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 Ray, J. L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Integrating Levels of Analysis in World Politics

`Levels of analysis' problems can involve issues regarding (1) the relative potency of different categories of explanatory factors, (2) the relationship between analyses focusing on different units of analysis or (3) the relationship between assumptions about individual social entities and hypotheses regarding interactions among those entities. An analysis of the manner in which economists have dealt with levels of analysis issues and recent developments in the field of international politics focusing on the relationship between regime types and international conflict can facilitate the integration of research efforts involving different levels of analysis. Advocates of `democratic peace' rely increasingly on an assumption that leaders of states place the highest priority on staying in power. This assumption offers a useful basis for the integration of domestic as well as international or environmental explanatory factors. Since this assumption and theoretical notions based on it imply that different types of states behave differently, however, it can also complicate the analysis of interactions among states. Directed dyadic level analyses, and analyses of more complex aggregates using directed dyads as building blocks, can produce data that are more germane to the evaluation of hypotheses regarding the impact of differences between states than aggregate level analyses that typically tend to obscure `who does what to whom'.

Key Words: democratic peace • directed dyads • interstate conflict • levels of analysis • regime type

Journal of Theoretical Politics, Vol. 13, No. 4, 355-388 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/0951692801013004002


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				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]

				K. L. Powers Dispute Initiation and Alliance Obligations in Regional Economic Institutions Journal of Peace Research, July 1, 2006; 43(4): 453 - 471. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Y. Gortzak, Y. Z. Haftel, and K. Sweeney Offense-Defense Theory: An Empirical Assessment Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2005; 49(1): 67 - 89. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. M. Mitchell and B. C. Prins Rivalry and Diversionary Uses of Force Journal of Conflict Resolution, December 1, 2004; 48(6): 937 - 961. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Lee Ray Does Interstate War Have A Future? Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 2002; 19(1): 53 - 80. [Abstract] [PDF]