1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Political Science
  4. Volume 21, 2018
  5. Article

Annual Review of Political Science

Volume 21, 2018

Politics and Political Science

Abstract

Throughout my life, politics and political science have been intertwined. I handed out leaflets for Adlai Stevenson at age 12, participated in protests at Oberlin and Berkeley, and, as I developed professional expertise, worked with national security agencies. Conflict has been a continuing interest, particularly whether situations are best analyzed as a security dilemma or aggression. In exploring this question, I was drawn into both political psychology and signaling, although the two are very different. I have continued to work on each and occasionally try to bring them together. My thinking about strategic interaction led to a book-length exploration of system effects, a way of thinking that I believe is still insufficiently appreciated in the discipline and among policy makers. My research continues to be stimulated by both developments in the discipline and unfolding international politics.

Keyword(s): autobiography, perception, security dilemma, signaling
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-090617-115035
2018-05-11
2024-12-03
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/polisci/21/1/annurev-polisci-090617-115035.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-090617-115035&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Bar-Joseph U, McDermott R 2017. Intelligence Success and Failure: The Human Factor New York: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Berliner J 1957. Factory and Manager in the USSR Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Booth K, Wheeler N 2008. The Security Dilemma New York: Palgrave Macmillan
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brodie B 1946. The Absolute Weapon: Atomic Power and World Order New York: Harcourt, Brace
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Carlin R, Jervis R 2015. Nuclear North Korea: How Will It Behave? Baltimore, MD: US-Korea Inst. SAIS
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Deutsch K, Burrell SA, Kann RA, Lee M Jr., Liehterman M et al. 1957. Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Duarte JL, Crawford JT, Stern C, Haidt J, Jussim L, Tetlock PE 2015. Political diversity will improve social psychological science. Behav. Brain Sci. 38:1–58
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Fearon J 1997. Signaling foreign policy interests: tying hands versus sinking costs. J. Confl. Resolut. 41:468–90
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Goffman E 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life Garden City, NY: Doubleday
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Green B, Long A 2015. Stalking the secure second strike: intelligence, counterforce, and nuclear strategy. J. Strateg. Stud. 38:1–238–73
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Green B, Long A 2017. The MAD who wasn't there: Soviet reaction to the late Cold War nuclear balance. Secur. Stud. 26:4606–41
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Greenstein F 1982. The Hidden-Hand Presidency: Eisenhower as Leader New York: Basic Books
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hatemi P, McDermott R 2011. Man Is by Nature a Political Animal: Evolution, Biology, and Politics Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hendrickson D 2003. Peace Pact: The Lost World of the American Founding Lawrence: Univ. Press Kansas
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Holsti O 1965. The 1914 case. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 59:2365–78
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Huntington S 1993. Why international primacy matters. Int. Secur. 17:468–83
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Jervis R 1967. The costs of the scientific study of politics: an examination of the Stanford content analysis studies. Int. Stud. Q. 11:4366–93
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Jervis R 1968. The costs of the quantitative study of international relations. Contending Approaches to International Politics K Knorr, J Rosenau, pp. 177–217 Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Jervis R 1970. The Logic of Images in International Relations Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Jervis R 1972. Bargaining and bargaining tactics. Coercion, Nomos, XIV R Pennock, J Chapman 272–88 Chicago: Aldine Atherton
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Jervis R 1978. Cooperation under the security dilemma. World Politics 30:2167–214
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Jervis R 1979. Deterrence theory revisited. World Politics 31:2299–301
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Jervis R 1980. Why nuclear superiority doesn't matter. Political Sci. Q. 94:4617–33
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Jervis R 1982–1983. Deterrence and perception. Int. Secur. 3:3–30
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Jervis R 1984. The Illogic of American Nuclear Strategy Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Jervis R 1989. The Meaning of the Nuclear Revolution Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Jervis R 1991.a Arms control, stability, and the causes of war. Daedalus 12:4167–82
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Jervis R 1991.b System effects. Strategy and Choice R Zeckhauser 107–30 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Jervis R 1991–1992. The future of world politics: Will it resemble the past?. Int. Secur. 16:339–73
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jervis R 1993.a Arms control, stability, and the causes of war. Political Sci. Q. 108:2239–53
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Jervis R 1993.b International primacy: Is the game worth the candle?. Int. Secur. 17:452–67
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Jervis R 1997. System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Jervis R 1999. Realism, neoliberalism and cooperation. Int. Secur. 24:142–63
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Jervis R 2000. Jervis on Logevall, “Choosing War: The Lost Chance for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam. .” H-Diplo https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/reviews/30108/jervis-logevall-choosing-war-lost-chance-peace-and-escalation-war
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Jervis R 2001.a Was the Cold War a security dilemma?. J. Cold War Stud. 3:136–60
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Jervis R 2001.b International history and international politics: Why are they studied differently?. Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations EM Fendius, C Elman 385–402 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Jervis R 2002.a Signaling and perception: drawing inferences and projecting images. Political Psychology K Monroe 29–30 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Jervis R 2002.b Theories of war in an era of leading power peace. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 96:11–14
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Jervis R 2002.c An assessment of September 11: what has changed and what has not. Political Sci. Q. 117:137–54
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Jervis R 2003. The confrontation between Iraq and the U.S.: Implications for the theory and practice of deterrence. Eur. J. Inte. Relat. 9:2315–37
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Jervis R 2004. Security studies: ideas, policy, and politics. The Evolution of Political Knowledge E Mansfield, R Sisson 100–26 Columbus: Ohio State Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Jervis R 2005. American Foreign Policy in a New Era New York: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Jervis R 2006. Reports, politics, and intelligence failures: the case of Iraq. J. Strateg. Stud. 29:13–52
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Jervis R 2008–2009. War, intelligence, and honesty: a review essay. Political Sci. Q. 123:4645–75
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Jervis R 2009. Unipolarity: a structural perspective. World Politics 61:1188–213
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Jervis R 2010.a Why Intelligence Fails: Lessons from the Iranian Revolution and the Iraq War Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Jervis R 2010.b International politics and diplomatic history: fruitful differences. H-Diplo/ISSF Essays12–9
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Jervis R 2010.c Identity and the Cold War. Cambridge History of the Cold War M Leffler, O Westad 222–43 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Jervis R 2010.d The politics of troop withdrawal. Dipl. Hist. 34:3507–16
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Jervis R 2010–2011. Policy and politics in the United Kingdom and the United States: a review essay. Political Sci. Q. 125:4685–700
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Jervis R 2012. System effects revisited. Crit. Rev. 24:3393–415
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Jervis R 2013.a Getting to yes with Iran: the challenge of coercive diplomacy. Foreign Aff 92:1105–15
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Jervis R 2013.b Causation and responsibility in a complex world. Back to Basics: State Power in a Contemporary World M Finnemore, J Goldstein 313–37 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Jervis R 2013.c On the road to yes with Iran. Foreign Aff. Online. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2013-11-29/road-yes-iran
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Jervis R 2014.a Serving or self-serving: a review essay. Political Sci. Q. 129:2319–33
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Jervis R 2014.b Audience costs and Vietnam: a comment on Lewis and Trachtenberg. H-Diplo/ISSF Forum https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/discussions/51266/issf-forum-%E2%80%9Caudience-costs-and-vietnam-war%E2%80%9D
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Jervis R 2015.a The torture blame game: the botched Senate report on the CIA's misdeeds. Foreign Aff 94:3120–27
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Jervis R 2015.b Turn down for what? The Iran deal and what follows. Foreign Aff. Online 94:4 https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/iran/2015-07-15/turn-down-what
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Jervis R 2016.a Some thoughts on deterrence in the cyber era. J. Inf. Warfare 15:266–73
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Jervis R 2016.b Our new and better world. Still a Western World? S Fabbrini, R Marchetti 13–22 New York: Routledge
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Jervis R 2017.a President Trump and IR theory. ISSF Policy Series, America and the World–2017 and Beyond. H-Diplo/ISSF http://issforum.org/ISSF/PDF/Policy-Roundtable-1-5B.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Jervis R 2017.b Rex Tillerson may be the weakest Secretary of State ever. Foreign Policy Online March 10: http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/10/rex-tillerson-might-be-the-weakest-secretary-of-state-ever/
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Jervis R 2017.c Introduction. North Korea and Asia's Evolving Nuclear Landscape: Challenges to Regional Stability. Washington, DC: Natl. Bur. Asian Res.
  64. Jervis R 2017d (1976). Perception and Misperception in International Politics Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Jervis R 2017.e How Statesmen Think: The Political Psychology of International Politics Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Jervis R 2017.f Introduction to “new light on 1914. .” Int. Secur. Stud. Forum. https://issforum.org/forums/newlight1914
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Jervis R 2018. Unpacking a US decision to use force against North Korea. 38 North, US-Korea Inst., Johns Hopkins Sch. Adv. Int. Stud. https://www.38north.org/reports/2018/01/rjervis013118/
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Jervis R, Lebow RN, Stein J 1985. Psychology of Deterrence Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Lieber K, Press D 2017. The new era of counterforce: technological change and the future of nuclear deterrence. Int. Secur. 41:49–49
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Monroe K 2005. Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Neustadt R 1990 (1960). Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan Toronto: Collier Macmillan
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Schelling T 1960. The Strategy of Conflict Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Schelling T 1966. Arms and Influence New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Schelling T 1978. Micromotives and Macrobehavior New York: Norton
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Schroeder P 2001. International history: Why historians do it differently than political scientists. Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists and the Study of International Relations EM Fendius, C Elman 403–16 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Snyder G 1961. Deterrence and Defense: Toward a Theory of National Security Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Snyder G 1965. The balance of power and the balance of terror. The Balance of Power P Seabury 184–201 San Francisco: Chandler
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Spence M 1974. Market Signaling: Informational Transfer in Hiring and Related Screening Processes Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Tang S 2010. A Theory of Security Strategy for Our Time: Defensive Realism New York: Palgrave Macmillan
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Ulam A 1960. The Unfinished Revolution: An Essay on the Sources of Influence of Marxism and Communism New York: Random House
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Waltz K 1959. Man, the State and War New York: Columbia Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Wohlstetter R 1962. Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Wolfers A 1962. Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Yarhi-Milo K 2014. Knowing the Adversary: Leaders, Intelligence, and Assessment of Intentions in International Relations Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-polisci-090617-115035
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error