Scholarly Publications
Click on a button to jump to that area of research. Those without institutional access to the journals can email me for a PDF.
Abstract
Within the subfield of arms trade research, scholars tend to focus either on the possession of arms or on the transfer of arms. Work on arms possession analyzes the relationship between a state’s arsenal and outcomes of interest like conflict or human rights violations. Work on arms transfers often takes an implicit network approach and looks at the relationships created or amplified when a weapon is given from one actor to another. These literatures rarely speak to one another, or to policy work on the arms trade. As a result, arms trade research has reached divergent conclusions why and when states send and seek arms. This article highlights divisions and divergences in arms trade research, and presents an agenda for future research based on a guiding set of theoretical and methodological questions.
Research on the Arms Trade
Jennifer Spindel, “Boom, Bling, Backbone or Blip?: The Signaling Inherent in Arms Sales,” International Security 43, no. 3 (Winter 2024/2025): 164-204.
Abstract
Why do states send and seek conventional weapons? Though it may seem obvious that the balance of power motivates states to do so, numerous conventional arms transfers do not conform to the balance of power logic. This article argues that states seek weapons because arms transfers send signals about political alignments. Misunderstanding this signaling dynamic is part of the reason why the arms trade literature reaches divergent findings about the causes and consequences of arms sales. To explain how signaling dynamics operate alongside balance of power considerations, this article proposes a theory of arms transfers as symbolic signals. The article presents a typology of conventional weapons based on the weapons’ military utility and prestige and shows that different types of conventional weapons transfers send different signals about the political closeness or distance between the sender and receiver. I examine the case of arms sales to the Middle East before the 1967 Six-Day War to show the signaling function of arms transfers.
Jennifer Spindel, “Arms Possession or Arms Transfers? Divisions and Future Directions in Arms Trade Research,” Contemporary Security Policy, online first, April 2026.
Jennifer Spindel, “Defense Offsets and Political Leverage,” Economics of Peace and Security Journal, 19, no. 1 (2024): 23-39.
Abstract
Why do states agree to offset provisions when they purchase weapons, and what are the consequences of different types of offsets? This article takes a network approach to understanding the causes and consequences of offsets in the arms trade. It argues that offset clauses create network ties that affect a state’s position and power in the global arms production network. This depends on the type of offset it pursues—only a small subset of states with advanced technological manufacturing capabilities can maintain a central and powerful position by leveraging direct offsets. Other states must pursue indirect offsets, which have the opposite effect and keep these states locked into peripheral positions of limited power. Through case studies of offset use in India and Malaysia, this article shows how difficult it is to achieve network interdependence (India), and the difficulties of using indirect offsets to achieve political goals (Malaysia).
Jennifer Spindel, “Arms for Influence? The Limits of Great Power Leverage,” European Journal of International Security 8, no. 3 (2023): 395-412.
Abstract
Scholars and policymakers agree that major powers have leverage over their more junior partners. Giving security assistance or providing arms is supposed to increase this leverage. However, major powers often hit roadblocks when trying to influence the behaviour of their junior partners. This article demonstrates that junior partners are often successful in constraining the behaviour of the major power partners, and have particular success in extracting additional resources from their major partners. This article develops the concept of loyalty coercion to explain that leverage is based on rhetorical and symbolic moves, rather than material preponderance. It then uses cases of US arms sales to show that weapons transfers did not lead to US leverage, instead opened opportunities for junior partner influence. The article contributes to scholarly and policy perspectives on alliance management and reputation, and leverage in world politics
Raymond Kuo and Jennifer Spindel, “The Unintended Consequences of Arms Embargoes,” Foreign Policy Analysis 19, no. 1 (2023): orac030.
Abstract
To what extent do arms embargoes curtail the embargoed state's ability to get conventional weapons? We argue that arms embargoes rarely prevent states from receiving conventional weapons, and are one of the few events that push states to switch their supplier base. Using a new dataset on the place of origin of conventional weapons, we provide a more full and complete picture of the effects of arms embargoes imposed by the United Nations and European Union. We show that middlemen, a previously obscured category of states who sell, but do not produce arms, are crucial to skirting embargoes. This article suggests that arms embargoes are a more complicated foreign policy tool than scholars have previously appreciated, and that policymakers need to be cautious in imposing them.
Ronald R. Krebs and Jennifer Spindel, “Divided Priorities: Why and When Allies Differ over Military Intervention.” Security Studies 27, no. 4 (2018): 575-606.
Abstract
Scholars have vigorously debated whether adversaries carefully scrutinize if states have, in the past, demonstrated toughness and whether adversaries base present and future crisis-bargaining behavior on this record. If they do—as a central strain of deterrence theory, and its contemporary defenders, maintain—hard-line policies, including limited military interventions, can bolster deterrence. We know much less about a second audience that is presumably attentive to demonstrations of resolve: allies. A common view, derived from the same logic, and which we call Hawkish Reassurance Theory, suggests that states should support and find reassuring their allies’ faraway military interventions. In contrast, we argue that such interventions call into doubt the intervener’s will and capacity to fulfill its core alliance commitments, undermine the credibility of the alliance, and threaten allies’ security in both the short and long run. Allies thus ultimately oppose powerful partners’ hawkish postures in distant conflicts, and they may even consequently explore routes to security beyond the alliance. To assess this argument, we examine the varied stances leading US allies took from the start of the US intervention in Vietnam through its end. Allied behavior was largely consistent with our expectations. We conclude that, if one reason to deploy force is to signal to allies that you will come to their aid when they call, states should not bother.
Research on Civil-Military Relations
Robert Ralston and Jennifer Spindel, “Public Attitudes toward Diversity, Promotion, and Leadership in the US Military,” Armed Forces & Society 51, no. 4 (2022): 1387-1412.
Abstract
This article explores how the public understands military service and diversity. Using a conjoint survey experiment, we ask respondents to select between two candidates for promotion. We randomly present respondents’ two profiles, which vary the candidates’ gender, race, sexual orientation, marital status, number of years served, number of deployments, combat experience, and branch of the military. We find that respondents do not discount candidates based on their branch of service, gender, race, or marital status. However, respondents do weigh the candidates’ combat experience, number of years served, and number of deployments favorably. Finally, respondents penalize candidates based on their sexual orientation: Homosexual individuals are less likely to be selected for promotion. Furthermore, respondents especially discounted transgender individuals for promotion. Important differences, we show in this article, also exist between conservative and liberal respondents, as well as between male and female respondents.
Robert Ralston, Matthew Motta, and Jennifer Spindel, "When OK is NOT OK: Public Concern About White Nationalism in the U.S. Military (Research Note),” Armed Forces & Society, 48, no. 1 (2022): 228-239.
Abstract
Are Americans aware and concerned about White nationalism in the U.S. Military? Our large and demographically representative survey suggests that while most Americans suspect at least some presence of White nationalism in the military, many do not view it as a serious problem; particularly self-identified conservatives and respondents who hold highly favorable views toward military service members. However, in a between-/within-subjects experiment embedded in our survey, we show that providing information about the issue of White nationalism in the U.S. Military increases the public’s overall concern about White nationalism in the U.S. Military.
Matthew Motta, Robert Ralston, and Jennifer Spindel, “A Call to Arms for Climate Change? How military service member concern about climate change can inform effective climate communication,” Environmental Communication 15, no. 1 (2021): 85-98.
Abstract
Military service members are a highly trusted group – especially among ideological conservatives. Consequently, we devised an environmental communication strategy that attributes pro-climate messages to military service members, aimed at convincing conservative climate skeptics to express elevated concern. In a large survey experiment, we show that conservatives are more likely to express concern about climate change when framed as a national security concern and communicated by members of the armed services. Supplementary analyses of an original military service member survey suggest that this approach is externally valid, as many past and current armed forces express concern about the effects of climate change. Our study demonstrates the effectiveness of appealing to trusted sources to communicate climate change risks to skeptical audiences, and suggests several promising avenues for future environmental communication research.
Jennifer Spindel and Robert Ralston, “Taking Social Cohesion to Task: Perceptions of Transgender Military Inclusion and Concepts of Cohesion,” Journal of Global Security Studies 5, no. 1 (2020): 80-96. **Special Issue on “Inclusion and Exclusion in Global Security Studies”
Abstract
Recent political debates over the inclusion of transgender servicemembers in the US military center around the impact such inclusion will have on unit cohesion and effectiveness. Missing from the debate, however, are the perceptions of those who do the soldiering. What are their perceptions of cohesion? Do they, like political leaders and the general public, believe unit cohesion leads to military effectiveness? In other words, how much does the narrative at the elite level—that insists excluding minority groups is a military necessity—match the perceptions of those who serve? Drawing on an original survey of 151 current and former members of the US military, our results suggest that servicemembers’ perceptions mirror those in the general public: political ideology is correlated with beliefs that minority groups disrupt unit cohesion. We find that conservatives are more likely to believe that the inclusion of transgender soldiers will negatively impact cohesion and undermine unit effectiveness. Moreover, conservatives are more likely to endorse a conceptualization of cohesion that hinges on the social—“people like me” or “band of brothers”—dynamics of cohesion rather than more professional, task-oriented conceptions of cohesion. However, military experience affects these perceptions: respondents with combat experience, who held/hold a higher rank, and who are currently serving are more likely to endorse a task-based conception of cohesion that ties cohesion to professionalism and competence, rather than social identity
Research on Methods and Teaching
Jennifer Spindel and Emily Baer, “Known Unknowns: Opportunities and Challenges to Strengthening Archival Research in Political Science,” Qualitative and Multi-Method Research 23, no. 1 (Spring 2025): 5-13.
This chapter presents an introduction to archival research as a political science methodology. We introduce a model of archival research that offers greater specification of primary source data identification, contextualization, and evaluation—the I.C.E. Model—which we argue will help strengthen the acceptance and understanding of the rigor of archival research as a data source and method of analysis, and promote its adoption across the discipline. The I.C.E. Model we present identifies a series of best practices important for strengthening validity and generalizability, and situates archival work alongside other social science research methods. We end with a discussion of contemporary challenges to conducting quality archival research that merit further response
“Qualitative Social Network Analysis,” in Doing Good Qualitative Research, eds. Jen St. Cyr and Sara Wallace Goodman, Oxford University Press, April 2024, pp. 373-385.
Qualitative social network analysis (QSNA) takes as its unit of analysis the relationships between actors. This relational approach sees agency as inherently linked to structure and provides scholars with a way to study social and political reality in dynamic, continual, and processual terms. As a methodological approach, QSNA can link micro and macro levels of analysis and is particularly good for studying change over time. The method is not without its difficulties, however. QSNA often struggles to move from description to explanation, and the requirements of data and evidence collection can be a barrier to its use. New developments in studying multiple, overlapping networks and clearer guidance on case selection can help scholars overcome these potential issues.
Jennifer Spindel and James Ackerman, “Adapting to the AI Era: ChatGPT in the Classroom,” Journal of Political Science Education, online first, October 2024.
Abstract
The emergence of ChatGPT, a conversational AI developed by OpenAI, has raised profound questions about its impact on the traditional university experience. This article addresses the pervasive discourse surrounding ChatGPT by investigating the actual capabilities of AI writing at the undergraduate level. To study the strengths and limitations of AI in the classroom, we conducted a survey experiment involving faculty assessment of essays generated by ChatGPT. Contrary to concerns of diminishing academic rigor and standards, our findings suggest that ChatGPT’s effectiveness is influenced by user knowledge, indicating potential for symbiotic integration into pedagogical approaches. Rather than spell the end of the college essay, we suggest that ChatGPT offers opportunities to open discussions about information literacy and verification of information. For universities, our study suggests revising university AI-usage policies and incorporating AI into teaching and learning objectives.
It's a Trap! Teaching Bureaucratic Politics with a Star Wars Simulation, Political Science Educator 28, no. 1. 7 June 2024.
H-Diplo Teaching Roundtable XXI-35 on Teaching Grand Strategy. 2 April 2020