Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background.

Wargaming has a long history as a tool for understanding the complexity of conflict. Although wargames have shown their relevance across topics and time, the immersive nature of wargames and the guild-like communities that surround them have often resisted the social scientific advances that occurred alongside the evolution of warfare. However, recent work raises new possibilities for integrating wargaming practices and social scientific methods.

Purpose.

Develop the experimental wargaming method and practice. Prioritizing the focus on iteration, control, and generalizability within experimental design can provide new opportunities for wargames to answer broader questions about decision-making, crisis behaviors, and patterns of outcomes.

Method.

The International Crisis Wargame developed in 2018 demonstrates the viability of experimental wargaming, and models the process of theorizing, designing, developing, and executing these wargames. It also identifies what makes games more or less experimental and details how experimental design influenced choices in the game.

Conclusion.

Experimental wargames are a promising new tool for both the social science and the wargaming communities. A proposed new research agenda for experimental design within wargames would support this nascent method

Keywords

experiment crisis behavior social science research methodology cyber

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acton

J. M.

(2018). Escalation through Entanglement: How the Vulnerability of Command-and-Control Systems Raises the Risks of an Inadvertent Nuclear War. International Security , 43(1), 56–99. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00320

Bartels

E. M.

(2017). Insights from a Survey of the Wargaming Community. Military Operations Research Society Wargaming Community of Practice . http://www.elliebartels.com/uploads/1/1/0/6/110629149/mors_cop_gaming_community_survey_briefing_7sept2017.pdf

Bartels

E. M.

(2018). Games as Structured Comparisons: A Discussion of Methods . International Studies Association Annual Conference, San Francisco. http://web.isanet.org/Web/Conferences/San%20Francisco%202018-s/Archive/08cc29ac-0973-4cac-97cb-d0f1891c5d55.pdf

Bartels

E. M.

(2019). The Science of Wargames: A discussion of philosophies of science for research games . Workshop on War Gaming and Implications for International Relations Research. http://www.elliebartels.com/uploads/1/1/0/6/110629149/bartels-the_science_of_wargames_nwc_mit.pdf

Barzashka

(2019, March 15). Wargaming: How to turn vogue into science. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists . https://thebulletin.org/2019/03/wargaming-how-to-turn-vogue-into-science/

Bloomfield

L. P.

, & Whaley

(1963). The political-military exercise: A progress report . The MIT Center for International Studies. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/83079

Borghard

E. D.

, & Lonergan

S. W.

(2017). The Logic of Coercion in Cyberspace. Security Studies , 26(3), 452–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2017.1306396

Borghard

E. D.

, & Lonergan

S. W.

(2019). Cyber operations as imperfect tools of escalation. Strategic Studies Quarterly , 13(3), 122–145.

Caffrey

M. B.

(2019). On wargaming: How wargames have shaped history and how they may shape the future. Naval War College Press.

10.

Cimbala

S. J.

(1999). Accidental/Inadvertent Nuclear War and Information Warfare. Armed Forces & Society , 25(4), 653–675. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X9902500407

11.

Compton

(2019, October 9). The Obstacles on the Road to Better Analytical Wargaming. War on the Rocks . https://warontherocks.com/2019/10/the-obstacles-on-the-road-to-better-analytical-wargaming/

12.

Falk

, & Heckman

J. J.

(2009). Lab Experiments Are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences. Science , 326(5952), 535–538. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1168244

13.

Fong

(2006). Adapting COTS games for military experimentation. Simulation & Gaming , 37(4), 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878106291670

14.

Gartzke

(2013). The Myth of Cyberwar: Bringing War in Cyberspace Back Down to Earth. International Security , 38(2), 41–73. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00136

15.

Gartzke

, & Lindsay

J. R.

(2017). Thermonuclear cyberwar. Journal of Cybersecurity . https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyw017

16.

Gerber

A. S.

, & Green

D. P.

(2012). Field experiments: Design, analysis, and interpretation (1st ed). W. W. Norton.

17.

Gvosdev

N. K.

(2017). How U.S. National Security Decisions Are Made. Orbis , 61(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2016.12.005

18.

Harrison

G. W.

, & List

J. A.

(2004). Field Experiments. Journal of Economic Literature , 42(4), 1009–1055. https://doi.org/10.1257/0022051043004577

19.

Jensen

, & Banks

(2018). Cyber Operations in Conflict: Lessons from Analytic Wargames (CLTC Occasional White Paper Series). Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity. https://cltc.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Cyber_Operations_In_Conflict.pdf

20.

Johnson

D. D. P.

, McDermott

, Barrett

E. S.

, Cowden

, Wrangham

, McIntyre

M. H.

, & Peter Rosen

(2006). Overconfidence in wargames: Experimental evidence on expectations, aggression, gender and testosterone. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 273(1600), 2513–2520. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3606

21.

Judge

(2020). The Wargaming Guild: How the Nature of a Discipline Impacts its Craft and Whether it Matters . Connection Wargaming Conference. https://connections-wargaming.com/connections-2020/

22.

Kriz

W. C.

(2017). Historical Roots and New Fruits of Gaming and Simulation. Simulation & Gaming , 48(5), 583–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878117732845

23.

Leonard

(2019, September 5). US Air Force Begins 2019 Space Wargame . Space.Com. https://www.space.com/united-states-air-force-schriever-wargame-2029.html

24.

Lindsay

J. R.

(2015). The Impact of China on Cybersecurity: Fiction and Friction. International Security , 39(3), 7–47. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00189

25.

Lin-Greenberg

(2018). Game of Drones: The Effect of Remote Warfighting Technology on Conflict Escalation (Evidence from Wargames). Available at SSRN . https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3288988

26.

Lin-Greenberg

, Pauly

, & Schneider

(2020). Wargaming for Political Science Research. Available at SSRN . https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3676665

27.

Mandel

(1977). Political Gaming and Foreign Policy Making during Crises. World Politics , 29(4), 610–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010041

28.

McCue

(2003). The Practice of Military Experimentation (CRM D0007581.A1/Final). Center for Naval Analyses. https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/D0007581.A1.pdf

29.

McDermott

(2002). Experimental Methods in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science , 5(1), 31–61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.5.091001.170657

30.

McDermott

(2011). Internal and External Validity. In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science . Cambridge University Press.

31.

McGrady

(2019, November 8). Getting the Story Right about Wargaming. War on the Rocks . https://warontherocks.com/2019/11/getting-the-story-right-about-wargaming/

32.

Morton

R. B.

, & Williams

K. C.

(2010). Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality: From Nature to the Lab . Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511762888

33.

Nye

J. S.

(2017). Deterrence and Dissuasion in Cyberspace. International Security , 41(3), 44–71. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00266

34.

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Matters. (2020). Nuclear Matters Handbook 2020 . https://www.acq.osd.mil/ncbdp/nm/nmhb/

35.

Perla

P. P.

(2016). Now hear this–improving war-gaming is worthwhile–and smart. Proceedings , 142(1), 1,355. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2016/january/now-hear-improving-wargaming-worthwhile-and-smart

36.

Reddie

A. W.

, Goldblum

B. L.

, Lakkaraju

, Reinhardt

, Nacht

, & Epifanovskaya

(2018). Next-generation wargames. Science , 362(6421), 1362–1364. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav2135

37.

Rubel

R. C.

(2006). The Epistemology of War Gaming. Naval War College Review , 59(2), 22.

38.

Schneider

(2017). Cyber and crisis escalation: Insights from wargaming. USASOC Futures Forum . https://paxsims.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/paper-cyber-and-crisis-escalation-insights-from-wargaming-schneider.pdf

39.

Schneider

, Schechter

, & Shaffer

(2017). Navy—Private Sector Critical Infrastructure War Game 2017: Game Report . U.S. Naval War College. https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=810802

40.

Schram

(2005) Artificiality: The tension between internal and external validity in economic experiments. Journal of Economic Methodology, 12(2): 225–237.

41.

Slayton

(2017). What Is the Cyber Offense-Defense Balance? Conceptions, Causes, and Assessment. International Security , 41(3), 72–109. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00267

42.

Smith

(2010). The Long History of Gaming in Military Training. Simulation & Gaming , 41(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878109334330

43.

Stoutland

P. O.

, & Pitts-Kiefer

(2018). Nuclear weapons in the new cyber age: Report of the cyber-nuclear weapons study group. Nuclear Threat Initiative.

44.

Unal

, & Lewis

(2018). Cybersecurity of nuclear weapons systems: Threats, vulnerabilities and consequences . Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

45.

Wintjes

(2015). Europe’s Earliest Kriegsspiel? Book Seven of Reinhard Graf zu Solms’ Kriegsregierung and the ‘Prehistory’of Professional War Gaming. British Journal for Military History , 2(1). http://bjmh.gold.ac.uk/article/view/634

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.

0.00 MB

9.46 MB

Wargaming as a Methodology: The International Crisis Wargame and Experimental Wargaming

Abstract

Background.

Purpose.

Method.

Conclusion.

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material