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 Mintz, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Decision to Attack Iraq

A Noncompensatory Theory of Decision Making

Texas A&M University

This article attempts to explain the decision to use force against Iraq using a noncompensatory theory of decision making. Rather than choosing an alternative that maximizes utility on the basis of a holistic comparison process as suggested by the expected utility model, or selecting an alternative that "satisfices" a certain criterion as predicted by the cybernetic model, the noncompensatory theory suggests that decisions on the use of force are often made based on the rejection of undesirable alternatives on the basis of one, or at most a few, criteria.

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 37, No. 4, 595-618 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002793037004001


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. W. Keller and Y. E. Yang Leadership Style, Decision Context, and the Poliheuristic Theory of Decision Making: An Experimental Analysis Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2008; 52(5): 687 - 712. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Mintz How Do Leaders Make Decisions?: A Poliheuristic Perspective Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 3 - 13. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. Goertz Constraints, Compromises, and Decision Making Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 14 - 37. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Dacey and L. J. Carlson Traditional Decision Analysis and the Poliheuristic Theory of Foreign Policy Decision Making Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 38 - 55. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. DeRouen Jr. and C. Sprecher Initial Crisis Reaction and Poliheuristic Theory Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 56 - 68. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. J. Christensen and S. B. Redd Bureaucrats Versus the Ballot Box in Foreign Policy Decision Making: An Experimental Analysis of the Bureaucratic Politics Model and the Poliheuristic Theory Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 69 - 90. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Mintz Foreign Policy Decision Making in Familiar and Unfamiliar Settings: An Experimental Study of High-Ranking Military Officers Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 91 - 104. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. B. REDD The Influence of Advisers on Foreign Policy Decision Making: An Experimental Study Journal of Conflict Resolution, June 1, 2002; 46(3): 335 - 364. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Astorino-Courtois and B. Trusty Degrees of Difficulty: The Effect of Israeli Policy Shifts on Syrian Peace Decisions Journal of Conflict Resolution, June 1, 2000; 44(3): 359 - 377. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. V. Simon and H. Starr Extraction, Allocation, and the Rise and Decline of States: A Simulation Analysis of Two-Level Security Management Journal of Conflict Resolution, June 1, 1996; 40(2): 272 - 297. [Abstract]

				K. H. Wang Presidential Responses to Foreign Policy Crises: Rational Choice and Domestic Politics Journal of Conflict Resolution, March 1, 1996; 40(1): 68 - 97. [Abstract]

				K. R. DeRouen Jr. The Indirect Link:: Politics, the Economy, and the Use of Force Journal of Conflict Resolution, December 1, 1995; 39(4): 671 - 695. [Abstract]

				A. Mintz The `Noncompensatory Principle' of Coalition Formation Journal of Theoretical Politics, July 1, 1995; 7(3): 335 - 349. [Abstract]