Abstract
This article attempts to explain the decision to use force against Iraq using a noncompensatory theory of decision making. Rather than choosing an alternative that maximizes utility on the basis of a holistic comparison process as suggested by the expected utility model, or selecting an alternative that “satisfices” a certain criterion as predicted by the cybernetic model, the noncompensatory theory suggests that decisions on the use of force are often made based on the rejection of undesirable alternatives on the basis of one, or at most a few, criteria.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
