When and why do foreign policy officials believe that it is important to fight for credibility? Conventional wisdom suggests that policymakers tend to care uniformly about how others perceive them. Yet this logic overlooks substantial variation in how officials prioritize credibility when weighing policy options. I argue that organizational identity affects the dimensions of credibility that policymakers value and their preferences on the use of force. Diplomats see the world from a reputational perspective, whereas military officials do so through the lens of military capabilities. During crises, diplomats match their advice to reputational considerations, while military officials attend to available capabilities. I examine these propositions via an original, vignette-based elite experiment involving over 250 U.S. national security officials and analysis of historical elite survey data. The findings demonstrate that where you sit shapes when you want to fight for credibility.
AllisonGrahamZelikowPhilip. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. London, UK: Longman.
2.
BarangerDavid AAFinsaasMegan CGoldsteinBrandon LVizeColin ELynamDonald ROlinoThomas M. 2023. “Tutorial: Power Analyses for Interaction Effects in Cross-Sectional Regressions.” Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science6 (3): 1–3.
3.
BettsRichard K.1991. Soldiers, Statesmen, and Cold War Crises. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
4.
BlankenshipBrianLin-GreenbergErik. 2022. “Trivial Tripwires? Military Capabilities and Alliance Reassurance.” Security Studies31 (1): 92-117.
5.
BrecherMichaelWilkenfeldJonathan. 1997. A Study of Crisis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
6.
BrooksRisa. 2008. Shaping Strategy: The Civil-Military Politics of Strategic Assessment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
BrooksRisa. 2020. “Paradoxes of Professionalism: Rethinking Civil-Military Relations in the United States.” International Security44 (4): 7-44.
8.
BrutgerRyanKertzerJoshua D.. 2018. “A Dispositional Theory of Reputation Costs.” International Organization72 (3): 693-724.
9.
BrutgerRyanKertzerJoshua DRenshonJonathanWeissChagai M. 2022. Abstraction in Experimental Design: Testing the Tradeoffs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
BurnsWilliam J.2019. The Back Channel: A Memoir of American Diplomacy and the Case for its Renewal. New York: Random House.
11.
CarpenterDaniel. 2002. The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
CaslerDonYarhi-MiloKeren. 2023. “Signaling, Resolve, and Reputation in International Politics.” The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology: 426-446.
13.
ChampelyStephaneEkstromClausDalgaardPeterGillJeffreyWeibelzahlStephanAnandkumarAdityaFordClayVolcicRobertRosarioHelios De. 2017. “Pwr: Basic Functions for Power Analysis.” https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pwr/.
14.
CheckelJeffrey T. 2017. “Socialization and Violence: Introduction and Framework.” Journal of Peace Research54 (5): 592-605.
15.
ClarkRichard. 2021. “Pool or Duel? Cooperation and Competition Among International Organizations.” International Organization75: 1-21.
16.
CrescenziMark J. C.2018. Of Friends and Foes: Reputation and Learning in International Politics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
DafoeAllanRenshonJonathanPaulHuth. 2014. “Reputation and Status as Motives for War.” Annual Review of Political Science17 (1): 371-393.
18.
DafoeAllanZwetslootRemcoCebulMatthew. 2021. “Reputations for Resolve and Higher-Order Beliefs in Crisis Bargaining.” Journal of Conflict Resolution65 (7-8): 1378-1404.
19.
DestlerI. M.1972. Presidents, Bureaucrats and Foreign Policy: The Politics of Organizational Reform. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
20.
DiCiccoJonathan MFordhamBenjamin O. 2018. “The Things They Carried: Generational Effects of the Vietnam War on Elite Opinion.” International Studies Quarterly62 (1): 131-144.
21.
DietrichSimoneHardtHeidiSwedlundHaley J. 2021. “How to Make Elite Experiments Work in International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations27 (2): 596-621.
22.
DobbinsJames. 2017. Foreign Service: Five Decades on the Frontlines of American Diplomacy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
23.
DruckmanJames NGreenDonald P. 2021. Advances in Experimental Political Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
EvansAlexandra TPotterA Bradley. 2019. When Do Leaders Change Course? Theories of Success and the American Withdrawal from Beirut, 1983-1984. Washington, DC: Texas National Security Review.
25.
FeaverPeter. 2003. Armed Servants: Agency, Oversight, and Civil-Military Relations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
FeaverPeter DGelpiChristopher. 2004. Choosing Your Battles: American Civil-Military Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
27.
FeaverPeter DKohnRichard H. 2001. Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28.
FinnemoreMartha. 2003. The Purpose of Intervention: Changing Beliefs about the Use of Force. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
29.
FriedmanJeffrey A.2019. War and Chance: Assessing Uncertainty in International Politics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
30.
GeorgeAlexander L.1980. Presidential Decisionmaking in Foreign Policy: The Effective Use of Information and Advice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
31.
GeorgeAlexander L.SmokeRichard. 1974. Deterrence in American Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
32.
GerberAlan SGreenDonald P. 2012. Field Experiments: Design, Analysis, and Interpretation. New York, NY: WW Norton.
33.
GvosdevNikolas KJessicaD BlankshainCooperDavid A. 2019. Decision-making in American Foreign Policy: Translating Theory into Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
Hafner-BurtonEmilie MLeVeckBrad LVictorDavid G. 2017. “No False Promises: How the Prospect of Non-compliance Affects Elite Preferences for International Cooperation.” International Studies Quarterly61 (1): 136-149.
HarringtonDaniel F.2012. Berlin on the Brink: The Blockade, the Airlift, and the Early Cold War. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.
37.
HarveyFrank P.MittonJohn. 2016. Fighting for Credibility: US Reputation and International Politics. Toronto; Buffalo; London: University of Toronto Press.
38.
HenryIain D.2020. “What Allies Want: Reconsidering Loyalty, Reliability, and Alliance Interdependence.” International Security44 (4): 45-83.
39.
HolstiOle RRosenauJames N. 1999. “Foreign Policy Leadership Project, 1976-1996.” Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
40.
HopfTed. 1994. Peripheral Visions. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
41.
HorowitzMichael CStamAllan C. 2014. “How Prior Military Experience Influences the Future Militarized Behavior of Leaders.” International Organization68: 527-559.
42.
HudsonValerie M. 2014. Foreign Policy Analysis : Classic and Contemporary Theory. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
43.
HuntingtonSamuel P.1957. The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
44.
HuthPaul K.1997. “Reputations and Deterrence: A Theoretical and Empirical Assessment.” Security Studies7 (1): 72-99.
45.
JacksonVan. 2016. Rival Reputations: Coercion and Credibility in US-North Korea Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
46.
JervisRobert. 1970. The Logic of Images in International Relations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
47.
JervisRobert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48.
JervisRobert. 1998. System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
JervisRobertSnyderJack. 1991. Dominoes and Bandwagons: Strategic Beliefs and Great Power Competition in the Eurasian Rimland. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
50.
JervisRobertYarhi-MiloKerenCaslerDon. 2021. “Redefining the Debate over Reputation and Credibility in International Security: Promises and Limits of New Scholarship.” World Politics73 (1): 1-37.
51.
JettDennis. 2014. American Ambassadors: The Past, Present, and Future of America’s Diplomats. New York: Springer.
52.
JostTyler. 2024. Bureaucracies at War: The Institutional Origins of Miscalculation in International Crises. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
53.
JostTylerJoshuaD KertzerMinEricSchubRobert. 2024. “Advisers and Aggregation in Foreign Policy Decision Making.” International Organization78 (1): 1-37.
54.
JostTylerMeshkinKaineSchubRobert. 2022. “The Character and Origins of Military Attitudes on the Use of Force.” International Studies Quarterly66: 1–10.
55.
KertzerJoshua D.2016. Resolve in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
56.
KertzerJoshua DRenshonJonathan. 2022. “Experiments and Surveys on Political Elites.” Annual Review of Political Science25: 1-26.
57.
KertzerJoshua DRenshonJonathanYarhi-MiloKeren. 2021. “How Do Observers Assess Resolve?” British Journal of Political Science51 (1): 308-330.
58.
KierElizabeth. 1997. Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine between the Wars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
59.
LegroJeffrey W.1996. “Culture and Preferences in the International Cooperation Two-step.” American Political Science Review90 (1): 118-137.
60.
LevyJack S.McKoyMichael K.PaulPoastWallaceGeoffrey P. R.. 2015. “Backing Out or Backing in? Commitment and Consistency in Audience Costs Theory.” American Journal of Political Science59 (4): 988-1001.
61.
Lin-GreenbergErik. 2022. “Wargame of Drones: Remotely Piloted Aircraft and Crisis Escalation.” Journal of Conflict Resolution66 (10): 1737-1765.
62.
LindseyDavid. 2023. Delegated Diplomacy: How Ambassadors Establish Trust in International Relations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
63.
LogevallFredrik. 1999. Choosing War: The Lost Chance for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
64.
LuptonDanielle L.2020. Reputation for Resolve: How Leaders Signal Determination in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
65.
LuptonDanielle L.2022. “Military Experience and Elite Decision-Making: Self-Selection, Socialization, and the Vietnam Draft Lottery.” International Studies Quarterly66 (1): sqab052.
66.
MacDonaldPaul K.2021. “Are You Experienced? U.S. Ambassadors and International Conflict, 1946-2014.” Foreign Policy Analysis17 (4): 1–23.
67.
MalisMatt. 2021. “Conflict, Cooperation, and Delegated Diplomacy.” International Organization75 (4): 1018-1057.
68.
McMahonRobert J.1991. “Credibility and World Power: Exploring the Psychological Dimension in Postwar American Diplomacy*.” Diplomatic History15 (4): 455-472.
69.
McManusRoseanne W.2017. Statements of Resolve: Achieving Coercive Credibility in International Conflict. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
70.
MearsheimerJohn J.2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.
71.
MercerJonathan. 1996. Reputation and International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
72.
MilesRufus E.1978. “The Origin and Meaning of Miles’ Law.” Public Administration Review38 (5): 399-403.
73.
MurphyRobert D. 1964. Diplomat Among Warriors. New York, NY: Doubleday.
74.
NielsenSuzanne CSniderDon M. 2009. American Civil-Military Relations: The Soldier and the State in a New Era. Baltimore, MD: JHU Press.
75.
NicolsonHarold. 1939. Diplomacy. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Diplomacy.
76.
PalanStefanSchitterChristian. 2018. “Prolific. Ac—A Subject Pool for Online Experiments.” Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance17: 22-27.
77.
PeerEyalBrandimarteLauraSamatSonamAcquistiAlessandro. 2017. “Beyond the Turk: Alternative Platforms for Crowdsourcing Behavioral Research.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology70: 153-163.
78.
PosenBarry. 1984. The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany between the World Wars. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
79.
PressDaryl Grayson. 2005. Calculating Credibility: How Leaders Assess Military Threats. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
80.
RathbunBrian C. 2014. Diplomacy’s Value: Creating Security in 1920s Europe and the Contemporary Middle East. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
81.
RecchiaStefano. 2014. Reassuring the Reluctant Warriors: US Civil-Military Relations and Multilateral Intervention. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
82.
ReiterDanPoastPaul. 2021. “The Truth about Tripwires: Why Small Force Deployments Do Not Deter Aggression (Summer 2021).” Texas National Security Review4 (3): 34–53.
83.
RenshonJonathanAllanDafoePaulHuth. 2018. “Leader Influence and Reputation Formation in World Politics.” American Journal of Political Science62 (2): 325-339.
84.
RobinsonMichael A.2022. Dangerous Instrument: Political Polarization and US Civil-Military Relations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
85.
SaganScott D.1993. The Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
86.
SaundersElizabeth N.2011. Leaders at War: How Presidents Shape Military Interventions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
87.
SaundersElizabeth N.2018. “Leaders, Advisers, and the Political Origins of Elite Support for War.” Journal of Conflict Resolution62 (10): 2118-2149.
88.
SchellingThomas C.1966. Arms and Influence: With a New Preface and Afterword. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
89.
SchubRobert. 2022. “Informing the Leader: Bureaucracies and International Crises.” American Political Science Review116 (4): 1460-1476.
90.
SchulzingerRobert D.1975. The Making of the Diplomatic Mind. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
91.
SechserTodd S.2004. “Are Soldiers Less War-Prone Than Statesmen?” Journal of Conflict Resolution48 (5): 746-774.
92.
SelznickPhilip. 1948. “Foundations of the Theory of Organization.” American Sociological Review13 (1): 25-35.
93.
ShultzGeorge P. 2010. Turmoil and Triumph: Diplomacy, Power, and the Victory of the American Deal. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
94.
SimonHerbert A. 1947. Administrative Behavior. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
95.
SimpsonSmith. 1967. Anatomy of the State Department. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
96.
SnyderGlenn HeraldDiesingPaul. 1977. Conflict Among Nations: Bargaining, Decision Making, and System Structure in International Crises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
97.
SnyderJack. 1989. The Ideology of the Offensive: Military Decision Making and the Disasters of 1914. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
98.
TangShiping. 2005. “Reputation, Cult of Reputation, and International Conflict.” Security Studies14 (1): 34-62.
99.
TomzMichael. 2007. “Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach.” International Organization61 (4): 821-840.
100.
TrachtenbergMarc. 1991. History and Strategy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
101.
TragerRobert F.2017. Diplomacy: Communication and the Origins of International Order. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
102.
WeeksJessica LP. 2014. Dictators at War and Peace. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
103.
WeisigerAlexYarhi-MiloKeren. 2015. “Revisiting Reputation: How Past Actions Matter in International Politics.” International Organization69 (02): 473-495.
104.
WhitePeter. 2021. “Generals in the Cabinet: Military Participation in Government and International Conflict Initiation.” International Studies Quarterly65 (2): 551-561.
105.
WilsonJames Q.1989. Bureaucracy : What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do it. New York, NY: Basic Books.
106.
WuCathy XuanxuanWolfordScott. 2018. “Leaders, States, and Reputations.” Journal of Conflict Resolution62 (10): 2087-2117.
107.
Yarhi-MiloKeren. 2014. Knowing the Adversary: Leaders, Intelligence, and Assessment of Intentions in International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
108.
Yarhi-MiloKeren. 2018. Who Fights for Reputation: The Psychology of Leaders in International Conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
109.
ZelikowPhilipMayErnest. 2018. Suez Deconstructed: An Interactive Study in Crisis, War, and Peacemaking. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
