Bones of Contention: Territorial, Maritime, and River Issues

争论的焦点：领土、海洋和河流问题

• 批准号: 0214417
• 负责人: Paul Hensel
• 金额: $ 17.5万
• 依托单位: Florida State University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2002
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2002-07-01 至 2004-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0214417&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Bones; Contention; Territorial; Maritime; River

Consider a researcher who must choose between two rival models, based on how well those models explain the behavior in a given set of data. Suppose one is a strategic choice model and the other is a nonstrategic model -that is, the models have different functional forms. How would the researcher discriminate between these models? In other words, how would she determine which of the models is "better?" In this project, Principal Investigators answer this question by merging two promising areas of methodological research, and then use those methods to analyze international conflict. The first line of research, by Signorino and various coauthors, has demonstrated that traditional specifications of statistical models are generally inconsistent with strategic theories of political behavior. The main message of this research has been that the functional form of one's statistical model must be consistent with the relationships implied by the behavior under analysis, or the statistical inferences will be invalid. However, aside from comparisons of likelihood values and percent correctly predicted, Signorino has not provided a more rigorous framework for comparing (nonnested) strategic models against one another, or against nonstrategic models. Clarke, on the other hand, has engaged in a second line of research, addressing comparative model testing for nonnested models. The main message of his research has been that nonnested model testing requires special techniques that are unknown to most political scientists. New and existing nonnested testing methods have been developed and adapted in prior research to deal with competing limited dependent variable models. The competing models in this literature, however, have only been nonnested in terms of their covanates. Testing strategic choice models against each other or against nonstrategic models requires discriminating between models that are nonnested in terms of their functional forms. The research conducted by Signorino and by Clarke is clearly complimentary. By developing nonnested tests for strategic choice models, Signorino and Clarke will provide the necessary tools for assessing whether strategic models outperform their nonstrategic rivals, or whether certain strategic specifications outperform other strategic specifications. By addressing strategic choice models, Signorino and Clarke will expand the set of functional forms beyond that currently available in the nonnested testing literature. As in previous work on nonnested model testing, the proposed research will make use of classical, Bayesian, and nonparametric statistical techniques. The project goals include: * Adapting absolute discrimination tests (such as the Cox test) for strategic models * Adapting and developing relative discrimination tests (such as the Vuong test, Clarke's non- parametric test, and Bayes factors) for strategic models. * Refining current Bayesian techniques for use with strategic models, and conducting Bayesian estimation of strategic models (to conduct tests based on Bayes factors). * Applying these methods to models of deterrence, alliance politics, and the effect of domestic politics on militarized interstate disputes. * Incorporating these techniques into currently available software (e.g. STRAT and WinBUGS). By combining these lines of research, future scholars will be able not only to develop statistical models that are truly consistent with their theories, but also to test those theories against each other. The attainment of these goals will allow the scientific study of international relations to move significantly beyond its current state.

考虑一位研究人员，他必须在两个竞争模型之间做出选择，根据这些模型对给定数据集中的行为的解释程度。假设一个是战略选择模型，另一个是非战略模型--也就是说，这两个模型具有不同的功能形式。研究人员将如何区分这些模型？换句话说，她将如何确定哪一款模特“更好”？在这个项目中，首席调查员通过合并两个有前途的方法论研究领域来回答这个问题，然后使用这些方法来分析国际冲突。西诺基诺和多位合著者的第一线研究表明，统计模型的传统规格通常与政治行为的战略理论不一致。这项研究的主要信息是，一个人的统计模型的函数形式必须与被分析行为所暗示的关系一致，否则统计推断将是无效的。然而，除了比较似然值和正确预测的百分比，西诺基诺并没有提供一个更严格的框架来比较(非嵌套的)战略模型之间或与非战略模型。另一方面，克拉克从事了二线研究，解决了非嵌套模型的比较模型测试问题。他的研究传递的主要信息是，非嵌套模型测试需要特殊的技术，而大多数政治学家对此一无所知。新的和现有的非嵌套检验方法已经被开发和适应于先前的研究，以处理竞争的有限因变量模型。然而，在这篇文献中，相互竞争的模型只是在它们的覆盖物方面是非嵌套的。对战略选择模型进行相互比较或针对非战略模型进行测试，需要区分在功能形式方面非嵌套的模型。西诺尼诺和克拉克的研究显然是值得称赞的。通过开发战略选择模型的非嵌套测试，西诺基诺和克拉克将提供必要的工具，用于评估战略模型是否优于他们的非战略竞争对手，或者某些战略规格是否优于其他战略规格。通过解决战略选择模型，西诺基诺和克拉克将扩展非嵌套测试文献中目前可用的功能形式集。与以前关于非嵌套模型测试的工作一样，拟议的研究将使用经典的、贝叶斯和非参数统计技术。项目目标包括：*为战略模型采用绝对判别检验(如考克斯检验)*为战略模型调整和发展相对判别检验(如冯检验、克拉克非参数检验和贝叶斯因子)。*改进当前用于战略模型的贝叶斯技术，并进行战略模型的贝叶斯估计(根据贝叶斯因素进行测试)。*将这些方法应用于威慑、联盟政治和国内政治对军事化国家间争端的影响的模型。*将这些技术纳入目前可用的软件(如Strat和WinBUGS)。通过将这些研究路线结合起来，未来的学者不仅能够开发出与他们的理论真正一致的统计模型，而且还能够相互测试这些理论。这些目标的实现将使对国际关系的科学研究大大超越目前的状态。