Toward a Network Theory of Alliance Formation

Cranmer, Skyler J.; Desmarais, Bruce A.; Kirkland, Justin H.

doi:10.1080/03050629.2012.677741

Cited by 74 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… Recent examples include Cao (); Cranmer, Desmarais, and Kirkland (); Dorussen and Ward (); Hafner‐Burton et al. (); Kinne (); Maoz (). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dependent Diplomacy: Signaling, Strategy, and Prestige in the Diplomatic Network

Kinne

2013

Int Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diplomatic recognition is an essential tool of statecraft but remains largely unanalyzed by political scientists. Two recent trends in diplomatic practice raise notable puzzles: (i) use of diplomatic ties to signal (dis)approval of a regime or its policies, based largely on cues from diplomatic partners, and (ii) reliance on diplomatic missions as a means of securing prestige in the international system. I argue that both trends are the result of network influences. States face resource constraints and must choose diplomatic partners wisely, but they lack complete information about the risks and benefits of extending diplomatic recognition. To solve this informational dilemma, they condition recognition on the diplomatic activity of others. First, states send missions to countries that host missions from their own diplomatic partners, which increases the strength of diplomatic signals and reduces political risks. Second, states send missions to countries that host large numbers of missions in general (that is, “prestigious” countries), which increases their capacity for information gathering. In general, a state's decision to extend or retract diplomatic recognition depends heavily on the decisions of other states. Employing novel network methodologies, I show that these endogenous network influences are among the most consistent and substantively powerful determinants of diplomatic recognition.

show abstract

“… Recent examples include Cao (); Cranmer, Desmarais, and Kirkland (); Dorussen and Ward (); Hafner‐Burton et al. (); Kinne (); Maoz (). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dependent Diplomacy: Signaling, Strategy, and Prestige in the Diplomatic Network

Kinne

2013

Int Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other scholars, such as Cranmer et al (2012aCranmer et al ( , 2012bCranmer et al ( , 2014, Manger et al (2012), and Warren (2010), have applied models specifically designed for dynamic and longitudinal network analysis to study evolving international network structures.…”

Section: Social Network Analysis In International Relationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Predicting the trajectory of the evolving international cyber regime: Simulating the growth of a social network

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…And what of phenomena occurring in the larger neighborhood of the focal dyad (and possibly involving it)? In a study of international alliances, Cranmer et al (2012a) theorize that a dyadic alliance is more attractive to the prospective allies when that alliance is embedded within a dense clique of states that are all allied to each other. This is an application of the common network theory that triadic bonding reinforces dyadic trust.…”

Section: Assumption: Dyads Exist In Isolationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critique of Dyadic Design

Cranmer

Desmarais

2016

int stud q

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dyadic research designs concern data that comprises interactions among actors. Dyadic approaches unambiguously constitute the most frequent designs employed in the empirical study of international politics, but what do such designs cary with them in terms of theoretical claims and statistical problems? These two issues are closely intertwined. When testing hypotheses empirically, the statistical model must be a careful operationalization of the theory being tested. Given that the theoretical and statistical cannot be separated, we discuss dyadic research designs from these two perspectives; highlighting model misspecification, erroneous assumptions about independence of events, artificial levels of analysis, and the incoherent treatment of multilateral/multiparty events on the theoretical side and difficult-to-escape challenges to valid inference on the statistical side. * cranmer.12@osu.edu † bdesmarais@psu.edu 1 We should note that relational data are distinct from but potentially related to relational theory. For example, relational social theory -popularized in voluminous works by scholars such as Tilly (2003) and White (2008)takes a network oriented perspective on social relations. Relational data are necessary to test relational theories, but one need not have a relational (network) theory to analyze relational data.

show abstract

Toward a Network Theory of Alliance Formation

Cited by 74 publications

References 67 publications

Dependent Diplomacy: Signaling, Strategy, and Prestige in the Diplomatic Network

Dependent Diplomacy: Signaling, Strategy, and Prestige in the Diplomatic Network

Predicting the trajectory of the evolving international cyber regime: Simulating the growth of a social network

A Critique of Dyadic Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About