ABSTRACT
The article "Dangerous Dyads" by Stuart Bremer (1992) is one of the most frequently cited empirical studies in international relations. 2 This article presented several methodological innovations and provided new insight into the war puzzle. For instance, the analysis demonstrated the very powerful impact of geographic contiguity on the likelihood of interstate conflict. This finding has since been overwhelmingly confirmed by numerous conflict studies and is, as such, not interesting in this context. Another notable but less-publicized finding in the Bremer article, support for a monadic democratic peace, has failed to receive the same degree of support in later investigations. 3 Is this finding a consequence of Bremer's unorthodox methodology, or can it be attributed to alternative or obsolete data?
