Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-mggfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-18T17:39:17.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Formal Theory and Statistical Methods: A Response to Carrubba, Yuen, and Zorn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2017

Curtis S. Signorino
Curtis S. Signorino*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, 303 Harkness Hall, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627. e-mail: sign@mail.rochester.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The recent article by Carrubba, Yuen, and Zorn (2007) (CYZ) attempts to relate the strategic random utility models in Signorino (1999, 2002, 2003) and in Signorino and Yilmaz (2003) to existing game theory practice and to existing statistical techniques. It contributes to this literature by reminding us that comparative statics analysis can be applied to the equilibria of these models. There are a number of claims in CYZ, however, that require clarification. In particular, the article's primary claim is that comparative statics analysis, in combination with one of three proposed statistical estimators, provides a simpler alternative to methods previously advocated. This claim (or combination of claims) is incorrect. When one examines the procedure CYZ recommends, it is no simpler for substantive researchers than anything previously recommended. Moreover, none of the proposed estimators are new: they are exactly the same methods introduced in Signorino (1999, 2003), in Signorino and Yilmaz (2003), in Signorino, Walker, and Bas (2002), and in Bas, Signorino, and Walker (2007).

Type
Research Article
Information
Political Analysis , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , Autumn 2007 , pp. 483 - 501
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Political Methodology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, Christopher. 2006. Expressive Bayesian voters, their turnout decisions, and double probit. Paper presented at the 2006 annual meeting of the Society for Political Methodology, Davis, CA.Google Scholar
Ashworth, Scott, and Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan. 2006. Monotone comparative statics for models of politics. American Journal of Political Science 50: 214–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bas, Muhammet Ali. 2007. Democratic inefficiency: Regime type and the tendency to make foreign policy mistakes. Working paper. University of Rochester.Google Scholar
Bas, Muhammet Ali, Signorino, Curtis, S., and Walker, Robert W. Forthcoming. Statistical backwards induction: A simple method for estimating recursive strategic models. Political Analysis doi:10.1093/pan/mpm029.Google Scholar
Carrubba, Clifford J., Yuen, Amy, and Zorn, Christopher. 2007. In defense of comparative statics: Specifying empirical tests of models of strategic interaction. Political Analysis doi:10.1093/pan/mpm008.Google Scholar
Leblang, David A. 2003. To defend or to devalue: The political economy of exchange rate policy. International Studies Quarterly 47: 533–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Jeffrey B., and Schultz, Kenneth A. 2003. Revealing preferences: Empirical estimation of a crisis bargaining game with incomplete information. Political Analysis 11: 345–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKelvey, Richard D., and Palfrey, Thomas R. 1998. Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games. Experimental Economics 1: 9–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsay, Kristopher W., and Signorino, Curtis S. 2006. Bargaining and society: A statistical model of the ultimatum game. Working paper. University of Rochester.Google Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S. 1999. Strategic interaction and the statistical analysis of international conflict. American Political Science Review 93: 279–97.Google Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S. 2002. Strategy and selection in international relations. International Interactions 28: 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S. 2003. Structure and uncertainty in discrete choice models. Political Analysis 11: 316–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S., and Tarar, Ahmer. 2006. A unified theory and test of extended immediate deterrence. American Journal of Political Science 50: 586–605.Google Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S., Walker, Robert W., and Bas, Muhammet Ali. 2002. Picking a fight: Disputes, deterrence, and war-time alliances. Paper presented at the 2002 annual meeting of the Society for Political Methodology, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S., and Whang, Taehee. 2007. Uncertainty and learning in statistical strategic models. Working paper. University of Rochester.Google Scholar
Signorino, Curtis S., and Yilmaz, Kuzey. 2003. Strategic misspecification in regression models. American Journal of Political Science 47: 551–66.Google Scholar
Wand, Jonathan. 2006. Comparing models of strategic choice: The role of uncertainty and signaling. Political Analysis 14: 101–20.Google Scholar
Whang, Taehee. 2007. Seeing is believing? International signaling use of economic sanctions. Working paper.Google Scholar