The Ineffective Power of Assumptions: Why Structural Modeling Doesn’t Fly in IR

Abstract This paper critiques Kenkel and Ramsay’s (in J Politics. https://doi.org/10.1086/732953 , 2024) “The Effective Power of Military Coalitions,” arguing that the study falls short of structural modeling standards despite its formal presentation. While adopting the aesthetics of game-theoretic analysis, their model simplifies coalitions to groups of independent actors and overlooks the interconnected nature of coalition warfare. This simplification commits what Tsebelis (in Am Polit Sci Rev 83(1):77–91, 1989) called the “Robinson Crusoe Fallacy”: assuming strategic independence when mutual responsiveness is essential. Their simulations do not re-optimize behavior as conditions change but instead reuse fixed parameters, resulting in calibrated, comparison-based results that are mistaken for structural inference. The model’s empirical fragility and theoretical rigidity weaken its explanatory power, especially when compared to historical examples of coordinated mobilization during World War I and World War II. As an alternative, I propose a theory-driven simulation framework that explicitly includes strategic interdependence. This approach preserves analytical clarity while recognizing the contingent and collective dynamics that shape military coalitions. Graphical Abstract

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Chinese Political Science Review
Published
2026-01-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-025-00312-3
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Ineffective Power of Assumptions: Why Structural Modeling Doesn’t Fly in IR

Dwayne Woods
Chinese Political Science Review
International Relations and Foreign Policy
article

The Ineffective Power of Assumptions: Why Structural Modeling Doesn’t Fly in IR

Dwayne Woods
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper critiques Kenkel and Ramsay’s (in J Politics. https://doi.org/10.1086/732953 , 2024) “The Effective Power of Military Coalitions,” arguing that the study falls short of structural modeling standards despite its formal presentation. While adopting the aesthetics of game-theoretic analysis, their model simplifies coalitions to groups of independent actors and overlooks the interconnected nature of coalition warfare. This simplification commits what Tsebelis (in Am Polit Sci Rev 83(1):77–91, 1989) called the “Robinson Crusoe Fallacy”: assuming strategic independence when mutual responsiveness is essential. Their simulations do not re-optimize behavior as conditions change but instead reuse fixed parameters, resulting in calibrated, comparison-based results that are mistaken for structural inference. The model’s empirical fragility and theoretical rigidity weaken its explanatory power, especially when compared to historical examples of coordinated mobilization during World War I and World War II. As an alternative, I propose a theory-driven simulation framework that explicitly includes strategic interdependence. This approach preserves analytical clarity while recognizing the contingent and collective dynamics that shape military coalitions. Graphical Abstract

Chinese Political Science Review
Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
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.