Cited by 139Political Conflict and GovernanceTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceSocial and Intergroup Psychology

C-Escalation and D-Escalation: A Theory of the Time-Dynamics of Conflict

Collins, Randall·2012·American Sociological Review

Abstract

Conflict escalates through a series of feedback loops. On the micro level, conflict generates conditions for intense interaction rituals, and internal solidarity fuels external conflict. Perceived atrocities reciprocally increase ideological polarization between opponents, while confrontational tension/fear makes violence incompetent and produces real atrocities. Conflict groups seek allies, drive out neutrals, and mobilize material resources. Both sides in a conflict counter-escalate through the same set of feedbacks. Winning and losing are determined by differences between rates of escalation and by attacks that one-sidedly destroy organizational and material capacity. Conflict de-escalates because both sides fail to find conditions for solidarity, cannot overcome confrontational tension/fear, and exhaust their material resources. Emotional burnout sets in through a time dynamic of explosion, plateau, and dissipation of enthusiasm. Defection of allies opens the way for third-party settlement. When both sides remain stalemated, initial enthusiasm and external polarization give way to emergent internal factions—a victory faction (hard-liners) versus a peace faction (negotiators)—creating new conflict identities. Ideals promoted at the outset of conflict become obstacles to resolution at the end.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0003122411428221

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?

  • Polarization on digital media is driven by conflict rather than isolation.

    “The suggestion is, in short, that polarization on digital media is driven by conflict rather than isolation (117), affording a form of politics rooted in identity rather than opinion (4).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collins, R.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Collins, Randall
Venue
American Sociological Review
Published
2012-01-25
Volume
77
Issue
1
Pages
1-20
ISSN
  • 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-8271
OpenAlex
W2120704664
Cited by
139
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
23.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
conflict escalation, conflict de-escalation, feedback loops, interaction rituals, solidarity, atrocities, ideological polarization, coalition formation, mobilization, burnout, factionalism, peace negotiations, conflict resolution

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