Reputation for Resolve

How do reputations form in international politics? What influence do these reputations have on the conduct of international affairs? In Reputation for Resolve, Danielle L. Lupton takes a new approach to answering these enduring and hotly debated questions by shifting the focus away from the reputations of countries and instead examining the reputations of individual leaders.

Lupton argues that new leaders establish personal reputations for resolve that are separate from the reputations of their predecessors and from the reputations of their states. Using innovative survey experiments and in-depth archival research, she finds that leaders acquire personal reputations for resolve based on their foreign policy statements and behavior. Reputation for Resolve shows that statements create expectations of how leaders will react to foreign policy crises in the future and that leaders who fail to meet expectations of resolute action face harsh reputational consequences.

Reputation for Resolve challenges the view that reputations do not matter in international politics. In sharp contrast, Lupton shows that the reputations for resolve of individual leaders influence the strategies statesmen pursue during diplomatic interactions and crises, and she delineates specific steps policymakers can take to avoid developing reputations for irresolute action. Lupton demonstrates that reputations for resolve do exist and can influence the conduct of international security. Thus, Reputation for Resolve reframes our understanding of the influence of leaders and their rhetoric on crisis bargaining and the role reputations play in international politics.

Danielle L. Lupton is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Colgate University. She has published articles in Political Analysis, Political Research Quarterly, International Interactions, and the Journal of Global Security Studies. Follow her on X @ProfLupton or on her website at daniellelupton.com.

Lupton brings clarity to the ongoing debate about reputations and their effects in international security. This should be a boon both for scholars looking to use Amazon's MTurk platform for survey research in international relations, and to scholars who are interested in studying how perceptions form and change over time.

Reputation for Resolve combines rigorous experiments with qualitative case studies, a multi-method approach that addresses both internal and external validity.[It]i s essential reading for international relations scholars who are interested in reputation, leaders, and crisis diplomacy.

Danielle Lupton's Reputation for Resolve makes a very welcome contribution to what has become an exciting new wave of research on reputation in international politics. [I]t does so with clarity, a wealth of empirical evidence, top-notch writing, and masterful organization.Reputation of Resolve is sure to become essential reading for scholars of reputation, signaling, and credibility.

Lupton brings clarity to the ongoing debate about reputations and their effects in international security. Most importantly, her innovative focus on leader-specific reputations shows that both leaders and states can have reputations for resolve (or for irresolute action), and that these reputations interact in interesting ways.

Reputation for Resolve is essential reading for international relations scholars who are interested in reputation, leaders, and crisis diplomacy. Lupton crafts an elegant and intuitive theory while ably addressing both the reputation supporters and skeptics upon whose work she builds. She also brings nuance to bear on her argument, deftly integrating additional factors like situational assessments and power/capabilities

Reputation of Resolve is sure to become essential reading for scholars of reputation, signaling, and credibility

Lupton's work is especially innovative for combining a micro-foundational perspective on her research question, through process tracing survey experiments that manipulate key features of both context and leader behavior, with case studies that probe how Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev evaluated two US presidents—Dwight Eisenhower and Kennedy—through a reputational lens.

This is an important book that is a welcome addition to the ongoing research on reputation and foreign policy, while also having important policy implications. In addition to its novel theoretical contribution, Lupton's study is also valuable in demonstrating the validity of a multimethod approach through her well-crafted qualitative and experimental research design. As such, Reputation for Resolve should have a strong appeal to diverse audiences, ranging from scholars and students of international politics to the broader policy community.

Lupton skillfully achieves her goals and much more, making a compelling case that reputations matter a great deal for leaders navigating the domain of international relations. Students, scholars, and policy makers should greatly profit from a thoughtful reading of this work.

Elizabeth N. Saunders, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, author of Leaders at War:

Reputation for Resolve marshals impressive evidence that leaders, not states, signal firmness in interstate disputes. The book is an important contribution to the debate over whether and how resolve matters in international politics.

Jack S. Levy, Rutgers University:

Do reputations for resolve matter in international politics? How does an individual leader's reputation form, how does it change, and how does it interact with power and interest? Lupton's fresh theoretical perspective and multi-method approach makes an important new contribution to an old debate in the International Relations field.

Todd S. Sechser, Pamela Feinour Edmonds and Franklin S. Edmonds, Jr. Discovery Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia, coauthor of Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy:

This book is the most important statement on reputations in international relations in a decade. Danielle Lupton brings new methods and evidence to the debate about how reputations form and whether they matter at the highest levels of foreign policy. She upends conventional wisdom and makes a convincing case for changing the way we think about reputations in international politics.