Empirical Knowledge on World Politics: A Summary of Quantitative Research, 1970-1991

By Brian H. Gibbs; J. David Singer | Go to book overview
Save to active project

given in text. The distance between an intervener and a target is measured along a 5-point scale: (1) 0-500 miles, (2) 501-1500 miles, (3) 1501-3000 miles, (4) 3001-5000 miles and (5) greater than 5000 miles. Dichotomous measures of the relative power of the intervener ("large" if 1 or 2; "small" otherwise) and affect employed.

Data Analysis: chi-squares, gamma statistics, frequency tables and tree diagrams.

Finding: Fifty two percent of the 141 interventions identified between 1948 and 1967 were made with the goal of changing the policy of the target state; forty eight percent to quell a domestic dispute. Fifty percent of the interventions were classified as "hostile"; 43 % as "friendly". Interventions were much more likely to be "friendly" if the goal was to quell a domestic dispute. They were much more likely to be "friendly" if the goal was to change a target's policies or internal conditions [Table 2]. There is a strong positive and significant correlation (gamma = +.65) between the "size" of an intervener and the geographic distance between it and the target of its interventions [Table 4]. This finding is generally consistent when controls were made for the size of the initiator relative to the target [Table 6]. "Large" states are more prone (76 % of the cases) to intervene on behalf of a friendly state than a hostile one, and are equally likely to intervene with the goal of quelling a domestic dispute or changing a target's policies. "Middle" and "small" states are much more prone (64 % of the cases) to intervene in a hostile state than a friendly one, and are equally as likely to intervene with the goal of quelling a domestic dispute as changing a state's policies [Table 5].


No. 182
"On the Use of a Quasi-Experimental Design in the Study of International Organization and War", Alan Pelowski, Journal of Peace Research, 8(3-4), 1971, 279-287.

Query: Were the number of states in defensive alliances, the number of new IGO and NGOs formed, and the volume of world trade during the periods after each of the World Wars higher than during the periods before them?

Sparial-Temporal Domain: structure of the international system 1895-1964.


Variables:
Outcomes: (1) dollar value of world trade (TRADE), (2) percentage of all
nations in defensive alliances (NATPER), (3) net number of new
IGOs formed ( IGONEW), (4) net number of new
NGOS formed
(NGONEW).

-283-

Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this page

Cited page

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Empirical Knowledge on World Politics: A Summary of Quantitative Research, 1970-1991
Table of contents

Table of contents

Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen
/ 458

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?