The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Enduring Rivalries: Theoretical Constructs and Empirical Patterns
Abstract
Historians commonly criticize studies in a more behavioral mode as being “ahistorical”; that is, they lump together a disparate group of events without regard for their historical contexts. We propose to focus on what may be the most obvious and serious form of historical continuity: repeated conflict among the same set of states, or what we refer to (in accordance with the small but growing literature) as “enduring rivalries.” Specifically, we (1) explore the theoretical relevance of the concept of enduring rivalries, (2) define the concept of enduring rivalries, (3) evaluate current operational criteria for enduring rivalries, and (4) describe empirically the rivalries generated by those criteria.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Identifying Rivals and Rivalries in World Politics
Thompson, W. R. (2001) · International Studies Quarterly · doi:10.1111/0020-8833.00214 · Cited by 490
Strategic Rivalries, Protracted Conflict, and Crisis Escalation
COLARESI, M., & THOMPSON, W. R. (2002) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343302039003002 · Cited by 107
Metadata
- Authors
- Goertz, G., & Diehl, P. F.
- Venue
- International Studies Quarterly
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1993-06
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 147
- ISSN
- 0020-8833 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017472428
- Cited by
- 322
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 61.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Enduring Rivalries: Theoretical Constructs and Empirical Patterns. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2600766
- The paper
- Goertz, G., & Diehl, P. F. (1993). Enduring Rivalries: Theoretical Constructs and Empirical Patterns. International Studies Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600766
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
