Convention All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: International Studies Association URL: http://www.isanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p98721_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Freeman, John., Brandt, Patrick. and Colaresi, Michael. "Reciprocity, Accountability and Credibility in International Relations" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-05-25 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p98721_index.html>

Freeman, J. R., Brandt, P. T. and Colaresi, M. P. , 2006-03-22 "Reciprocity, Accountability and Credibility in International Relations" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA <Not Available>. 2009-05-25 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p98721_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Abstract: Research on international relations has suffered from several unfortunate schisms into static versus dynamic analyses of conflict processes. Models of the relationship among public support and conflict focus on the movement of opinion and conflict over time. From these dynamic studies we know there are patterns of distinct and directed actions and reactions unfolding between and within states. Meanwhile, efforts to explain the institutional bases of democracy and conflict are generally static, viewing the presence of democracy as determinative of international relations. From these static analyses we know the aggregate patterns and correlations among democracy, trade and conflict.The failure to account for the dynamics of conflict, opinion, and institutions has significant implications for the study of conflict. For example, ambiguity remains about the consistency of reciprocal relations between states, and the importance of public opinion in foreign policy formulation. Likewise, the ?democratic process? that leads to peace has remained contentious, despite several notable attempts at explanation. In effect, we believe that we need to better understand the dynamic implications of international political theories to appreciate how conflict evolves in different types of regimes. In this paper, we illustrate the important theoretical and empirical gains that can be made by crossing the static-dynamic divide and merging research on the democratic peace with studies of reciprocity and public opinion. We do this by explicitly accounting for the dynamics of opinion across countries in various stages of democratic development and in different types of conflicts. We hypothesize that adding an understanding of domestic accountability (leader-public action/reaction) and international credibility (international-public action/reaction) dynamics to reciprocity should more accurately predict and explain the dynamics of international conflicts than a purely reciprocity-based model. We employ new data on public preferences for peace with an international enemy and leadership support in three democracies (India, Taiwan and Israel) and one semi-democracy (Palestine), and one state transitioning from democracy (Pakistan). In these dyadic conflicts we analyze the impact of varying democratic development and retrogression: China-Taiwan ? a non-democracy and a developing democracy; India-Pakistan ? a democracy and a state suffering a democratic reversion; and Israel-Palestine ? a democracy and a semi-democracy. This variation allows analysis of institutional and public opinion impacts on conflict. Our focus on the dynamics of conflict and democratic processes leads us to specify a Bayesian vector autoregression (BVAR) model that can account for complex dynamics and uncertainty. Our data and methods allow us to analyze several important questions on international conflict and cooperation. For example, do increases in public preferences for peace lead to more peaceful foreign policies, or does opinion react to peace? Do international threats increase domestic bellicosity, or is domestic bellicosity self-reinforcing? One of the biggest advantages of our research design is that, while it does not force answers for every question, it can define what remains unknown and serve as a guide for future research and theorizing.

Assessing Louisiana Professional Development Schools (PDSs) on Student Learning, In-service Teachers, and Pre-service Teachers (Pre-Katrina)

Introducing pre-service teachers to formative assessment: Improving assessment design and accountability in school mathematics through a network-based learning environment

Mathematics Lesson Study Teachers Learn About Representations to Promote Student Communication: A Case Study

Improving students' mathematical understandings: An exploration into teacher learning in an urban professional development setting

Elementary Teachers' Understanding of Students' Prior Science Knowledge: Implications for Practice and Teacher Education