This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Vuchinich, S. Articles by Teachman, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Influences on the Duration of Wars, Strikes, Riots, and Family Arguments

Oregon State University

Jay Teachman

University of Maryland

Utility theory has been frequently applied in the analyses of the outbreak of war. The present study extends the application of utility theory to conflict duration. The authors consider how the perceived utility of continuing conflict changes while conflicts are under way, and posit that conflicts end when the utility of continuing is less than the utility of surrender. Predictions developed from the theory are tested, using hazard models, on duration data from actual wars, strikes, riots, and family arguments. Consistent with utility theory, the likelihood of wars and strikes ending is found to decrease while they are under way, exhibiting a tendency for these conflicts to become entrenched. In sharp contrast to this, but consistent with utility theory, riots and family arguments are more likely to end the longer they last. Size of conflict and dispute issue are shown to effect duration in some circumstances. The results offer a way of explaining how conflicts between "rational" organizations become entrenched and resistant to resolution. Implications for efforts to reduce conflict duration are discussed.

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 37, No. 3, 544-568 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002793037003007


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. A. Stanley and J. P. Sawyer The Equifinality of War Termination: Multiple Paths to Ending War Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2009; 53(5): 651 - 676. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. S. Morey Conflict and the Duration of Peace in Enduring Internal Rivalries Conflict Management and Peace Science, September 1, 2009; 26(4): 331 - 345. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Mattes and T. C. Morgan When Do They Stop? Modeling the Termination of War Conflict Management and Peace Science, July 1, 2004; 21(3): 179 - 193. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. CHAN Explaining War Termination: a Boolean Analysis of Causes Journal of Peace Research, January 1, 2003; 40(1): 49 - 66. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. H. Clark Agreeing to Disagree: Domestic Institutional Congruence and U.S. Dispute Behavior Political Research Quarterly, June 1, 2000; 53(2): 375 - 400. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Werner Negotiating the Terms of Settlement: War Aims and Bargaining Leverage Journal of Conflict Resolution, June 1, 1998; 42(3): 321 - 343. [Abstract]

				C. Cioffi-Revilla and D. Lai War And Politics in Ancient China, 2700 B.C. to 722 B.C.: Measurement and Comparative Analysis Journal of Conflict Resolution, September 1, 1995; 39(3): 467 - 494. [Abstract]