Skip to main content
Log in

Social norms and the traditional deterrence game

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bicchieri (The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of norms, 2006, xi) presents a formal analysis of norms that answers the questions of “when, how, and to what degree” norms affect human behavior in the play of games. The purpose of this paper is to apply a variation of the Bicchieri norms analysis to generate a model of norms-based play of the traditional deterrence game (Zagare and Kilgour, Int Stud Q 37:1–27, 1993; Morrow, Game theory for political scientists, 1994), the paradigmatic model of conflict initiation in International Relations. The deterrence game is modeled here as a sequential decision problem. As such, our analysis is an adaptation of Bicchieri’s game-theoretic formalization of norms to what we will call the norms account of the game. We find that the standard account of the traditional deterrence game is a special case of the norms account of the game. We also show that the adaptation of Bicchieri’s analysis of social norms yields new and interesting claims regarding when, how, and to what degree norms operate as a constraint on risk-related behavior in the traditional deterrence game. Moreover, we discuss how the results of the model provide testable propositions of relevance to the role of norms in international interactions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allison G. (1969) Conceptual models and the Cuban missile crisis. American Political Science Review 63: 689–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berejikian J. (2002) A cognitive theory of deterrence. Journal of Peace Research 39: 165–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bicchieri C. (2006) The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of norms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bicchieri, C., & Chavez, A. (this volume). Behaving as expected: Public information and fairness norms. Synthese.

  • Bicchieri, C., & Xiao, E. (2007). Do the right thing: But only if others do. Working paper.

  • Carlson L.J., Dacey R. (2004a) Traditional decision analysis and the poliheuristic theory of foreign policy decision making. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48: 38–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L. J., & Dacey, R. (2004b). Sequential analysis of the traditional deterrence game. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, 10, Article 2 (www.bepress.com/peps/vol10/iss3/2).

  • Carlson L.J., Dacey R. (2006a) Sequential analysis of deterrence games with a declining status quo. Conflict Management and Peace Science 23: 181–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L. J., & Dacey, R. (2006b). Confusions of loss aversion and risk attitude in international relations and peace science. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, 12, Article 1 (www.bepress.com/peps/vol12/iss2/1).

  • Danilovic V. (2002) When the stakes are high: Deterrence and conflict among major powers. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  • Fearon J. (1994) Signaling versus balance of power and interests. Journal of Conflict Resolution 38: 236–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn P., Kochenberger G. (1979) Two-piece von Neumann-Morgenstern utility functions. Decision Sciences 10: 503–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore M., Sikkink K. (2001) Taking stock: The constructivist research program in international relations and comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science 4: 391–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelpi C. (1997) Crime and punishment: The role of norms in crisis bargaining. American Political Science Review 91: 339–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huth P.K., Russett B. (1988) Deterrence failure and crisis escalation. International Studies Quarterly 32: 29–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jervis R. (1994) Political implications of loss aversion. In: Farnham B. (eds) Avoiding losses/taking risks: Prospect theory and international conflict. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis R. (2004) The implications of prospect theory for human nature and values. Political Psychology 25: 163–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D., Tversky A. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 47: 263–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D., Tversky A. (2000) Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan M. (1996) Decision theory as philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, M. (this volume). Defense of modest probabilism.

  • Kim W., Morrow J.D. (1992) When do power shifts lead to war?. American Journal of Political Science 36: 896–922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebow R.N. (1981) Between peace and war: The nature of international crises. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeds B.A. (2003) Alliance reliability in times of war: Explaining state decisions to violate treaties. International Organization 57: 801–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeds B.A., Long A., Mitchell S.M. (2000) Reevaluating alliance reliability: Specific threats, specific promises. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 44: 689–699

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi A.S., Whyte G. (1997) A cross-cultural exploration of crucial decisions under risk: Japan’s 1941 decision for war. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41: 792–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy J.S. (1996) Loss aversion, framing, and bargaining: The implications of prospect theory for international conflict. International Political Science Review 17: 179–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy J.S. (1997) Prospect theory, rational choice and international relations. International Studies Quarterly 41: 87–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy J.S. (1998) The causes of war and the conditions of peace. Annual Review of Political Science 1: 139–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy J.S. (2008) Preventive war and democratic politics. International Studies Quarterly 52: 1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maoz Z., Russett B. (1993) Normative and structural causes of the democratic peace, 1946–1986. American Political Science Review 87: 624–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrow J.D. (1994) Game theory for political scientists. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill B. (2001) Risk aversion in international relations theory. International Studies Quarterly 45: 617–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajmaira S., Ward M.D. (1990) Evolving foreign policy norms: Reciprocity in the superpower triad. International Studies Quarterly 34: 457–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond G.A. (1997) Problems and prospects in the study of international norms. Mershon International Studies Review 41: 205–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russett B.M., Starr H. (2000) From democratic peace to Kantian peace: Democracy and conflict in the international system. In: Midlarsky M.I. (eds) Handbook of war studies II. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, pp 93–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5: 297–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward M.D., Rajmaira S. (1992) Reciprocity and norms in US-Soviet foreign policy. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 36: 342–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner S. (1999) Choosing demands strategically: The distribution of power, the distribution of benefits, and the risk of conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution 43: 705–726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zagare F.C., Kilgour D.M. (1993) Asymmetric deterrence. International Studies Quarterly 37: 1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zagare F.C., Kilgour D.M. (2000) Perfect deterrence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zinnes D.A. (2004) Constructing political logic: The democratic peace puzzle. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48: 430–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raymond Dacey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carlson, L.J., Dacey, R. Social norms and the traditional deterrence game. Synthese 176, 105–123 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9486-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9486-z

Keywords

Navigation