Bones of Contention: Territorial, Maritime, and River Issues

考虑一个研究人员，他必须在两个相互竞争的模型之间做出选择，根据这些模型在给定数据集中解释行为的程度。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。研究者如何区分这些模型？换句话说，她如何确定哪个模型“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。西格诺里诺和其他合作者的研究表明，统计模型的传统规范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，统计模型的功能形式必须与被分析行为所隐含的关系一致，否则统计推断将无效。然而，除了比较可能性值和正确预测的百分比之外，Signorino并没有提供一个更严格的框架来比较（非嵌套的）策略模型之间的差异，或者与非策略模型之间的差异。另一方面，Clarke则从事第二方面的研究，针对非嵌套模型进行比较模型测试。他的研究的主要信息是，非嵌套模型测试需要特殊的技术，这是大多数政治科学家所不知道的。新的和现有的非嵌套测试方法已经在先前的研究中发展和适应，以处理竞争的有限因变量模型。然而，在本文献中与之竞争的模型，就其共形而言，只是非嵌套的。测试战略选择模型之间的相互对照或对照非战略模型，需要根据其功能形式区分非嵌套模型。Signorino和Clarke所做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，Signorino和Clarke将提供必要的工具来评估战略模型是否优于其非战略竞争对手，或者某些战略规范是否优于其他战略规范。通过解决策略选择模型，Signorino和Clarke将扩展非嵌套测试文献中现有的功能形式集。正如之前关于非嵌套模型测试的工作一样，提出的研究将利用经典、贝叶斯和非参数统计技术。项目目标包括：*对战略模型采用绝对判别检验（如Cox检验）*对战略模型采用和开发相对判别检验（如Vuong检验、Clarke's非参数检验和Bayes因子）。*改进当前的贝叶斯技术以用于战略模型，并对战略模型进行贝叶斯估计（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模型。*将这些技术整合到当前可用的软件中（例如STRAT和WinBUGS）。通过将这些研究结合起来，未来的学者不仅可以开发出与他们的理论真正一致的统计模型，还可以相互检验这些理论。实现这些目标将使对国际关系的科学研究大大超越其现状。

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.