Search

How do variations in the electoral rules, specifically term limits and the constitutional inter-election period (CIEP), affect the conflict behavior of leaders? If leaders know that they have a fixed time in office we argue that they are more likely to engage in conflict given their shortened policy time horizon and that they do not have to face reselection. We develop a framework of how the CIEP has differing effects depending on the possibility of leader reselection. Leaders that do not face terms limits should be more conflict prone early in the CIEP. However leaders with term limits will be less likely to engage in conflicts early in the CIEP. We test our hypotheses by analyzing both monadic and dyadic leader year data. The results suggest that term limits alter the conflict calculation of democratic leaders, both for propensity as well as timing. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on foreign policy decision-making suggests that due to the complex and unstable international environment, individuals making decisions with regards to the international realm rely on pre-existing theories or images to deal with the task at hand. One important element of such a complex and unstable environment is the presence of inconsistent information. The question of what decision-makers do with information that is inconsistent with preexisting beliefs and images has garnered significant scholarly attention both within the social cognition and decision-making fields. While competing theories exist, such as selective exposure and biased interpretation, this paper presents an alternative approach to puzzle of information inconsistency whereby decision-makers put inconsistent information ?on the bench? until activated by an increasing frequency of such information.An experimental design is used to assess the effects of consecutive or sporadic exposure to inconsistent information (as a means to ?crowd the bench?) on the decision processes and outcomes. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An experimental test of the proposition that exposure to historical analogies make people less sensitive to the information about the current crisis, thereby increasing support for leaders' advocated foreign policy. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]