politics 81 (4):1388–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Michael C., and Fuhrmann, Matthew. 2018. Studying Leaders and Military Conflict: Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda. Journal of Conflict Resolution 62 (10):2072–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovland, Carl I., and Weiss, Walter. 1951. The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly 15 (4):635–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, Irving L. 1972. Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Dominic D.P. 2015. Survival of the Disciplines: Is International Relations Fit for the New Millennium? Millennium 43 (2):749–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Dominic D.P. 2020. Strategic Instincts: The Adaptive Advantages of Cognitive Biases in International Politics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Richard Tanner. 1974. Managing the White House: An Intimate study of the Presidency. Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Jordan, Amos A., Taylor, William J. Jr., Meese, Michael J., and Nielsen, Suzanne C.. 2009. American National Security. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Kaarbo, Juliet. 1998. Power Politics in Foreign Policy: The Influence of Bureaucratic Minorities. European Journal of International Relations 4 (1):67–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Renshon, Jonathan. 2007. Why Hawks Win. Foreign Policy 158:34–38.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Renshon, Jonathan. 2009. Hawkish Biases. In American Foreign Policy and the Politics of Fear: Threat Inflation Since 9/11, edited by Trevor Thrall, A. and Cramer, Jane K., 79–96. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica 47 (2):263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 2017. Conflict Resolution: A Cognitive Perspective. In Preference, Belief, and Similarity: Selected Writings of Amos Tversky, edited by Shafir, Eldar, 729–46. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kameda, Tatsuya, and Davis, James H.. 1990. The Function of the Reference Point in Individual and Group Risk Decision Making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 46 (1):55–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, Norbert L., MacCoun, Robert J., and Kramer, Geoffrey P.. 1996. Bias in Judgment: Comparing Individuals and Groups. Psychological Review 103 (4):687–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, Norbert, and Tindale, Scott. 2004. Group Performance and Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology 55:623–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kertzer, Joshua D. 2016. Resolve in International Politics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kertzer, Joshua D. 2021. Re-assessing Elite Public Gaps in Political Behavior. American Journal of Political Science (online first).Google Scholar
Kertzer, Joshua D., Rathbun, Brian C., and Rathbun, Nina Srinivasan. 2020. The Price of Peace: Motivated Reasoning and Costly Signaling in International Relations. International Organization 74 (1):95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kertzer, Joshua D., and Renshon, Jonathan. 2022. Experiments and Surveys on Political Elites. Annual Review of Political Science 25:1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kertzer, Joshua D., and Tingley, Dustin. 2018. Political Psychology in International Relations: Beyond the Paradigms. Annual Review of Political Science 21:319–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knobe, Joshua. 2003. Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language. Analysis 63 (3):190–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, David A., and Powell, Robert, eds. 1999. Strategic Choice and International Relations. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau-Wells, Marika. 2018. Dealing with Danger: Threat Perception and Policy Preferences. PhD diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Larrick, Richard P. 2016. The Social Context of Decisions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 3 (1):441–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, Deborah Welch. 1985. Origins of Containment: A Psychological Explanation. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, Deborah Welch. 1994. The Role of Belief Systems and Schemas in Foreign Policy Decision-Making. Political Psychology 15 (1):17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leites, Nathan. 1951. The Operational Code of the Politburo. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
LeVeck, Brad L., Alex Hughes, D., Fowler, James H., Hafner-Burton, Emilie, and Victor, David G.. 2014. The Role of Self-Interest in Elite Bargaining. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (52):18536–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LeVeck, Brad L., and Narang, Neil. 2017. The Democratic Peace and the Wisdom of Crowds. International Studies Quarterly 61 (4):867–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Jack S. 1996. Loss Aversion, Framing, and Bargaining: The Implications of Prospect Theory for International Conflict. International Political Science Review 17 (2):179–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Jack S. 1997. Prospect Theory, Rational Choice, and International Relations. International Studies Quarterly 41 (1):87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Jack S. 2013. Psychology and Foreign Policy Decision-Making. In Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, 2nd ed., edited by Huddy, Leonie, Sears, David O., and Levy, Jack S., 301–33. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lewin, Kurt, Lippitt, Ronald, and White, Ralph K.. 1939. Patterns of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created “Social Climates.” Journal of Social Psychology 10 (2):269–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malhotra, Neil, and Kuo, Alexander G.. 2008. Attributing Blame: The Public's Response to Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Politics 70 (1):120–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maoz, Ifat, Ward, Andrew, Katz, Michael, and Ross, Lee. 2002. Reactive Devaluation of an “Israeli” vs. “Palestinian” Peace Proposal. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46 (4):515–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattes, Michaela, and Weeks, Jessica L.P.. 2019. Hawks, Doves and Peace: An Experimental Approach. American Journal of Political Science 63 (1):53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCourt, David M. 2016. Practice Theory and Relationalism as the New Constructivism. International Studies Quarterly 60 (3):475–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Rose. 1998. Risk-Taking in International Politics: Prospect Theory in American Foreign Policy. University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Rose. 2004. Prospect Theory in Political Science: Gains and Losses from the First Decade. Political Psychology 25 (2):289–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, Kathleen M. 1991. Managing Blame: An Experimental Test of the Effects of Political Accounts. American Political Science Review 85 (4):1133–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercer, Jonathan. 1995. Anarchy and Identity. International Organization 49 (2):229–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintz, Alex. 2007. Why Behavioral IR? International Studies Review 9 (1):157–62.Google Scholar
Mintz, Alex, Redd, Steven B., and Vedlitz, Arnold. 2006. Can We Generalize from Student Experiments to the Real World in Political Science, Military Affairs, and International Relations? Journal of Conflict Resolution 50 (5):757–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintz, Alex, Valentino, Nicholas, and Wayne, Carly. 2021. Beyond Rationality: Behavioral Political Science in the Twenty-first Century. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintz, Alex, and Wayne, Carly. 2016. The Polythink Syndrome: US Foreign Policy Decisions on 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and ISIS. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitzen, Jenniger, and Schweller, Randall L.. 2011. Knowing the Unknown Unknowns: Misplaced Certainty and the Onset of War. Security Studies 20 (1):2–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molnar, Andras. 2019. SMARTRIQS: A Simple Method Allowing Real-Time Respondent Interaction in Qualtrics Surveys. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance 22:161–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moynihan, Lisa M., and Peterson, Randall S.. 2001. A Contingent Configuration Approach to Understanding the Role of Personality in Organizational Groups. Research in Organizational Behavior 23:327–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, David G., and Lamm, Helmut. 1976. The Group Polarization Phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin 83 (4):602–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Scott E. 2007. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Page, Scott E. 2019. The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in the Knowledge Economy. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pechenkina, Anna O., and Argo, Nichole. 2020. How Do Civilians Assign Blame and Praise Amidst Civil Conflict? Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression 12 (4):243–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulsen, Lauge N. Skovgaard, and Aisbett, Emma. 2013. When the Claim Hits: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Bounded Rational Learning. World Politics 65 (2):273–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, Robert. 2017. Research Bets and Behavioral IR. International Organization 71 (S1):S265–S277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powers, Kathleen E. 2022. Nationalisms in International Politics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Preston, Thomas. 2001. The President and His Inner Circle: Leadership Style and the Advisory Process in Foreign Policy Making. Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathbun, Brian C. 2014. Diplomacy's Value: Creating Security in 1920s Europe and the Contemporary Middle East. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rathbun, Brian C., Kertzer, Joshua D., Reifler, Jason, Goren, Paul, and Scotto, Thomas J.. 2016. Taking Foreign Policy Personally: Personal Values and Foreign Policy Attitudes. International Studies Quarterly 60 (1):124–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratkovic, Marc, and Tingley, Dustin. 2017. Sparse Estimation and Uncertainty with Application to Subgroup Analysis. Political Analysis 25 (1):1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redd, Steven B. 2002. The Influence of Advisers on Foreign Policy Decision Making: An Experimental Study. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46 (3):335–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renshon, Jonathan. 2017. Fighting for Status: Hierarchy and Conflict in World Politics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ringmar, Erik. 2014. The Search for Dialogue as a Hindrance to Understanding: Practices as Inter-paradigmatic Research Program. International Theory 6 (1):1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberson, Quinetta M. 2019. Diversity in the Workplace: A Review, Synthesis, and Future Research Agenda. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 6 (1):69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Lee. 1993. Reactive Devaluation in Negotiation and Conflict Resolution. Stanford Center on International Conflict and Negotiation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Ross, Lee, and Ward, Andrew. 1995. Psychological Barriers to Dispute Resolution. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 27, edited by Zanna, M.P., 255–304. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Saunders, Elizabeth N. 2011. Leaders at War: How Presidents Shape Military Interventions. Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, Elizabeth N. 2017. No Substitute for Experience: Presidents, Advisers, and Information in Group Decision Making. International Organization 71 (S1):S219–S247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Mark, and Crichlow, Scott. 2010. Groupthink Versus High-Quality Decision Making in International Relations. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Schneeweiss, Christoph. 2012. Distributed Decision Making. Springer Science and Business Media.Google Scholar
Sheffer, Lior, Loewen, Peter John, Soroka, Stuart, Walgrave, Stefaan, and Sheafer, Tamir. 2018. Nonrepresentative Representatives: An Experimental Study of the Decision Making of Elected Politicians. American Political Science Review 112 (2):302–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherif, Muzafer. 1935. A Study of Some Social Factors in Perception. Archives of Psychology: 5–60.Google Scholar
Staples, D., and Zhao, Lina. 2006. The Effects of Cultural Diversity in Virtual Teams Versus Face-to-Face Teams. Group Decision and Negotiation 15 (July):389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Janice Gross. 1988. Building Politics into Psychology: The Misperception of Threat. Political Psychology 9 (2):245–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Janice Gross. 2017. The Micro-Foundations of International Relations Theory: Psychology and Behavioral Economics. International Organization 71 (S1):S249–S263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoner, James Arthur Finch. 1961. A Comparison of Individual and Group Decisions Involving Risk. Master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Strodtbeck, Fred L., James, Rita M., and Hawkins, Charles. 1957. Social Status in Jury Deliberations. American Sociological Review 22 (6):713–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., and Hastie, Reid 2014. Making Dumb Groups Smarter. Harvard Business Review 92 (12):90–98.Google Scholar
Surowiecki, James. 2005. The Wisdom of Crowds. Anchor.Google Scholar
Tidwell, Lisa Collins, and Walther, Joseph B.. 2006. Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time. Human Communication Research 28 (3):317–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traven, David. 2021. Law and Sentiment in International Politics: Ethics, Emotions, and the Evolution of the Laws of War. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vertzberger, Yaacov Y.I. 1998. Risk Taking and Decisionmaking: Foreign Military Interventions. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voss, James F., and Post, Timothy A.. 1988. On the Solving of Ill-structured Problems. In The Nature of Expertise, edited by Chi, Michelene H., Glaser, Robert, and Farr, Marshall J., 261–85. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Walther, Joseph B. 1992. Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction: A Relational Perspective. Communication Research 19 (1):52–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Weeks, Jessica L.P. 2014. Dictators at War and Peace. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 2004. The State as Person in International Theory. Review of International Studies 30 (2):289–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, Nicholas J., and Holmes, Marcus. 2021. The Strength of Weak Bonds: Substituting Bodily Co-presence in Diplomatic Social Bonding. European Journal of International Relations 27 (3):730–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whyte, Glen. 1989. Groupthink Reconsidered. Academy of Management Review 14 (1):40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yarhi-Milo, Keren. 2018. Who Fights for Reputation in International Politics? Leaders, Resolve, and the Use of Force. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Kertzer et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/N8GBLF
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Kertzer et al. supplementary material

Kertzer et al. supplementary material

Download Kertzer et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 427.7 KB