This is a continuation paper from another writer. It is the second draft in a series of 5. I have uploaded the last assignment for you. I will need you to read and expand on it per the instructions below. The first paragraph is what’s listed as a guideline and the second paragraph is the feedback from the first assignment. Thank you so much.
Draft 2. Literature Review. The literature review should revise the first draft in
accordance with comments received and substantially expand the portfolio from a
discussion of one articles approach and findings to a discussion of five such pieces of
academic literature and their approaches to the puzzle. Describe and critique the
theories and results of at least five peer-reviewed articles, dissertations/theses, or
research monographs from scholarly presses (or all of them, if five such sources do not
exist which is the students burden to prove). Meeting this milestone is worth up to
50 points, depending on the quality of the work.
Failure to clearly identify the question will result in the deduction of half of the
points which the portfolio would otherwise have earned.
For every one source fewer than five, ten points will be deducted. The exception
is if the student demonstrates to the satisfaction of the instructor that all work
relevant to the question has been reviewed.
No more than two assigned readings from class can count towards the
five-source minimum.
For each source which does not meet the academic criteria for inclusion,
up to ten points will be deducted, depending on how distant the source is
from original scholarly research (for example, other literature reviews or
academic textbooks are worth only 60% credit while encyclopedias are
worth only 20% credit).
Each source discussed must clearly relate to the question. If the
relationship is unclear, up to five points may be deducted.
For every two spelling/grammar errors, one point will be deducted.
~~~Feedback from Draft #1~~~
Talk more about the details of the two-level game used by Waddell. Does he use Putnam’s concept of a two-level game to formalize his theory of interstate war/escalation — or does the game merely serve as a metaphor in a more qualitative discussion?
What can we learn from this article about the preferences of publics or domestic constituencies in Vietnam and the PRC — or about how responsive their authoritarian governments must be to domestic actors?
Look for more articles with formal models of the domestic politics of war, whether they mention the SCS or not. You can always apply a more general model to the SCS situation, but if you craft your model around a single case, you won’t be able to generalize.
Why might political scientists care about your puzzle? Does it raise or shed light on some unanswered question(s) within the discipline? Possible idea: the real puzzle is why the parties haven’t bargained a solution to the problem rather than moving toward war, which is a highly inefficient system for resoling who gets what…
See if you can find a good literature review on the causes of interstate wars. That might give you a bunch of ideas for things that could be represented in a formal model of your own — especially if Waddell fails to address one or more common causes of such wars.
Related Completed Projects
Compare and/or contrast the views of masculinity presented in any of the following two poems: “Rite of Passage,” “What Work Is,” “How to Watch Your Brother Die.”
COVID-19 CHALLENGES FOR AUDIT FIRMS: SURVEY OF AUDITORS’ PERCEPTIONS.
Discuss the Effects of the World Pedagogy Curriculum Module on College Students’ Achievement in World Pedagogy at a University in China.
Navigable Water Protection Rule 2020 Argumentative