Anarchy is What Students Make of It: Playing Out Wendt’s Three Cultures of Anarchy

References

• Adler, Emanuel, and Michael Barnett. 1998. Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Asal, Victor. 2005. “Playing Games with International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 6(3):359–373. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3577.2005.00213.
   Google Scholar
• Asal, Victor, Inga Miller, and Charmaine N. Willis. 2019. “System, State or Individual: Gaming Levels of Analysis in International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 21(1):97–107. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekz018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bridge, Dave, and Simon Radford. 2014. “Teaching Diplomacy by Other Means: Using and outside-of-Class Simulation to Teach International Relations Theory.” International Studies Perspectives 15(4):423–437. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bull, Hedley. 1977 [1995]. The Anarchical Society. A Study of Order in World Politics, 2 ed. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsch, Karl W., Sidney A. Burrell, Robert A. Kann, Maurice Lee, Jr., Martin Lichterman, Raymond E. Lindgren, Francis L. Loewenheim, and Richard W. Van Wagenen. 1957. Political Community and The North Atlantic Area. International Organization in The Light of Historical Experience. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Galatas, Steven. 2006. “A Simulation of the Council of the European Union: Assessment of the Impact on Student Learning.” PS: Political Science & Politics 39(1):147–151. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650606029X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gattie, Gordon J. 2004. Investigating Dynamic Environments using The Game of DIPLOMACY. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Horn, Laura, Olivier Rubin, and Laust Schouenborg. 2015. “Undead Pedagogy: How a Zombie-Simulation Can Contribute to Teaching International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 17 :n/a–201. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hudson, Valerie M. 2014. Foreign Policy Analysis. Classic and Contemporary Theory, 2 ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, Alistair I. 1995. Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kacowicz, Arie M. 1998. Zones of Peace in the Third World: South American and West Africa in Comparative Perspective. New York: SUNY Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kirschner, Shanna A. 2020. “Simulating Negotiation in Protracted Conflicts.” Journal of Political Science Education 16(4):430–440. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/155129.2018.1530122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Michael, and Zachary C. Shirkey. 2017. “Going beyond the Existing Consensus: The Use of Games in International Relations Education.” PS: Political Science & Politics 50(2):571–575. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096516003218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loggins, Julie A. 2009. “Simulating the Foreign-Policy Decision-Making Process in the Undergraduate Classroom.” PS: Political Science & Politics 42(2):401–407. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096509090544.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattlin, Mikael. 2018. “Adapting the DIPLOMACY Board Game for 21st Century International Relations Teaching.” Simulation & Gaming 49(6):735–750. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878118788905.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mearsheimer, John J. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York, NY: W. W. Nortion & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Niv-Solomon, Anat, Laura L. Janik, Mark A. Boyer, Natalie Florea Hudson, Brian Urlacher, Scott W. Brown, and Donalyn Maneggia. 2011. “Evolving Beyond Self-Interest? Some Experimental Findings from Simulated International Negotiations.” Simulation & Gaming 42(6):711–732. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878109341764.
   Google Scholar
• Paino, Maria, and Jeffrey Chin. 2011. “Monopoly and Critical Theory: Gaming in a Class on the Sociology of Deviance.” Simulation & Gaming 42(5):571–588. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878110391022.
   Google Scholar
• Rittinger, Eric R. 2020. “Inspiring Students to Think Theoretically about International Relations through the Game of Diplomacy.” Journal of Political Science Education 16(1):41–56. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.15165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stover, William J. 2007. “Simulating the Cuban Missile Crisis Crossing Time and Space in Virtual Reality.” International Studies Perspectives 8(1):111–120. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2007.00272.x.
   Google Scholar
• Tamai, Masataka, Atsushi Kondo, and Noboru Miyawaki. 2016. “Understanding the History of International Politics: Retrospective and Repeated Type of Gaming and Simulation in the Classroom.” Simulation and Gaming in the Network Society Conference Proceedings, 133–145.
   Google Scholar
• Waltz, Kenneth. 1979 [2010]. Theory of International Politics. Long Grove: Waveland Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wendt, Alexander. 1992. “Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization 46(2):391–425. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wendt, Alexander. 1999 [2010]. Social Theory of International Politics, 13 ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wight, Martin. 1991. “The Three Traditions of International Theory.” In International Theory: The Three Traditions, eds. G. Wight and N. Porter. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 7–24.
   Google Scholar