Testing Deterrence Theory: Rigor Makes a Difference

Authors:
  • PHPaul Huth
    Paul Huth
  • BRBruce Russett
    Bruce Russett
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
There is no consensus among scholars on how to test hypotheses about deterrence systematically. The disputes are sometimes rooted in differences about theory or sources of data, but they are magnified by methodological confusion, especially over concepts and operational definitions that produce perverse empirical results. Serious theoretical errors include inadequate appreciation of the role of uncertainty in deterrence as well as selection biases that undermine empirical tests. Rigorous examination of our previous work in light of recent criticism discloses very robust findings on the conditions for deterrence success and failure.

This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit: