Cumulation, Evaluation and the Research Process: Investigating the Diffusion of Conflict

Harvey Star and Randolph M. Siverson
Additional contact information
Harvey Star: Department of Government and International Studies, University of South Carolina
Randolph M. Siverson: Department of Political Science, University of California, Davis

Journal of Peace Research, 1998, vol. 35, issue 2, 231-237

Abstract: Broad analytic assessments of research areas can be invaluable for scholars because they can inform the ongoing feedback process between theory and research that is at the heart of scientific inquiry. Unfortunately, Simowitz's (1998) evaluation of diffusion analyses of conflict has several problematic characteristics that make it less useful to the research community than might otherwise be the case. The major difficulties we see in her article are: (1) the forced, idiosyncratic synthesis of the standard of scientific progress and its consequent application; (2) the excessively unilinear conception of scientific process (and progress); (3) the inaccurate understanding of some of the research on war diffusion; (4) the failure to include in the evaluation several studies and results that might have led to different conclusions; and (5) the absence of any constructive suggestion of where research on the topic of war and conflict diffusion might profitably be directed.

Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://jpr.sagepub.com/content/35/2/231.abstract (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:joupea:v:35:y:1998:i:2:p:231-237

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Peace Research from Peace Research Institute Oslo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().