Cited by 603Political Conflict and GovernanceEastern European Communism and ReformsPost-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics

Structure and Example in Modular Political Phenomena: The Diffusion of Bulldozer/Rose/Orange/Tulip Revolutions

Beissinger, Mark R.·2007·Perspectives on Politics

Abstract

The article develops an approach to the study of modular political phenomena (action based in significant part on emulation of the prior successful example of others), focusing on the trade-offs between the influence of example, structural facilitation, and institutional constraints. The approach is illustrated through the example of the spread of democratic revolution in the post-communist region during the 2000–2006 period, with significant comparisons to the diffusion of separatist nationalism in the Soviet Union during the glasnost' era.Mark R. Beissinger is Professor of Politics, Princeton University (mbeissin@princeton.edu). The author is grateful to the School of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison for the opportunity to pursue research for this essay. He would also like to thank Nancy Bermeo, Valerie Bunce, Atul Kohli, Jon Pevehouse, Grigore Pop-Eleches, Edward Schatz, Jack Snyder, Al Stepan, Joshua Tucker, and two anonymous reviewers for their feedback on an earlier version of this article.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1537592707070776

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Revolutionary waves become less successful the further away they travel from their original point of instigation.

    “Oftentimes, revolutionary waves become less successful the further away they travel from their original point of instigation (Beissinger 2007; Patel, Bunce, and Wolchik 2011).”

    From Within and Beyond the “Fourth Generation” of Revolutionary Theory (2016) · cites this paper as Beissinger 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Beissinger, M. R.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
Corresponding author
Beissinger, Mark R.
Venue
Perspectives on Politics
Published
2007-05-14
Volume
5
Issue
02
ISSN
  • 1537-5927 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0986
OpenAlex
W2018298021
Cited by
603
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 38
FWCI
59.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Perspectives on Politics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Eastern European Communism and Reforms
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Post-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics
Keywords
institutional constraints, democratic revolution, post-communist democratization, glasnost, Soviet Union, Tulip Revolution, Orange Revolution, Rose Revolution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review