This manuscript addresses an important empirical regularity: Why are revolutionary leaders more likely to initiate conflict? With the goal of explaining this regularity, I offer an identity-driven model of decision making that can explain why certain leaders are more likely to take risky gambles. Broadly, this manuscript provides a different model of decision making that emphasizes emotion and identity as key to explain decision making. I offer a plausibility probe of the identity-driven model with four in-depth case studies: The initiation of the Iran-Iraq War, the initiation of the Gulf War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the start of the Korean War. I use the congruence method and process tracing to test the plausibility probe. I find strong support in two cases—the initiation of the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War—and mixed support for the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Korean War.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:uoregon.edu/oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/24192 |
| Date | 11 January 2019 |
| Creators | Van Orden, Patrick |
| Contributors | Vu, Tuong |
| Publisher | University of Oregon |
| Source Sets | University of Oregon |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Rights | Creative Commons BY 4.0-US |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds