Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Conflict Resolution
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koopman, C.
Right arrow Articles by Jervis, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Theory-Driven versus Data-Driven Assessment in a Crisis

A Survey of International Security Readers

Cheryl Koopman

Jack Snyder

Robert Jervis

Columbia University

A survey examined theory-driven versus data-driven assessments in a crisis. Respondents were 604 subscribers to International Security who completed a mailed questionnaire. The questionnaire contained alternative versiosn of a hypothetical crisis scenario and elicited assessments of threat, deterrence contingencies, and policy responses. An earlier section of the questionnaire surveyed general beliefs about Soviet-U.S. relations and military strategy, permitting examination of the relationships of respondents' general beliefs to their assessments. Alternative versions of the hypothetical crisis differed in information describing the crisis, permitting examination of the influence of specific data on assessments. Four kinds of information were varied: Soviet motives, the balance of interests, the local conventional military balance, and the nuclear balance. Respondents were substantially more theory-driven than data-driven in assessing the hypothetical crisis. Assessments were particularly associated with beliefs about Soviet motives and the necessity of displaying resolve to deter Soviet aggression.

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 34, No. 4, 694-722 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002790034004006
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
S. K. Murray and J. Meyers
Do People Need Foreign Enemies?: American Leaders' Beliefs after the Soviet Demise
Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 1999; 43(5): 555 - 569.
[Abstract] [PDF]