Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Peace Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leeds, B. A.
Right arrow Articles by Davis, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Beneath the Surface: Regime Type and International Interaction, 1953-78

Brett Ashley Leeds

Department of Political Science, Florida State University

David R. Davis

Department of Political Science, Emory University

The empirical finding that democracies do not fight each other has long suggested that regime type influences international behavior. In the research reported here, we demonstrate that the democratic peace is only the most visible manifestation of the impact of domestic political structure on international relations. We consider the complete range of cooperative and conflictual interaction of each state in the international system with every dyadic partner in its politically relevant international environment between 1953 and 1978. We demonstrate a strong and consistent relationship between regime type and foreign policy behavior, both at the monadic and the dyadic level. States with more democratic characteristics tend to behave more cooperatively and less conflictually in the international system; these tendencies intensify when democratic states interact with other democracies. Meanwhile, non-democracies tend to treat democracies with more conflictual and less cooperative behavior. The influence of the internal institutional structures of states on their external behavior extends well beyond decisions to go to war. The empirical findings reported herein suggest that future research will benefit from increased attention to the relationships among state structure, leaders' incentives, foreign policy behavior, and international outcomes.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 36, No. 1, 5-21 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343399036001001


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Conflict Management and Peace ScienceHome page
S. L. Quackenbush and M. Rudy
Evaluating the Monadic Democratic Peace
Conflict Management and Peace Science, July 1, 2009; 26(3): 268 - 285.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
M. Fuhrmann
Taking a Walk on the Supply Side: The Determinants of Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2009; 53(2): 181 - 208.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Conflict Management and Peace ScienceHome page
M. J.C. Crescenzi, A. J. Enterline, and S. B. Long
Bringing Cooperation Back In: A Dynamic Model of Interstate Interaction
Conflict Management and Peace Science, July 1, 2008; 25(3): 264 - 280.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
H. E. Hansen, S. McLaughlin Mitchell, and S. C. Nemeth
IO Mediation of Interstate Conflicts: Moving Beyond the Global versus Regional Dichotomy
Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2008; 52(2): 295 - 325.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Conflict Management and Peace ScienceHome page
C. R. Boehmer
A Reassessment of Democratic Pacifism at the Monadic Level of Analysis
Conflict Management and Peace Science, February 1, 2008; 25(1): 81 - 94.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
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]


Home page
The Journal of Environment DevelopmentHome page
A. Makim
Resources for Security and Stability? The Politics of Regional Cooperation on the Mekong, 1957-2001
The Journal of Environment Development, March 1, 2002; 11(1): 5 - 52.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
K. Rasler and W. R. Thompson
Rivalries and the Democratic Peace in the Major Power Subsystem
Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 2001; 38(6): 659 - 683.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
D. Lemke and W. Reed
The Relevance of Politically Relevant Dyads
Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2001; 45(1): 126 - 144.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
D. Reiter
Military Strategy and the Outbreak of International Conflict: Quantitative Empirical Tests, 1903-1992
Journal of Conflict Resolution, June 1, 1999; 43(3): 366 - 387.
[Abstract] [PDF]