ScholarGate
어시스턴트

방법 비교

선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.

Foreign Policy Similarity Score×Democratic Peace Analysis×
분야International RelationsInternational Relations
계열Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
기원 연도20111993
창시자Foreign-policy-similarity literature (Signorino & Ritter; Voeten ideal points; Frank Häge chance correction)Zeev Maoz & Bruce Russett (and the broader democratic-peace literature)
유형Dyadic measurement of revealed foreign-policy agreementObservational dyadic test of the regime-type/conflict relationship
원전Häge, F. M. (2011). Choice or circumstance? Adjusting measures of foreign policy similarity for chance agreement. Political Analysis, 19(3), 287–305. DOI ↗Maoz, Z., & Russett, B. (1993). Normative and structural causes of democratic peace, 1946–1986. American Political Science Review, 87(3), 624–638. DOI ↗
별칭Foreign Policy Similarity Measurement, UN Voting Affinity Score, Ideal Point Distance, State Preference SimilarityDemocratic Peace Theory Testing, Dyadic Democratic Peace Analysis, Joint Democracy and Conflict Analysis, Liberal Peace Analysis
관련33
요약A foreign-policy similarity score measures how alike two states' revealed foreign-policy positions are — most commonly from their votes in the UN General Assembly, but also from alliance portfolios or treaty positions. It is a workhorse measure of shared interests, affinity, and alignment in dyadic IR. Häge (2011) shows that naive agreement and the popular S-score can be inflated by chance agreement that arises because states differ in how often they take each position, and proposes chance-corrected indices (Scott's π, Cohen's κ) that better isolate genuine alignment.Democratic peace analysis is the empirical study of the proposition that democracies rarely or never fight one another. Building on the dyadic research design crystallized by Maoz and Russett (1993), it codes the regime type of each state, constructs dyad-years, and models the probability of militarized conflict as a function of joint democracy alongside controls for power, contiguity, alliances, and trade. The approach has produced one of the most robust empirical regularities in international relations and a long debate over whether shared norms or institutional structures account for it.
ScholarGate데이터셋
  1. v1
  2. 1 출처
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 출처
  3. PUBLISHED

검색으로 이동 슬라이드 다운로드

ScholarGate방법 비교: Foreign Policy Similarity Score · Democratic Peace Analysis. 2026-06-25에 다음에서 검색함: https://scholargate.app/ko/compare