Dissertation/Thesis Abstract

A comparative test of theories of polarity and conflict
by Zhang, Wanfa, Ph.D., The University of Alabama, 2009, 191; 3390657
Abstract (Summary)

Works on the relationship between polarity and war in the past produce inconsistent, sometimes, self-conflicting conclusions. This is caused by the lack of a comparable way of conceptualizing and defining polarity and the lack of a common gauge for estimating that relationship. This research addresses these methodological shortcomings and explores the linkage between the international system of the major powers and dyadic conflict by conducting a comparative study of polarity and war. It tests the targeted relationship using: (1) a number of quantifiable polarity concepts proposed by several representative scholars, including John Mearsheimer, Jack Levy, Charles Kegley and Gregory Raymond, and George Modelski; (2) a common research design that has incorporated the Kantian variables and has drawn the essence from the latest progress in this discipline, and (3) an objective method of calculating a continuous measure of the polarity among the great powers. Such a research design can compare the impact of various types of polarity on the onset of wars while controlling for both realist and Kantian influences. It provides a broad prospective on the connection between polarity and war. This study confirms the existence of a connection between polarity and war of unipolarity > bipolarity > multipolarity in order of peacefulness.

Indexing (document details)
Advisor: Gibler, Douglas, Oneal, John
Commitee: Borelli, Steven, Chotiner, Barbara, DeRouen, Karl, Pecorino, Paul
School: The University of Alabama
Department: Political Science
School Location: United States -- Alabama
Source: DAI-A 71/02, Dissertation Abstracts International
Source Type: DISSERTATION
Subjects: International Relations, Political science, International law
Keywords: Bipolarity, Conflict, Multipolarity, Polarity, Unipolarity, War
Publication Number: 3390657
ISBN: 9781109602036
Copyright © 2019 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy Cookie Policy
ProQuest