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 Eyerman, J. Articles by Hart, R. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

An Empirical Test of The Audience Cost Proposition

Democracy Speaks Louder than Words

Robert A. Hart, Jr.

Department of Political Science, The Florida State University

Fearon (1994a) concludes that democracies should be less likely to back down in crises and thus be able signal resolve more effectively than autocratic states. The authors evaluate this argument against the population of conflicts identified by the SHERFACS phase-disaggregated conflict management data set. Their findings indicate that domestic characteristics of democracies enable them to communicate intentions effectively. Between 1945 and 1984, conflicts between pairs of democratic states have been found to have fewer phases than those involving at least one autocratic state. This suggests that the information conveyed by the regime type of a state may help resolve the security dilemma by providing communication between democracies. This finding also supports an integration of existing explanations of the democratic peace.

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 40, No. 4, 597-616 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002796040004004


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S.-W. Choi and P. James Civil Military Structure, Political Communication, and the Democratic Peace Journal of Peace Research, January 1, 2008; 45(1): 37 - 53. [Abstract] [PDF]

				U. E. Daxecker Perilous Polities? An Assessment of the Democratization-Conflict Linkage European Journal of International Relations, December 1, 2007; 13(4): 527 - 553. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Filson and S. Werner Sensitivity to Costs of Fighting versus Sensitivity to Losing the Conflict: Implications for War Onset, Duration, and Outcomes Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2007; 51(5): 691 - 714. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. H. Allen Time Bombs: Estimating the Duration of Coercive Bombing Campaigns Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2007; 51(1): 112 - 133. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. A. Zinnes Constructing Political Logic: The Democratic Peace Puzzle Journal of Conflict Resolution, June 1, 2004; 48(3): 430 - 454. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. C. PRINS Institutional Instability and the Credibility of Audience Costs: Political Participation and Interstate Crisis Bargaining, 1816-1992 Journal of Peace Research, January 1, 2003; 40(1): 67 - 84. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. LYNCH Why Engage? China and the Logic of Communicative Engagement European Journal of International Relations, June 1, 2002; 8(2): 187 - 230. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. GUISINGER and A. SMITH Honest Threats: The Interaction of Reputation and Political Institutions in International Crises Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2002; 46(2): 175 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. A. Schultz Looking for Audience Costs Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2001; 45(1): 32 - 60. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V. Danilovic Conceptual and Selection Bias Issues in Deterrence Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2001; 45(1): 97 - 125. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. J. Partell Executive Constraints and Success in International Crises Political Research Quarterly, September 1, 1997; 50(3): 503 - 528. [Abstract] [PDF]