Dynamic Screening in International Crises

In this article, I introduce dynamic screening theory as a theoretical framework for understanding how states behave and assess resolve in crises. Modeling crisis diplomacy as a war of attrition, I ask how long countries will be willing to participate in costly negotiations and invest in sunk costs and audience costs before going to war or conceding. I show that more resolved states display greater impatience with diplomacy, preferring to fight instead. In turn, the least resolved states prefer to concede quickly to avoid having to fight. Finally, moderately resolved states negotiate longer, pay more sunk costs, and accumulate more audience costs. Consequently, moderately resolved states are more likely to obtain concessions, not because belief in their resolve increases but because they grant their rival more time to concede. The model also features stalemated negotiations, providing new microfoundations for a common crisis outcome.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Politics
Published
2024-09-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1086/732977
Citations
1
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.23
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dynamic Screening in International Crises

Noam Reich
1 citations
The Journal of Politics
International Relations and Foreign Policy
2.23
article

Dynamic Screening in International Crises

Noam Reich
article en
1 citations

Abstract

In this article, I introduce dynamic screening theory as a theoretical framework for understanding how states behave and assess resolve in crises. Modeling crisis diplomacy as a war of attrition, I ask how long countries will be willing to participate in costly negotiations and invest in sunk costs and audience costs before going to war or conceding. I show that more resolved states display greater impatience with diplomacy, preferring to fight instead. In turn, the least resolved states prefer to concede quickly to avoid having to fight. Finally, moderately resolved states negotiate longer, pay more sunk costs, and accumulate more audience costs. Consequently, moderately resolved states are more likely to obtain concessions, not because belief in their resolve increases but because they grant their rival more time to concede. The model also features stalemated negotiations, providing new microfoundations for a common crisis outcome.

The Journal of PoliticsVol. 87(3)
Yale University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
2.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.