Ties that Bias in International Conflict

The authors argue that traditional dyadic analysis of international conflict often ignores spatial dependence, where the risk of conflict in one pair of states is influenced by the status of other linked pairs. They introduce new measures for 'third-party' and 'fourth-party' alliance ties, as well as a theory of geographic 'inbetweenness,' to demonstrate that dyads linked to ongoing disputes through these pathways are significantly more likely to experience conflict onset. Using data from 1950-1992, the study finds that these extra-dyadic factors provide a substantially better fit for predicting conflict than purely dyadic models.

• The odds of a dispute onset are approximately 3.14 times higher for dyads connected to an ongoing dispute via third- or fourth-party alliance ties compared to those without such ties.
• Third-party alliance ties have a stronger effect on conflict risk than fourth-party ties, increasing the odds of a dispute by a factor of 8.25, while fourth-party ties increase them by 2.75.
• Geographic 'inbetweenness' significantly raises conflict risk; a third-party inbetweenness ratio of 1 is associated with a nearly 27-fold increase in the odds of a dispute compared to a ratio of 0.
• Fourth-party inbetweenness increases the odds of a dispute by a factor of 14.3 for dyads with contiguous capitals and a maximum inbetweenness ratio of 1, relative to those with a ratio of 0.
• Including extra-dyadic ties in the model significantly alters the estimated impact of other variables: the coefficient for major power status is reduced by nearly 45%, while the negative effect of bilateral alliances increases by almost 35%.
• The expanded model with extra-dyadic ties is more effective at identifying actual disputes, correctly flagging 88 out of 1,078 cases at a 0.5 probability threshold, compared to 57 cases in the baseline model.

APA

Gartzke, E. A., & Gleditsch, K. S. (n.d.). Ties that Bias in International Conflict. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/a6555be0-217a-4ef2-a5e5-da9834174459/final_GG_ties.pdf?inline=true

Chicago

Gartzke, Erik A., and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch. Ties that Bias in International Conflict. Peace Research Institute Oslo, n.d. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/a6555be0-217a-4ef2-a5e5-da9834174459/final_GG_ties.pdf?inline=true.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Gartzke |first1=Erik A. |last2=Gleditsch |first2=Kristian Skrede |title=Ties that Bias in International Conflict |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/a6555be0-217a-4ef2-a5e5-da9834174459/final_GG_ties.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{gartzkendties, author = {Gartzke, Erik A. and Gleditsch, Kristian Skrede}, title = {{Ties that Bias in International Conflict}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/a6555be0-217a-4ef2-a5e5-da9834174459/final_GG_ties.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }