Item Details

Replication Data for: Ballots and Blackmail: Coercive Diplomacy and the Democratic Peace

Poznansky, Michael; Scroggs, Matt K.
Computer Resource; Online; Dataset
Poznansky, Michael
Scroggs, Matt K.
Does the restraint that prevents pairs of democracies from fighting large-scale wars also prevent them from coercing one another? While scholars have long drawn a bright line between using force and threatening it, the literature on democratic peace theory overwhelmingly emphasizes the former. Using a dataset uniquely suited for the study of militarized compellent threats, we find that pairs of democracies are significantly less likely to engage in coercive diplomacy than are other types of regimes. We employ a variety of estimators to ensure the robustness of our results; the finding holds in all cases. We also elaborate on several alternative logics that might account for the hypotheses, allowing us to adjudicate between a variety of mechanisms. Our findings reveal that democratic peace theory has broader applicability than even proponents have given it credit for: not only are democracies less likely to fight wars with one another, but they are also less likely to threaten each other with force. This replication folder includes the dataset used in our paper, as well as the do files and documentation necessary to recreate our results.
Date Received
University of Virginia, 2016
Logo for Copyright Not EvaluatedCopyright Not Evaluated


Access Online