Abstract
Alcock's (1972) two-phase theory of war and an earlier test of the theory are critically reviewed. Two pendulum hypotheses linking the onset of war (defined both broadly and narrowly), the formation of alliances, and changes in military expenditures are derived, operationalized, and tested. Contrary to Alcock's earlier findings, the tests, concentrating on 1900-1965 great power war and alliance behavior, fail to provide any systematic support for the two hypotheses. This does not mean that we can reject the theory, but the evidence indicates that Alcock's theory does not advance our understanding of great power war and alliance behavior.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
