Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:36:31.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transaction Data and Analysis: In Search of Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Barry B. Hughes
Barry B. Hughes
Affiliation:
Berry B. Hughes is an assistant professor of political science atCase Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio.
Get access

Extract

The article focuses on two problems in the measurement of integration with transaction data. The first is the analysis procedure by which the transaction data are summarized. Different procedures affect the data in such different ways that they can actually lead to contradictory conclusions about the progress of integration. This article spells out some of the major differences in the models of analysis. The second problem is validity of transaction data as measures of integration. There are numerous different conceptualizations of integration, some centering on the development of central institutions, others on the existence of favorable attitudes among people, and still others on the existence of a highly co-operative relationship among states. It is not clear that transaction data are the most appropriate measure of any of these concepts.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , Autumn 1972 , pp. 659 - 680
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Recently, for instance, David RePass illustrated how the reliance upon closed, as opposed to open-ended, questions has affected our conclusions concerning the issue orientation of the American public. RePass, David, “Issue Salience and Party Choice,” American Political Science Review, 65 (06, 1971), pp. 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Caporaso, James A., “Theory and Method in the Study of International Integration,” International Organization, 25 (Spring, 1971), p. 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 See especially, Puchala, Donald, “International Transactions and Regional Integration,” International Organization, 24 (Autumn, 1970), pp. 732–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 Alker, Hayward R. Jr., “Integration Logics”: A Review, Extension, and Critique International Organization, 24 (Autumn, 1970), pp. 869–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 The basic article dealing with the null model is Savage, Richard I. and Deutsch, Karl W., “A Statistical Model of the Gross Analysis of Transaction Flows,” Econometrica, 28 (07, 1960), pp. 551–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar A literature has grown up around the model, including Alker, Hayward Jr., “An IBM 709 Program for the Gross Analysis of Transaction Flows,” Behavioral Science, 7 (10, 1962), pp. 498–99;Google ScholarGoodman, Leo, “Statistical Methods for the Preliminary Analysis of Transaction Flows,” Econometrica, 31 (1963), pp. 197–208;CrossRefGoogle ScholarGoodman, Leo, “A Short Computer Program for the Analysis of Transaction Flows,” Behavioral Science, 9 (04, 1964), pp. 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The program presented by Goodman was used in the computation of relative acceptance coefficients in this paper.

6 Users include Alker, “Integration Logics,” Puchala, “International Transactions,”; Savage and Duetsch, “A Statistical Model”; Deutsch, Karl, “Integration and Arms Control in the European Political Environment: A Summary Report.’ American Political Science Review, 60 (06, 1966), pp. 354–366;CrossRefGoogle ScholarLijphart, Arend, “Tourist Traffic and Transition Potential,” Journal of Common Market Studies, 2 (03, 1964), pp. 251–262;CrossRefGoogle ScholarRussett, Bruce M., Community and Contention: Britain and America in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1953).Google Scholar

7 Two excellent works relying heavily on export-percentage figures are Gehlen, Michael P., “The Integrative Process in East Europe: A Theoretical Framework,” Journal of Politics, 30 (02, 1968) pp. 90–113,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Walter, Ingo, The European Common Market (New York: J. B. Lippincott, Co., 1967).Google Scholar

8 For an example of this approach, see Russett, Bruce M., International Regions and the International System (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1967).Google Scholar Russett actually used gross national product. The data used for control in this analysis were national income data for the NATO and western nations and net material product for the communist countries.

9 Additional measures were used by both Caporaso, “Theory and Method,” and Puchala, “International Transactions.”

10 Some have suggested that we should also control for other variables such as distance between nations. Whether we should penalize nations for being near each other or whether we should treat that as an independent variable which may underlie a high level of transactions is a difficult, but primarily theoretical, question. On the other hand, if we wish to compare the degree of interaction between United States and Canada with that between Bulgaria and Albania, the size of the nations must almost certainly be controlled.

11 Hughes, Barry, “Transaction Analysis: The Impact of Operationalization,” International Organization, 25 (Winter, 1971), pp. 132–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Richard Chadwick and Karl Deutsch have noted that applications of the null model (including mine) have unjustifiably assumed that the “rest of the world” to the “rest of the world” cell is zero (as did Savage and Deutsch in the original model presentation). Not assuming this would some what change the values in the null model column. Using Chadwick and Deutsch's data, however, the percentage change for the EEC only changes by 4%—from 17% to 13%. See Chadwick, and Deutsch, , “International Trade and Economic Integration: Further Developments in Matrix Analysis to Estimate the Effects of Background Conditions Versus Political Controls,” mimeo, 1971, p. 25.Google Scholar

13 Gehlen, Michael, “The Integrative Process in East Europe,” Journal of Politics, 30 (02, 1968), pp. 90–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Since this characteristic has not been recognized by same users of the null model, it should be substantiated. Expected values are approximately equal to the product of row and column marginals divided by total trade in the system examined. Total trade in the system is always less than total world trade because it is impossible to fill in the “rest of the world” to the “rest of the world” cell with actual trade. Yet as additional nations are added to the matrix, the total trade increases toward the limit of total world trade. This means that the expected values will decrease. Thus the RAs will increase. Once the matrix examined includes all of the Eastern and Western European nations and North America, however, the bulk of world trade is included, and the addition of further nations will have a small impact.

15 James Caporaso, “Theory and Method.”

16 See for example, Hopmann, P. Terrence and Hughes, Barry B., “Attitudinal and Behavioral Measures of Cohesion and Integration in International Political Coalitions: A Comparison of the Communist System and the North Atlantic Community,” paper delivered at the annual convention of the Midwest Political Science Association, 05, 1970.Google Scholar

17 Deutsch, Karl W. and Singer, J. David, “Multipolar Systems and International Stability,“ World Politics, 16 (04, 1964), pp. 390–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Inglehart, Ronald, “Trends and Nontrends in the Western Alliance: A Review,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 12 (03, 1968), pp. 120–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 For a discussion of this question see Miller, Linda, “Regional Organization and the Regulation of Internal Conflict,” in Nye, Joseph Jr. (ed.), International Regionalism (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1968), pp. 77–96.Google Scholar

20 Russett, Bruce M., “Transactions, Community and International Political Integration,” Journal of Common Market Studies, 9 (03, 1971), pp. 236–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Moses, Lincoln E., Brody, Richard A., Holsti, Ole R., Kadane, Joseph B., and Milstein, Jeffrey S., “Scaling Data on Intern-Nation Action,” Science Vol. 156 (05 26, 1967), pp. 1056–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Aggregations were used rather than individual actions because those using transaction data are often most interested in intra-bloc and inter-bloc relationships.

13 Gehlen, Michael, “The Integrative Process in East Europe,” Journal of Politics, 30 (02, 1968), pp. 90–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Since this characteristic has not been recognized by same users of the null model, it should be substantiated. Expected values are approximately equal to the product of row and column marginals divided by total trade in the system examined. Total trade in the system is always less than total world trade because it is impossible to fill in the “rest of the world” to the “rest of the world” cell with actual trade. Yet as additional nations are added to the matrix, the total trade increases toward the limit of total world trade. This means that the expected values will decrease. Thus the RAs will increase. Once the matrix examined includes all of the Eastern and Western European nations and North America, however, the bulk of world trade is included, and the addition of further nations will have a small impact.

15 James Caporaso, “Theory and Method.”

16 See for example, Hopmann, P. Terrence and Hughes, Barry B., “Attitudinal and Behavioral Measures of Cohesion and Integration in International Political Coalitions: A Comparison of the Communist System and the North Atlantic Community,“ paper delivered at the annual convention of the Midwest Political Science Association, 05, 1970.Google Scholar

17 Deutsch, Karl W. and Singer, J. David, “Multipolar Systems and International Stability,“ World Politics, 16 (04, 1964), pp. 390–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Inglehart, Ronald, “Trends and Nontrends in the Western Alliance: A Review,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 12 (03, 1968), pp. 120–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 For a discussion of this question see Miller, Linda, “Regional Organization and the Regulation of Internal Conflict,” in Nye, Joseph Jr. (ed.), International Regionalism (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1968), pp. 77–96.Google Scholar

20 Russett, Bruce M., “Transactions, Community and International Political Integration,” Journal of Common Market Studies, 9 (03, 1971), pp. 236–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Moses, Lincoln E., Brody, Richard A., Holsti, Ole R., Kadane, Joseph B., and Milstein, Jeffrey S., “Scaling Data on Intern-Nation Action,” Science Vol. 156 (05 26, 1967), pp. 1056–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Aggregations were used rather than individual actions because those using transaction data are often most interested in intra-bloc and inter-bloc relationships.

23 See Lindberg, Leon, “The European Community as a Political System: Notes Toward the Construction of a Model,” Journal of Common Market Studies, 5 (06, 1967), pp. 344–387,CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “Political Integration as a Multidimensional Phenomenon Requiring Multivariate Measurement,” International Organization, XXIV (Autumn, 1970), pp. 649–732.Google Scholar See also Nye, Joseph, “Comparative Regional Measurement,“ International Organization, (Autumn, 1968), pp. 855–880,Google Scholar and Puchala, Donald, “Integration and Disintegration in France-German Relations: 1954–1965,” International Organization, 24 (Spring, 1970), pp. 183–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Puchala, , “Integration and Disintegration,“ p. 199.Google Scholar

25 Nye, “Comparative Regional Measurement.”

26 Nye, Ibid., p. 875.

27 Fisher, William E., “An Analysis of the Deutsch Sociocausal Paradigm of Political Integration,” International Organization, 23 (Spring, 1969), pp. 254–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 Deutsch, Karl W., Political Community at the International Level: Problems of Definition and Measurement (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co., 1970).Google Scholar

29 Puchala, “Integration and Disintegration.”

30 Puchala, Donald J., “European Political Integration: Progress and Prospects,” (New Haven: Yale University, Political Science Research Library, Mimeo, 1966).Google Scholar

31 Lijphart, “Tourist Traffic.”

32 See for example, Karl W. Deutsch, Political Community. See also, Alker, “Integration Logics,” and Puchala, “International Transactions.”

33 Merritt, Richard L. and Puchala, Donald J. (eds.), Western European Perspectives on International Affairs (New York: Praeger, 1968).Google Scholar

34 The number of cases varies because the availability of data varied. In each case all nations were used for which data were available. All of the nations in the set were from Western Europe and North America.

35 Similarly, it was possible to correlate events data and additional data for the same set of national dyads over the 1955–65 period. The average correlation was 15. This is similar to the table 4 cross-sectional value of —.13. The over-time and cross-sectional correlations support and are given support by the Miller and Stokes research in the United States, of the relationship between public foreign policy attitudes and votes of representatives. The Miller, and Stokes, study found no correlation. “Constituency Influences in Congress,” American Political Science Review. 57 (03, 1963). pp. 45–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 The nations used in the cross-section correlation between trade and events (table 4) are Belgium-Luxembourg, Canada, France, West Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.

37 Brams, Steven J., “Transaction Flows in the International System,” American Political Science Review, 60 (12, 1966), pp. 880–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38 Cobb, Roger W. and Elder, Charles, International Community (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970), p. 86.Google Scholar

39 For a discussion of the relationship among these subconcepts, see Barry Hughes and John Schwarz, “Dimensions of Political Integration and the Experience of the European Community,” International Studies Quarterly, forthcoming.