See other articles in PMC that cite the published article. Abstract Autism prevalence has increased rapidly in the United States during the past two decades. We have previously shown that the diffusion of information about autism through spatially proximate social relations has contributed significantly to the epidemic. This study expands on this finding by identifying the focal points for interaction that drive the proximity effect on subsequent diagnoses.
In this introduction we examine the role of wars and economic crises as socially constructed openings for change.
We attempt three things: One scarcely need identify the events to which these dates refer. The usual disclaimers apply.
On socialpolitik, see Alkopher From the materialist vantage, scholars stress the effect of major wars and economic crises on the bal- ance of power or economic production possibilities. There are two key problems with such approaches.
Neither wars nor crises can be defined simply in terms of their effects on military or economic capabilities. Second, materialist approaches obscure the full scope of agency, limiting it to strategic interaction or adaptation, suggesting that agents rather automatically and unproblematically respond to material shifts in easily predicable ways.
However, the range of what agents can do is not exhausted by adaptation to structural constraints or material incentives. In this light, this symposium offers a constructivist analysis of wars and crises, which we define as events which Do endogenous or exogenous shocks have intersubjectively interpret as necessitating change.
In short, agents act upon such understandings rather than their materially telegraphed interests. Neither state nor societal agents can react to material changes until they have interpreted them through diverse frameworks of understanding.
Instead, they render concerns for such things as the balance of power contentious, as when varied ideological, nationalist, or religious ties indepen- dently drive foreign policy choices. They are moments when, as Katznelson To get inside the processes of persuasion that help us understand how both elites and the mass public interpret wars and crises differently, we stress the importance of not reading interests as materially tele- graphed from structural positions.
We also emphasize the need to see the limita- tions of extant constructivist work that assumes that agents are constituted as subjects by the prevailing systemic culture.
In the first section of this introductory piece, we critique materialist treatments of such events on the grounds that even exogenous shocks must be endoge- nously interpreted.
We stress here that war and crises ignite processes of persuasion between elites, from elites to the mass public, and from the mass public to elites.
Developing these arguments, in the third section, we outline elements of a research agenda into the construction of wars and crises, the components of which are highlighted in the individual symposium contributions.
While each article is grounded in a basic concern for the meaning of critical events, each also varyingly stresses the elite, mass public, or institutional forces that shape inter- pretations of crises.
In the final effort, Leonard Seabrooke traces evolving mass attitudes in interwar Britain, arguing that these provided the foundation for the ostensibly elite-driven Keynesian Revolution.
Taken together, these contributions highlight the importance of persuasive struggles to the construction of crises that transform state and societal interests alike. While some capitalists may prefer higher wages to raise demand, others may prefer falling wages to reduce labor costs.
However, such approaches obscure the importance of the interpretive context and lead to a somewhat impoverished view of agency Hay This is logically the case given that if there are underlying incentive structures that guide rational choices, we should expect the variation in politically relevant outcomes to be quite limited.
The fact that it is not surely tells us something of interest.
Constructivism stresses how intersubjective understandings, sustained through interaction, give meaning to incentives and interests. These under- standings are termed inter subjective because they transcend individual beliefs and possess instead a collective permanence.
Instead, agents face a funda- mental uncertainty in forming expectations.
This uncertainty is not limited to the ability to make a probabilistic calculation regarding the likelihood of some event, such as a shift in the balance of power or a market downturn.
Rather, it is a more pervasive constraint, one which limits the ability of agents to form any meaningful estimate of future trends. The remainder of this section juxtaposes materialist views of wars and crises as exogenous shocks with a constructivist stress on their endogenous, social foundations.
To assume that agents are strategic is simply to suggest that they have consistent preferences and make choices which advance those preferences, not that they can collectively employ all available information. Given this distinction, while constructivist frameworks cannot at base be recon- ciled with rationalist assumptions, they can be reconciled with approaches that posit agents make strategic choices, given some social context.
Widmaier, Mark Blyth, and Leonard Seabrooke Materialist and Constructivist Approaches to War and Change International relations scholars have long noted the association between major wars, postwar settlements, and change in international orders.
One might ask, however, how a victori- ous hegemon might define its interests, in a benign or a more predatory fash- ion?endogenous growth work, and other models that may emphasize multiple equilibria. The next section describes what may be the growth response of an economy to an exogenous shock, while sections 3 and 4 discuss the methodology and data, section 5 describes our results and section 6 concludes with caveats and avenues for future research.
stages of development due to various endogenous and exogenous shocks related to unexpected market, and cash flow events. In some case, however, these types of organizations are able to remain intact after such shocks even without additional financial capital injections or external mediation.
Endogenous risk refers to the risk from shocks that are generated and ampli-ﬁed within the system. It stands in contrast to exogenous risk, which refers to shocks that arrive from outside the system. Financial markets are subject to both types of risk.
However, the greatest damage is done from risk of the. Framing the crisis as exogenous served an important purpose in ; it suggested that while the then-government had clearly failed to see the crisis coming, it could not reasonably have been expected to do .
uncertainty can have a meaningful effect on economic activity, even if exogenous volatility shocks have a small impact. Speciﬁcally, the effect of consumption uncertainty from our Euler equation. The treatment of exogenous factors in economic theory has special relevance to the objectives ofPrometheus.
For example, there is the of exogenous plug-ins, spill-overs and feed-backs only. dealing with endogenous variable input, or more precisely, with.