CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 623Economic Sanctions and International RelationsInternational Relations and Foreign PolicyPolitical Conflict and Governance

Multi-Dimensional Threat Perception and State Repression: An Inquiry into Why States Apply Negative Sanctions

Davenport, Christian·1995·American Journal of Political Science
DOI 10.2307/2111650
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Christian Davenport, Multi-Dimensional Threat Perception and State Repression: An Inquiry into Why States Apply Negative Sanctions, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 39, No. 3 (Aug., 1995), pp. 683-713

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2111650

Cites

54 of 54 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?

  • The intensity of repressive actions employed by governments is often dependent on the level of threat perception.

    “As noted long ago by Davenport (1995), the intensity of repressive actions employed by governments is often dependent on the level of threat perception.”

    From The Long Arm and the Iron Fist: Authoritarian Crackdowns and Transnational Repression (2024) · cites this paper as Davenport (1995)

  • Over 50 years of research on repression shows that the major predictor of most forms of repression is the extent to which a movement or group is a threat.

    “Over 50 years of research on repression shows that the major predictor of most forms of repression is the extent to which a movement or group is a threat (5, 19, 175).”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [175]

  • Other factors known from decades of research on repression, such as the structure of political opportunities and/or the weakness of challengers, may also affect digital repression.

    “Other factors known from decades of research on repression, such as the structure of political opportunities (177, 178) and/or the weakness of challengers (5, 19, 175), may also affect digital repression.”

    From Physical and virtual repertoires of contention (2022) · cites this paper as [175]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Davenport, C.
Corresponding author
Davenport, Christian
ORCID
Davenport, Christian
Venue
American Journal of Political Science
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1995-08
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
683
ISSN
0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2111650
OpenAlex
W2083513139
Cited by
623
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 19
FWCI
8.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Sanctions and International Relations
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
threat perception, state repression, negative sanctions, sanctions, political violence

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