The timing and mode of foreign exit from conflict zones: A behavioral perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We examine the timing and mode of firm exits from host-country conflict zones. We argue that timing and mode are interdependent decisions where decision ordering matters, and show that a firm’s prioritizing of either exit timing or mode is dependent on the relative salience of two behavioral stimuli: (1) the firm’s own experience (i.e., its performance shortfall), and (2) the experience of peer firms (i.e., their exits). Using instrumental variables modeling on a sample of 101 Japanese MNE exits from 11 conflict-afflicted countries between 1991 and 2005, we demonstrate that, when mode is prioritized over timing, partial exits tend to occur earlier and whole exits later. However, when timing is prioritized over mode, the decision choices reverse: earlier exits tend to be whole and later exits partial. The outcome of one decision therefore affects that of the other in a unique and predictable manner, such that the ordering of the decisions both produces and precludes strategic choices. Our findings, based on a multidecision problem that has traditionally been treated as a single decision (i.e., foreign exit), delineate expanded boundary conditions for satisficing, as well as reconcile optimizing and satisficing behaviors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".