Rational Models and the Ending of Wars

Bibliographic Data

ID6284166
AuthorsC R Mitchell (City, University of London), Christopher Mitchell (0000-0001-6523-0382, City, University of London), Michael Nicholson (0000-0001-5492-0679, The Richardson Institute, University of Lancaster)
Year1983
Volume27
Issue3
Pages495-520
Publication date1983-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Conflict Resolution (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0022-0027 • E-ISSN: 1552-8766
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0022002783027003005
OpenAlexW2039583916
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited5

The article considers the problem of using the expected utility approach to war termination. In the context of the ending of the Boer War, the authors attempt to explain why an expected utility approach has difficulty in accommodating the fact that there was a long delay between the initiation of certain proposals for termination and the eventual acceptance of essentially the same terms. They conclude that the problem in this case was that neither of the decision maker was unitary, and that the process of formulating a preference ordering takes time. It is of course reasonable in a static theory to ignore this. However, to apply the process of decision-making as distinct for just the end result, we need a theory of the process of preference formulation in groups

Context (archaeology · Decision maker · Decision process · Decision theory · Economics · Expected utility hypothesis · Management science · Mathematical economics · Microeconomics · Political science · Positive economics · Preference · Process (computing · Unitary state · Computer Science · Defense, Military, and Policy Studies · History · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub