Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Estimating signaling games in international relations: problems and solutions

  • Casey Crisman-Cox (a1) and Michael Gibilisco (a2)

Abstract

Signaling games are central to political science but often have multiple equilibria, leading to no definitive prediction. We demonstrate that these indeterminacies create substantial problems when fitting theory to data: they lead to ill-defined and discontinuous likelihoods even if the game generating the data has a unique equilibrium. In our experiments, currently used techniques frequently fail to uncover the parameters of the canonical crisis-signaling game, regardless of sample size and number of equilibria in the data generating process. We propose three estimators that remedy these problems, outperforming current best practices. We fit the signaling model to data on economic sanctions. Our solutions find a novel U-shaped relationship between audience costs and the propensity for leaders to threaten sanctions, which current best practices fail to uncover.

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. Email: c.crisman-cox@tamu.edu

References

Hide All
Aguirregabiria, V and Mira, P (2007) Sequential estimation of dynamic discrete games. Econometrica 75, 153.
Bajari, P, Benkard, CL and Levin, J (2007) Estimating dynamic models of imperfect competition. Econometrica 75, 13311370.
Bas, MA, Signorino, CS and Whang, T (2014) Knowing one's future preferences: a correlated agent model with bayesian updating. Journal of Theoretical Politics 26, 334.
Chaudoin, S (2014) Audience features and the strategic timing of trade disputes. International Organization 68, 877911.
Crisman-Cox, C and Gibilisco, M (2018) Audience costs and the dynamics of war and peace. American Journal of Political Science 62, 566580.
De Paula, A (2013) Econometric analysis of games with multiple equilibria. Annual Review Economics 5, 107131.
Dorussen, H and Mo, J (2001) Ending economic sanctions audience costs and rent-seeking as commitment strategies. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45, 395426.
Drezner, DW (2003) The hidden hand of economic coercion. International Organization 57, 643659.
Ellickson, PB and Misra, S (2011) Estimating discrete games. Marketing Science 30, 9971010.
Gleditsch, KS, Hug, S, Schubiger, LI and Wucherpfennig, J (2018) International conventions and nonstate actors. Journal of Conflict Resolution 62, 346380.
Hart, RA Jr. (2000) Democracy and the successful use of economic sanctions. Political Research Quarterly 53, 267284.
Hotz, VJ and Miller, RA (1993) Conditional choice probabilities and the estimation of dynamic models. The Review of Economic Studies 60, 497529.
Jo, J (2011) Nonuniqueness of the equilibrium in Lewis and Schultz's model. Political Analysis 19, 351362.
Keohane, RO (1984) After Hegemony. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kertzer, JD and Brutger, R (2016) Decomposing audience costs: bringing the audience back into audience cost theory. American Journal of Political Science 60, 234249.
Krustev, VL and Morgan, TC (2011) Ending economic coercion: domestic politics and international bargaining. Conflict Management and Peace Science 28, 351376.
Kurizaki, S and Whang, T (2015) Detecting audience costs in international crises. International Organization 69, 949980.
Lewis, JB and Schultz, KA (2003) Revealing preferences: empirical estimation of a crisis bargaining game with incomplete information. Political Analysis 11, 345367.
Martin, LL (1993) Credibility, costs, and institutions: cooperation on economic sanctions. World Politics 45, 406432.
McKelvey, RD and Palfrey, TR (1998) Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games. Experimental Economics 1, 941.
Pesendorfer, M and Schmidt-Dengler, P (2010) Sequential estimation of dynamic discrete games: a comment. Econometrica 78, 833842.
Peterson, TM (2013) Sending a message: the reputation effect of us sanction threat behavior. International Studies Quarterly 57, 670682.
Schelling, TC (1960) The Strategy of Conflict. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schultz, KA and Lewis, JB (2005) Learning about learning. Political Analysis 14, 121129.
Signorino, CS (1999) Strategic interaction and the statistical analysis of international conflict. American Political Science Review 93, 279297.
Su, C-L and Judd, KL (2012) Constrained optimization approaches to estimation of structural models. Econometrica 80, 22132230.
Thomson, CP (2016) Public support for economic and military coercion and audience costs. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 18, 407421.
Trager, RF and Vavreck, L (2011) The political costs of crisis bargaining: presidential rhetoric and the role of party. American Journal of Political Science 55, 526545.
van Damme, E (1996) Stability and Perfection of Nash Equilibria, 2nd Edn. Berlin: Springer.
Wand, J (2006) Comparing models of strategic choice: the role of uncertainty and signaling. Political Analysis 14, 101120.
Whang, T (2010) Empirical implications of signaling models. Political Analysis 18, 381402.
Whang, T, McLean, EV and Kuberski, DW (2013) Coercion, information, and the success of sanction threats. American Journal of Political Science 57, 6581.

Keywords

Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Crisman-Cox and Gibilisco supplementary material
Crisman-Cox and Gibilisco supplementary material

 PDF (725 KB)
725 KB

Estimating signaling games in international relations: problems and solutions

  • Casey Crisman-Cox (a1) and Michael Gibilisco (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed