Cited by 90Political Conflict and GovernanceCulture, Economy, and Development StudiesHealth and Conflict Studies

Does infectious disease cause global variation in the frequency of intrastate armed conflict and civil war?

Letendre, Kenneth, Fincher, Corey L., Thornhill, Randy·2010·Biological Reviews

Abstract

Geographic and cross-national variation in the frequency of intrastate armed conflict and civil war is a subject of great interest. Previous theory on this variation has focused on the influence on human behaviour of climate, resource competition, national wealth, and cultural characteristics. We present the parasite-stress model of intrastate conflict, which unites previous work on the correlates of intrastate conflict by linking frequency of the outbreak of such conflict, including civil war, to the intensity of infectious disease across countries of the world. High intensity of infectious disease leads to the emergence of xenophobic and ethnocentric cultural norms. These cultures suffer greater poverty and deprivation due to the morbidity and mortality caused by disease, and as a result of decreased investment in public health and welfare. Resource competition among xenophobic and ethnocentric groups within a nation leads to increased frequency of civil war. We present support for the parasite-stress model with regression analyses. We find support for a direct effect of infectious disease on intrastate armed conflict, and support for an indirect effect of infectious disease on the incidence of civil war via its negative effect on national wealth. We consider the entanglements of feedback of conflict into further reduced wealth and increased incidence of disease, and discuss implications for international warfare and global patterns of wealth and imperialism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00133.x

Cites

58 of 58 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Letendre, K., Fincher, C. L., & Thornhill, R.
Affiliations
University of New Mexico (US)
Corresponding author
Letendre, Kenneth
Venue
Biological Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-07-08
Volume
85
Issue
3
Pages
669-683
ISSN
  • 0006-3231 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-7931
  • 1469-185X
OpenAlex
W2155901464
Cited by
90
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Culture, Economy, and Development Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Conflict Studies
Keywords
infectious diseases, intrastate armed conflict, civil war, xenophobia, ethnocentrism, national wealth, resource competition, public health investment, poverty, imperialism, cross-national variation
MeSH terms
Communicable Diseases, Culture, Humans, International Cooperation, Models, Theoretical, Organizational Objectives, Warfare, Global Health

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