CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9International Relations and Foreign PolicyIntelligence, Security, War StrategyEuropean and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.

Misreading the Enemy

Fettweis, Christopher J.·2015·Survival
DOI 10.1080/00396338.2015.1090135
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Pathological exaggeration of the enemy is more common than complacency, and has inspired overreaction, blunder and national ruin.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00396338.2015.1090135

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Cited by 9

Metadata

Authors
Fettweis, C. J.
Corresponding author
Fettweis, Christopher J.
Venue
Survival
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2015-09-03
Volume
57
Issue
5
Pages
149-172
ISSN
  • 0039-6338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2699
DOI
10.1080/00396338.2015.1090135
OpenAlex
W2100474912
Cited by
9
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
4.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Survival (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Intelligence, Security, War Strategy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › European and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies
Keywords
enemy perception, overreaction, complacency, national security, military strategy

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Misreading the Enemy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00396338.2015.1090135
The paper
Fettweis, C. J. (2015). Misreading the Enemy. Survival. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2015.1090135