Comparing Two Studies of Crisis Bargaining

Russell J. Leng and Stephen G. Walker
Additional contact information
Russell J. Leng: Department of Political Science, Middlebury College
Stephen G. Walker: Department of Political Science, Arizona State University

Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1982, vol. 26, issue 4, 571-591

Abstract: This article employs events data to compare two studies of crisis bargaining: a qualitative study by Snyder and Diesing based on comparative case studies, and a quantitative study by Leng and Wheeler. Three propositions are tested: (1) both disputants will adopt increasingly coercive bargaining strategies during the confrontation phase of the crisis; (2) the structure of the crisis will determine the strategies of each side once the crisis turning point is reached; (3) to maximize success, each disputant should follow a strategy consistent with the crisis structure. The authors find strong support for the first proposition, little support for the second, and modest support for the third. Interesting parallels between Snyder and Diesing's study and Leng and Wheeler's regarding the overall effectiveness of reciprocating bargaining strategies emerge.

Date: 1982
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002782026004001 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:jocore:v:26:y:1982:i:4:p:571-591

DOI: 10.1177/0022002782026004001

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Conflict Resolution from Peace Science Society (International)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().