When looking at different regime types it is clear that both autocracies and democracies place different values on the importance of credibility. For a democracy the support of the opposition and the public is linked to its credibility through audience costs, which can cushion the blow to the leaders credibility if they back down in a crisis. Autocratic states have the advantage of limited audience costs if they choose to back down, which makes losing credibility less of an issue in an international crisis, but does mean that autocracies struggle to signal credibility through the support of the opposition or public in the same way that a democratic leader is able to.
The importance of credibility and how actors show this
Now we have looked at what credibility is we can assess how important it is to an actor and how they use this credibility in an international crisis. In this section the essay will examine how an actor shows credibility through honesty and previous behaviour, and which tactics actor’s use to tie their hands and signal their resolve in a crisis. This will relate to the…show more content… (1997). p267). Reputation and its importance in signalling credibility is key when looking at Sartori’s claim that honesty and credibility are inextricably linked, her point is further backed up by evidence suggesting this is the case (Sartori, A. (2002). p141)(Jervis, R. (2003). p332). Jervis’s Domino Theory Paradox argues that other actors should not consider previous crises that have knocked a state’s credibility, as it is not an accurate predictor of an actor’s resolve and credibility in the next crisis. Again this shows that Jervis does not believe that reputation should be important in International
