text:
Repeated measures design
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: longitudinal study and panel study
The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page. Use the lead layout guide to ensure the section follows Wikipedia's norms and to be inclusive of all essential details. (August 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Repeated measures design uses the same subjects with every branch of research, including the control.[1] For instance, repeated measurements are collected in a longitudinal study in which change over time is assessed. Other (non-repeated measures) studies compare the same measure under two or more different conditions. For instance, to test the effects of caffeine on cognitive function, a subject's math ability might be tested once after they consume caffeine and another time when they consume a placebo.
Contents
[hide]
1 Crossover studies
2 Uses
3 Order effects
4 Counterbalancing
5 Limitations
6 Repeated measures ANOVA
6.1 Partitioning of error
6.2 Assumptions
6.3 F test
6.4 Effect size
6.5 Cautions
7 See also
8 Notes
9 References
9.1 Design and analysis of experiments
9.2 Exploration of longitudinal data
10 External links
Crossover studies[edit]
Main article: Crossover study
A popular repeated-measures is the crossover study. A crossover study is a longitudinal study in which subjects receive a sequence of different treatments (or exposures). While crossover studies can be observational studies, many important crossover studies are controlled experiments. Crossover designs are common for experiments in many scientific disciplines, for example psychology, education, pharmaceutical science, and health-care, especially medicine.
Randomized, controlled, crossover experiments are especially important in health care. In a randomized clinical trial, the subjects are randomly assigned treatments. When such a trial is a repeated measures design, the subjects are randomly assigned to a sequence of treatments. A crossover clinical trial is a repeated-measures design in which each patient is randomly assigned to a sequence of treatments, including at least two treatments (of which one may be a standard treatment or a placebo): Thus each patient crosses over from one treatment to another.
Nearly all crossover designs have "balance", which means that all subjects should receive the same number of treatments and that all subjects participate for the same number of periods. In most crossover trials, each subject receives all treatments.
However, many repeated-measures designs are not crossovers: the longitudinal study of the sequential effects of repeated treatments need not use any "crossover", for example (Vonesh & Chinchilli; Jones & Kenward).
Uses[edit]
Limited number of participants —The repeated measure design reduces the variance of estimates of treatment-effects, allowing statistical inference to be made with fewer subjects.[2]
Efficiency—Repeated measure designs allow many experiments to be completed more quickly, as fewer groups need to be trained to complete an entire experiment. For example, experiments in which each condition takes only a few minutes, whereas the training to complete the tasks take as much, if not more time.
Longitudinal analysis—Repeated measure designs allow researchers to monitor how participants change over time, both long- and short-term situations.
Order effects[edit]
Order effects may occur when a participant in an experiment is able to perform a task and then perform it again. Examples of order effects include performance improvement or decline in performance, which may be due to learning effects, boredom or fatigue. The impact of order effects may be smaller in long-term longitudinal studies or by counterbalancing using a crossover design.
Counterbalancing[edit]
In this technique, two groups each perform the same tasks or experience the same conditions, but in reverse order. With two tasks or conditions, four groups are formed.
Counter Balancing
Task/Condition
Task/Condition
Remarks
Group A
1
2
Group A performs Task/Condition 1 first, then Task/Condition 2
Group B
2
1
Group B performs Task/Condition 2 first, then Task/Condition 1
Counterbalancing attempts to take account of two important sources of systematic variation in this type of design: practice and boredom effects. Both might otherwise lead to different performance of participants due to familiarity with or tiredness to the treatments.
Limitations[edit]
It may not be possible for each participant to be in all conditions of the experiment (i.e. time constraints, location of experiment, etc.). Severely diseased subjects tend to drop out of longitudinal studies, potentially biasing the results. In these cases mixed effects models would be preferable as they can deal with missing values.
Mean regression may affect conditions with significant repetitions. Maturation may affect studies that extend over time. Events outside the experiment may change the response between repetitions.
Repeated measures ANOVA[edit]
Repeated measures analysis of variance (rANOVA) is a commonly used statistical approach to repeated measure designs.[3] With such designs, the repeated-measure factor (the qualitative independent variable) is the within-subjects factor, while the dependent quantitative variable on which each participant is measured is the dependent variable.
Partitioning of error[edit]
One of the greatest advantages to rANOVA, as is the case with repeated measures designs in general, is the ability to partition out variability due to individual differences. Consider the general structure of the F-statistic:
F = MSTreatment / MSError = (SSTreatment/dfTreatment)/(SSError/dfError)
In a between-subjects design there is an element of variance due to individual difference that is combined with the treatment and error terms:
SSTotal = SSTreatment + SSError
dfTotal = n-1
In a repeated measures design it is possible to partition subject variability from the treatment and error terms. In such a case, variability can be broken down into between-treatments variability (or within-subjects effects, excluding individual differences) and within-treatments variability. The within-treatments variability can be further partitioned into between-subjects variability (individual differences) and error (excluding the individual differences):[4]
SSTotal = SSTreatment (excluding individual difference) + SSSubjects + SSError
dfTotal = dfTreatment (within subjects) + dfbetween subjects + dferror = (k-1) + (n-1) + ((n-k)*(n-1))
In reference to the general structure of the F-statistic, it is clear that by partitioning out the between-subjects variability, the F-value will increase because the sum of squares error term will be smaller resulting in a smaller MSError. It is noteworthy that partitioning variability reduces degrees of freedom from the F-test, therefore the between-subjects variability must be significant enough to offset the loss in degrees of freedom. If between-subjects variability is small this process may actually reduce the F-value.[4]
Assumptions[edit]
As with all statistical analyses, specific assumptions should be met to justify the use of this test. Violations can moderately to severely affect results and often lead to an inflation of type 1 error. With the rANOVA, standard univariate and multivariate assumptions apply.[5] The univariate assumptions are:
Normality—For each level of the within-subjects factor, the dependent variable must have a normal distribution.
Sphericity—Difference scores computed between two levels of a within-subjects factor must have the same variance for the comparison of any two levels. (This assumption only applies if there are more than 2 levels of the independent variable.)
Randomness—Cases should be derived from a random sample, and scores from different participants should be independent of each other.
The rANOVA also requires that certain multivariate assumptions be met, because a multivariate test is conducted on difference scores. These assumptions include:
Multivariate normality—The difference scores are multivariately normally distributed in the population.
Randomness—Individual cases should be derived from a random sample, and the difference scores for each participant are independent from those of another participant.
F test[edit]
As with other analysis of variance tests, the rANOVA makes use of an F statistic to determine significance. Depending on the number of within-subjects factors and assumption violations, it is necessary to select the most appropriate of three tests:[5]
Standard Univariate ANOVA F test—This test is commonly used given only two levels of the within-subjects factor (i.e. time point 1 and time point 2). This test is not recommended given more than 2 levels of the within-subjects factor because the assumption of sphericity is commonly violated in such cases.
Alternative Univariate test[6]—These tests account for violations to the assumption of sphericity, and can be used when the within-subjects factor exceeds 2 levels. The F statistic is the same as in the Standard Univariate ANOVA F test, but is associated with a more accurate p-value. This correction is done by adjusting the degrees of freedom downward for determining the critical F value. Two corrections are commonly used—The Greenhouse-Geisser correction and the Huynh-Feldt correction. The Greenhouse-Geisser correction is more conservative, but addresses a common issue of increasing variability over time in a repeated-measures design.[7] The Huynh-Feldt correction is less conservative, but does not address issues of increasing variability. It has been suggested that lower Huynh-Feldt be used with smaller departures from sphericity, while Greenhouse-Geisser be used when the departures are large.
Multivariate Test—This test does not assume sphericity, but is also highly conservative.
Effect size[edit]
One of the most commonly reported effect size statistics for rANOVA is partial eta-squared (ηp2). It is also common to use the multivariate η2 when the assumption of sphericity has been violated, and the multivariate test statistic is reported. A third effect size statistic that is reported is the generalized η2, which is comparable to ηp2 in a one-way repeated measures ANOVA. It has been shown to be a better estimate of effect size with other within-subjects tests.[8][9]
Cautions[edit]
rANOVA is not always the best statistical analysis for repeated measure designs. The rANOVA is vulnerable to effects from missing values, imputation, unequivalent time points between subjects and violations of sphericity.[10] These issues can result in sampling bias and inflated rates of Type I error.[11] In such cases it may be better to consider use of a linear mixed model.[12]
See also[edit]
Analysis of variance
Clinical trial protocol
Crossover study
Design of experiments
Glossary of experimental design
Longitudinal study
Growth curve
Missing data
Mixed models
Multivariate analysis
Observational study
Optimal design
Panel analysis
Panel data
Panel study
Randomization
Randomized controlled trial
Repeated measures design
Sequence
Statistical inference
Treatment effect
Notes[edit]
Jump up ^ Shuttleworth, Martyn (2009-11-26). "Repeated Measures Design". Experiment-resources.com. Retrieved 2013-09-02.
Jump up ^ Barret, Julia R. (2013). "Particulate Matter and Cardiovascular Disease: Researchers Turn an Eye toward Microvascular Changes". Environmental Health Perspectives. 121: a282. doi:10.1289/ehp.121-A282. PMC 3764084  . PMID 24004855.
Jump up ^ Gueorguieva; Krystal (2004). "Move Over ANOVA". Arch Gen Psychiatry. 61: 310. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.61.3.310.
^ Jump up to: a b Howell, David C. (2010). Statistical methods for psychology (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. ISBN 978-0-495-59784-1.
^ Jump up to: a b Salkind, Samuel B. Green, Neil J. Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh : analyzing and understanding data (6th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-205-02040-9.
Jump up ^ Vasey; Thayer (1987). "The Continuing Problem of False Positives in Repeated Measures ANOVA in Psychophysiology: A Multivariate Solution". Psychophysiology. 24: 479–486. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1987.tb00324.x.
Jump up ^ Park (1993). "A comparison of the generalized estimating equation approach with the maximum likelihood approach for repeated measurements". Stat Med. 12: 1723–1732. doi:10.1002/sim.4780121807.
Jump up ^ Bakeman (2005). "Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs". Behavior Research Methods. 37 (3): 379–384. doi:10.3758/bf03192707.
Jump up ^ Olejnik; Algina (2003). "Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: Measures of effect size for some common research designs". Psychological Methods. 8: 434–447. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.8.4.434.
Jump up ^ Gueorguieva; Krystal (2004). "Move Over ANOVA". Arch Gen Psychiatry. 61: 310–317. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.61.3.310.
Jump up ^ Muller; Barton (1989). "Approximate Power for Repeated -Measures ANOVA lacking sphericity". Journal of the American Statistical Association. 84 (406): 549–555. doi:10.1080/01621459.1989.10478802.
Jump up ^ Kreuger; Tian (2004). "A comparison of the general linear mixed model and repeated measures ANOVA using a dataset with multiple missing data points". Biological Research for Nursing. 6: 151–157. doi:10.1177/1099800404267682.
References[edit]
Design and analysis of experiments[edit]
Jones, Byron; Kenward, Michael G. (2003). Design and Analysis of Cross-Over Trials (Second ed.). London: Chapman and Hall.
Vonesh, Edward F. & Chinchilli, Vernon G. (1997). Linear and Nonlinear Models for the Analysis of Repeated Measurements. London: Chapman and Hall.
Exploration of longitudinal data[edit]
Davidian, Marie; David M. Giltinan (1995). Nonlinear Models for Repeated Measurement Data. Chapman & Hall/CRC Monographs on Statistics & Applied Probability. ISBN 978-0-412-98341-2.
Fitzmaurice, Garrett, Davidian, Marie, Verbeke, Geert and Molenberghs, Geert, eds. (2008). Longitudinal Data Analysis. Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman and Hall/CRC. ISBN 1-58488-658-7. CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter (link)
Jones, Byron; Kenward, Michael G. (2003). Design and Analysis of Cross-Over Trials (Second ed.). London: Chapman and Hall.
Kim, Kevin & Timm, Neil (2007). ""Restricted MGLM and growth curve model" (Chapter 7)". Univariate and multivariate general linear models: Theory and applications with SAS (with 1 CD-ROM for Windows and UNIX). Statistics: Textbooks and Monographs (Second ed.). Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC. ISBN 978-1-58488-634-1.
Kollo, Tõnu & von Rosen, Dietrich (2005). ""Multivariate linear models" (chapter 4), especially "The Growth curve model and extensions" (Chapter 4.1)". Advanced multivariate statistics with matrices. Mathematics and its applications. 579. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4020-3418-3.
Kshirsagar, Anant M. & Smith, William Boyce (1995). Growth curves. Statistics: Textbooks and Monographs. 145. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc. ISBN 0-8247-9341-2.
Pan, Jian-Xin & Fang, Kai-Tai (2002). Growth curve models and statistical diagnostics. Springer Series in Statistics. New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-95053-2.
Seber, G. A. F. & Wild, C. J. (1989). ""Growth models (Chapter 7)"". Nonlinear regression. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics: Probability and Mathematical Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. pp. 325–367. ISBN 0-471-61760-1.
Timm, Neil H. (2002). ""The general MANOVA model (GMANOVA)" (Chapter 3.6.d)". Applied multivariate analysis. Springer Texts in Statistics. New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-95347-7.
Vonesh, Edward F. & Chinchilli, Vernon G. (1997). Linear and Nonlinear Models for the Analysis of Repeated Measurements. London: Chapman and Hall. (Comprehensive treatment of theory and practice)
Conaway, M. (1999, October 11). Repeated Measures Design. Retrieved February 18, 2008, from http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/twiki/pub/Main/ClinStat/repmeas.PDF
Minke, A. (1997, January). Conducting Repeated Measures Analyses: Experimental Design Considerations. Retrieved February 18, 2008, from Ericae.net: http://ericae.net/ft/tamu/Rm.htm
Shaughnessy, J. J. (2006). Research Methods in Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
External links[edit]
Examples of all ANOVA and ANCOVA models with up to three treatment factors, including randomized block, split plot, repeated measures, and Latin squares, and their analysis in R (University of Southampton)
[show]
v
t
e
Design of experiments
Scientific
method
Scientific experiment
Statistical design
Control
Internal and external validity
Experimental unit
Blinding
Optimal design: Bayesian
Random assignment
Randomization
Restricted randomization
Replication versus subsampling
Sample size
Treatment
and blocking
Treatment
Effect size
Contrast
Interaction
Confounding
Orthogonality
Blocking
Covariate
Nuisance variable
Models
and inference
Linear regression
Ordinary least squares
Bayesian
Random effect
Mixed model
Hierarchical model: Bayesian
Analysis of variance (Anova)
Cochran's theorem
Manova (multivariate)
Ancova (covariance)
Compare means
Multiple comparison
Designs

Completely
randomized
Factorial
Fractional factorial
Plackett-Burman
Taguchi
Response surface methodology
Polynomial and rational modeling
Box-Behnken
Central composite
Block
Generalized randomized block design (GRBD)
Latin square
Graeco-Latin square
Orthogonal array
Latin hypercube
Repeated measures design
Crossover study
Randomized controlled trial
Sequential analysis
Sequential probability ratio test
Glossary
Category
Statistics portal
Statistical outline
Statistical topics
[show]
v
t
e
Statistics
Outline
Index
[show]
Descriptive statistics
Continuous data
Center
Mean
arithmetic
geometric
harmonic
Median
Mode
Dispersion
Variance
Standard deviation
Coefficient of variation
Percentile
Range
Interquartile range
Shape
Central limit theorem
Moments
Skewness
Kurtosis
L-moments
Count data
Index of dispersion
Summary tables
Grouped data
Frequency distribution
Contingency table
Dependence
Pearson product-moment correlation
Rank correlation
Spearman's rho
Kendall's tau
Partial correlation
Scatter plot
Graphics
Bar chart
Biplot
Box plot
Control chart
Correlogram
Fan chart
Forest plot
Histogram
Pie chart
Q–Q plot
Run chart
Scatter plot
Stem-and-leaf display
Radar chart
[hide]
Data collection
Study design
Population
Statistic
Effect size
Statistical power
Sample size determination
Missing data
Survey methodology
Sampling
stratified
cluster
Standard error
Opinion poll
Questionnaire
Controlled experiments
Design
control
optimal
Controlled trial
Randomized
Random assignment
Replication
Blocking
Interaction
Factorial experiment
Uncontrolled studies
Observational study
Natural experiment
Quasi-experiment
[show]
Statistical inference
Statistical theory
Population
Statistic
Probability distribution
Sampling distribution
Order statistic
Empirical distribution
Density estimation
Statistical model
Lp space
Parameter
location
scale
shape
Parametric family
Likelihood (monotone)
Location–scale family
Exponential family
Completeness
Sufficiency
Statistical functional
Bootstrap
U
V
Optimal decision
loss function
Efficiency
Statistical distance
divergence
Asymptotics
Robustness
Frequentist inference
Point estimation
Estimating equations
Maximum likelihood
Method of moments
M-estimator
Minimum distance
Unbiased estimators
Mean-unbiased minimum-variance
Rao–Blackwellization
Lehmann–Scheffé theorem
Median unbiased
Plug-in
Interval estimation
Confidence interval
Pivot
Likelihood interval
Prediction interval
Tolerance interval
Resampling
Bootstrap
Jackknife
Testing hypotheses
1- & 2-tails
Power
Uniformly most powerful test
Permutation test
Randomization test
Multiple comparisons
Parametric tests
Likelihood-ratio
Wald
Score
Specific tests
Z-test (normal)
Student's t-test
F-test
Goodness of fit
Chi-squared
G-test
Kolmogorov–Smirnov
Anderson–Darling
Lilliefors
Jarque–Bera
Normality (Shapiro–Wilk)
Likelihood-ratio test
Model selection
Cross validation
AIC
BIC
Rank statistics
Sign
Sample median
Signed rank (Wilcoxon)
Hodges–Lehmann estimator
Rank sum (Mann–Whitney)
Nonparametric anova
1-way (Kruskal–Wallis)
2-way (Friedman)
Ordered alternative (Jonckheere–Terpstra)
Bayesian inference
Bayesian probability
prior
posterior
Credible interval
Bayes factor
Bayesian estimator
Maximum posterior estimator
[show]
Correlation
Regression analysis
Correlation
Pearson product-moment
Partial correlation
Confounding variable
Coefficient of determination
Regression analysis
Errors and residuals
Regression model validation
Mixed effects models
Simultaneous equations models
Multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS)
Linear regression
Simple linear regression
Ordinary least squares
General linear model
Bayesian regression
Non-standard predictors
Nonlinear regression
Nonparametric
Semiparametric
Isotonic
Robust
Heteroscedasticity
Homoscedasticity
Generalized linear model
Exponential families
Logistic (Bernoulli) / Binomial / Poisson regressions
Partition of variance
Analysis of variance (ANOVA, anova)
Analysis of covariance
Multivariate ANOVA
Degrees of freedom
[show]
Categorical / Multivariate / Time-series / Survival analysis
Categorical
Cohen's kappa
Contingency table
Graphical model
Log-linear model
McNemar's test
Multivariate
Regression
Manova
Principal components
Canonical correlation
Discriminant analysis
Cluster analysis
Classification
Structural equation model
Factor analysis
Multivariate distributions
Elliptical distributions
Normal
Time-series
General
Decomposition
Trend
Stationarity
Seasonal adjustment
Exponential smoothing
Cointegration
Structural break
Granger causality
Specific tests
Dickey–Fuller
Johansen
Q-statistic (Ljung–Box)
Durbin–Watson
Breusch–Godfrey
Time domain
Autocorrelation (ACF)
partial (PACF)
Cross-correlation (XCF)
ARMA model
ARIMA model (Box–Jenkins)
Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH)
Vector autoregression (VAR)
Frequency domain
Spectral density estimation
Fourier analysis
Wavelet
Whittle likelihood
Survival
Survival function
Kaplan–Meier estimator (product limit)
Proportional hazards models
Accelerated failure time (AFT) model
First hitting time
Hazard function
Nelson–Aalen estimator
Test
Log-rank test
[show]
Applications
Biostatistics
Bioinformatics
Clinical trials / studies
Epidemiology
Medical statistics
Engineering statistics
Chemometrics
Methods engineering
Probabilistic design
Process / quality control
Reliability
System identification
Social statistics
Actuarial science
Census
Crime statistics
Demography
Econometrics
National accounts
Official statistics
Population statistics
Psychometrics
Spatial statistics
Cartography
Environmental statistics
Geographic information system
Geostatistics
Kriging
Category
Portal
Commons
WikiProject
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Repeated_measures_design&oldid=841234406"
Categories:
Design of experiments
Science experiments
Analysis of variance
Hidden categories:
Wikipedia introduction cleanup from August 2017
All pages needing cleanup
Articles covered by WikiProject Wikify from August 2017
All articles covered by WikiProject Wikify
CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Edit links
This page was last edited on 14 May 2018, at 18:18.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: href title

attrs: href class title

values:
/wiki/Panel_study
mw-redirect
Panel study

attrs: role class

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

value: td

value: b

value: span

value: i

value: small

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-style ambox-lead_rewrite

values:
/wiki/Crossover_studies
mw-redirect
Crossover studies

values:
/wiki/Observational_studies
mw-redirect
Observational studies

values:
/wiki/Controlled_experiment
mw-redirect
Controlled experiment

values:
/wiki/Academic_discipline
mw-redirect
Academic discipline

values:
/wiki/Pharmaceutical_science
mw-redirect
Pharmaceutical science

values:
/wiki/Crossover_design
mw-redirect
Crossover design

values:
/wiki/Mixed_models
mw-redirect
Mixed models

values:
/wiki/Type_1_error
mw-redirect
Type 1 error

values:
/wiki/F_statistic
mw-redirect
F statistic

values:
/wiki/Clinical_trial_protocol
mw-redirect
Clinical trial protocol

values: -moz-column-width: 18em; -webkit-column-width: 18em; column-width: 18em;

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1289%2Fehp.121-A282

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/PubMed_Identifier
mw-redirect
PubMed Identifier

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24004855

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1001%2Farchpsyc.61.3.310

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1002%2Fsim.4780121807

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.3758%2Fbf03192707

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: Edit section: Design and analysis of experiments

values: Edit section: Exploration of longitudinal data

values: Category:CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter

values:
nofollow
external free
http://ericae.net/ft/tamu/Rm.htm

values:
/wiki/Experimental_unit
mw-redirect
Experimental unit

values:
/wiki/Blind_experiment
mw-redirect
Blind experiment

values:
/wiki/Sample_size
mw-redirect
Sample size

values:
/wiki/Random_effect
mw-redirect
Random effect

values:
/wiki/Hierarchical_linear_modeling
mw-redirect
Hierarchical linear modeling

values:
/wiki/Hierarchical_Bayes_model
mw-redirect
Hierarchical Bayes model

values:
/wiki/Comparing_means
mw-redirect
Comparing means

values:
/wiki/Multiple_comparison
mw-redirect
Multiple comparison

values:
/wiki/Plackett-Burman_design
mw-redirect
Plackett-Burman design

values: Polynomial and rational function modeling

values:
/wiki/Randomized_block_design
mw-redirect
Randomized block design

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values:
/wiki/Shape_of_the_distribution
mw-redirect
Shape of the distribution

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-subgroup

values:
/wiki/Population_(statistics)
mw-redirect
Population (statistics)

values:
/wiki/Statistical_power
mw-redirect
Statistical power

values: nowraplinks collapsible uncollapsed navbox-subgroup

values:
/wiki/Maximum_likelihood
mw-redirect
Maximum likelihood

values:
/wiki/Median-unbiased_estimator
mw-redirect
Median-unbiased estimator

values:
/wiki/Likelihood_interval
mw-redirect
Likelihood interval

values:
/wiki/Permutation_test
mw-redirect
Permutation test

values:
/wiki/Randomization_test
mw-redirect
Randomization test

values:
/wiki/Multiple_comparisons
mw-redirect
Multiple comparisons

values:
/wiki/Rank_statistics
mw-redirect
Rank statistics

values:
/wiki/Sample_median
mw-redirect
Sample median

values: Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance

values:
CorrelationRegression_analysis
font-size:114%;margin:0 4em
hlist hlist-separated

values: Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient

values:
/wiki/Regression_model_validation
mw-redirect
Regression model validation

values: Multivariate adaptive regression splines

values:
/wiki/Multivariate_distribution
mw-redirect
Multivariate distribution

values:
/wiki/Trend_estimation
mw-redirect
Trend estimation

values: List of fields of application of statistics

values:
/wiki/Population_statistics
mw-redirect
Population statistics

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values: navigation navbox Statistics padding:3px

values: Category:Wikipedia introduction cleanup from August 2017

values: Category:Articles covered by WikiProject Wikify from August 2017

values: Category:All articles covered by WikiProject Wikify

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Repeated_measures_design
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: تصميم القياسات المتكررة – Arabic

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Repeated_measures_design rootpage-Repeated_measures_design skin-vector action-view


text:
Beverly Hills Cop (soundtrack)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Beverly Hills Cop
Soundtrack album by Various artists
Released
April 8, 1985 (1985-04-08)
Genre
Pop rock
Dance pop
Synthpop
R&B
Length
38:58
Label
MCA Records
Producer
Various artists
Singles from Beverly Hills Cop
"New Attitude"
Released: December 1984
"The Heat Is On"
Released: 1984
"Stir It Up"
Released: June 16, 1985
"Axel F"
Released: March 18, 1985 (UK)
December 5, 1984 (US)
Professional ratings
Review scores
Source
Rating
AllMusic [1]
Beverly Hills Cop is the soundtrack to the 1984 action comedy film Beverly Hills Cop. It was released on April 8, 1985 (1985-04-08) by MCA Records, successor-in-interest to Paramount's old record division, the Famous Music Group (specifically Paramount Records). The soundtrack was mastered by Greg Fulginiti and features various artists whose tracks were included in the movie plus some other tracks not included in the movie but are similar in electronic style. The instrumental title tune, "Axel F" by Harold Faltermeyer, became a worldwide hit single and has since been covered by numerous artists. "The Heat Is On" by Glenn Frey was also a big international hit.
The soundtrack won a Grammy Award for Best Score Soundtrack for Visual Media in 1986.[2] It hit #1 on the US Billboard 200 album chart in July 1985.
Contents
[hide]
1 Track listing
2 2016 La-La Land album
3 Charts
4 References
Track listing[edit]
"New Attitude" by Patti LaBelle
"Don't Get Stopped in Beverly Hills" by Shalamar
"Do You Really (Want My Love?)" by Junior Giscombe
"Emergency" by Rockie Robbins
"Neutron Dance" by The Pointer Sisters
"The Heat Is On" by Glenn Frey
"Gratitude" by Danny Elfman
"Stir It Up" by Patti LaBelle
"Rock 'N Roll Me Again" by The System
"Axel F" by Harold Faltermeyer
2016 La-La Land album[edit]
In 2016 La-La Land Records issued a limited edition album featuring Harold Faltermeyer's score and several of the songs used. The label originally planned to release it as part a 2-disc set with the expanded Beverly Hills Cop II soundtrack, but La-La Land Records was contractually obligated to issue each album separately.[3]
Foley Finds Mikey (1:20)
Bad Guys (1:23)
Flowers (:23)
Foley Busted (1:29)
Cops Follow Merc (:43)
Late Dinner/Warehouse (2:48)
Shoot Out (1:44)
Customs (1:31)
The New Team (:40)
Chase to Harrow’s (02:42)
Rosewood/Foley to Gallery (:57)
The Discovery (2:15)
Rosewood Saves Foley/Rosewood/Foley to Mansion (3:10)
Good Guys on Grounds (3:14)
Foley Shoots a Bad Guy (1:22)
Zack Shoots (1:06)
Zack Shot (:54)
Maitland Shot (:51)
Shoot Out (alternate ending) (1:42)
The Discovery (alternate) (2:18)
The Discovery (theme suite) (2:51)
Zack Shot (alternate) (:54)
Axel F (album version) (3:00)
Shoot Out (album version) 02:44)
The Heat is On -Glenn Frey (3:45)
Neutron Dance - The Pointer Sisters (4:12)
New Attitude - Patti LaBelle (4:36)
Do You Really (Want My Love?) - Junior Giscombe (3:41)
Stir It Up - Patti LaBelle (3:36)
Charts[edit]
Chart
Position
UK Albums Chart[4] 24
US Billboard 200 1
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "Beverly Hills Cop [Original Motion Picture Soundtrack] - Original Soundtrack - Songs, Reviews, Credits - AllMusic". AllMusic. Retrieved 14 May 2017.
Jump up ^ "Past Winners Search". Grammy.com. National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences. Retrieved 31 August 2015.
Jump up ^ "FSM Board: LA LA LAND: BEVERLY HILLS COP I & II H FALTERMEYER". www.filmscoremonthly.com. Retrieved 14 May 2017.
Jump up ^ http://www.officialcharts.com/search/albums/beverly%20hills%20cop/
Preceded by
Around the World in a Day by Prince and the Revolution Billboard 200 number-one album
June 22 - July 5, 1985 Succeeded by
No Jacket Required by Phil Collins
[hide]
v
t
e
Beverly Hills Cop series
Films
Beverly Hills Cop (1984)
Beverly Hills Cop II (1987)
Beverly Hills Cop III (1994)
Characters
Axel Foley
Billy Rosewood
Music
Beverly Hills Cop
"Axel F"
"The Heat Is On"
"Neutron Dance"
"New Attitude"
"Stir It Up"
Beverly Hills Cop II
"Cross My Broken Heart"
"I Want Your Sex"
"Shakedown"
Beverly Hills Cop III
"Luv 4 Dem Gangsta'z"
"The Right Kinda Lover"
Other
Video game

This soundtrack-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
v
t
e
This 1980s album–related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
v
t
e
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beverly_Hills_Cop_(soundtrack)&oldid=780417102"
Categories:
1984 soundtracks
MCA Records soundtracks
Film soundtracks
Beverly Hills Cop
Soundtrack stubs
1980s album stubs
Hidden categories:
Articles with hAudio microformats
Music infoboxes with deprecated parameters
All stub articles
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Nederlands
Edit links
This page was last edited on 14 May 2017, at 23:45.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

attrs: colspan class style

values: text-align:center;font-size:125%;font-weight:bold;font-style: italic; background-color: gainsboro

value: tr

values: Beverly Hills Cop soundtrack album cover.jpg

attrs: href class

attrs: colspan style

values: float:right;width:24.2em;font-size:80%;text-align:center;margin:0.5em 0 0.5em 1em;padding:0;border-spacing:0

values:
/wiki/Action_comedy
mw-redirect
Action comedy

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: decimal;

values:
/wiki/Prince_(artist)
mw-redirect
Prince (artist)

values:
/wiki/Number-one_albums_of_1985_(USA)
mw-redirect
Number-one albums of 1985 (USA)

values:
/wiki/Billy_Rosewood
mw-redirect
Billy Rosewood

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: position: absolute; right: 15px; display: none;

values:
metadata plainlinks stub
presentation
background:transparent

values: Category:Articles with hAudio microformats

values: Category:Music infoboxes with deprecated parameters

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values:
/wiki/Beverly_Hills_Cop_(soundtrack)
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Beverly_Hills_Cop_soundtrack rootpage-Beverly_Hills_Cop_soundtrack vector-experimental-print-styles vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view


text:
Origins of the War of 1812
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the Anglo-American War of 1812 to 1815. For Napoleon's invasion of Russia, see French invasion of Russia.
Origins of
the War of 1812
Chesapeake–Leopard affair
Orders in Council (1807)
Embargo Act of 1807
Non-Intercourse Act (1809)
Macon's Bill Number 2
Tecumseh's War
Henry letters
War hawks
Rule of 1756
Monroe–Pinkney Treaty
Little Belt affair
v
t
e
The War of 1812, a war between the United States, Great Britain, and Britain's Indian allies, lasted from 1812 to 1815. The U.S. declared war and historians have long debated the multiple factors behind that decision.[1]
There were several causes for the U.S. declaration of war: First, a series of trade restrictions introduced by Britain to impede American trade with France, a country with which Britain was at war (the U.S. contested these restrictions as illegal under international law);[2] second, the impressment (forced recruitment) of U.S. seamen into the Royal Navy; third, the British military support for American Indians who were offering armed resistance to the expansion of the American frontier to the Northwest; fourth, a possible desire on the part of the United States to annex Canada.[3] An implicit but powerful motivation for the Americans was the desire to uphold national honor in the face of what they considered to be British insults (such as the Chesapeake affair).[4]
American expansion into the Northwest (Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin) was impeded by Indian raids. Some historians maintain that an American goal in the war was annex some or all of Canada, a view that many Canadians still share, while others argue that inducing the fear of such a seizure had merely been a U.S. tactic designed to obtain a bargaining chip.[5] Some members of the British Parliament at the time[6] and dissident American politicians such as John Randolph of Roanoke[7] claimed that land hunger rather than maritime disputes was the main motivation for the American declaration. However, some historians, both Canadian and American, retain the view that desire to annex all or part of Canada was an American goal.[8] Although the British made some concessions before the war on neutral trade, they insisted on the right to reclaim their deserting sailors. The British also had the long-standing goal of creating a large "neutral" Indian state that would cover much of Ohio, Indiana and Michigan. They made the demand as late as 1814 at the peace conference, but lost battles that would have validated their claims.[9][10]
The war was fought in four theatres: on the oceans, where the warships and privateers of both sides preyed on each other's merchant shipping; along the Atlantic coast of the U.S., which was blockaded with increasing severity by the British, who also mounted large-scale raids in the later stages of the war; on the long frontier, running along the Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence River, which separated the U.S. from Upper and Lower Canada (Ontario and Quebec); and finally along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. During the course of the war, both the Americans and British launched invasions of each other's territory, all of which were unsuccessful or gained only temporary success. At the end of the war, the British held parts of Maine and some outposts in the sparsely populated West while the Americans held Canadian territory near Detroit, but these occupied territories were restored at the end of the war.
In the United States, battles such as New Orleans and the earlier successful defence of Baltimore (which inspired the lyrics of the U.S. national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner) produced a sense of euphoria over a "second war of independence" against Britain. It ushered in an "Era of Good Feelings," in which the partisan animosity that had once verged on treason practically vanished. Canada also emerged from the war with a heightened sense of national feeling and solidarity. Britain, which had regarded the war as a sideshow to the Napoleonic Wars raging in Europe, was less affected by the fighting; its government and people subsequently welcomed an era of peaceful relations with the United States.
Contents
[hide]
1 British goals
1.1 Defeating Napoleon
1.2 Creating an Indian barrier state between U.S. and Canada
2 American goals
2.1 British support for Indian raids
2.2 American expansionism
2.2.1 Annexation
2.2.2 Seizing Canada as a bargaining chip
2.3 Inhabitants of Ontario
3 Violations of American rights
4 Honor
5 American economic motivations
6 Incidents leading up to the war
7 Declaration of war
8 See also
9 Notes
10 References
11 External links
British goals[edit]
The British were engaged in a life-and-death war with Napoleon and could not allow the Americans to help the enemy, regardless of their lawful neutral rights to do so. As Horsman explains, "If possible, England wished to avoid war with America, but not to the extent of allowing her to hinder the British war effort against France. Moreover...a large section of influential British opinion, both in the government and in the country, thought that America presented a threat to British maritime supremacy." [11]
Defeating Napoleon[edit]
The British had two goals: All parties were committed to the defeat of France, and this required sailors (hence the need for impressment), and it required all-out commercial war against France (hence the restrictions imposed on American merchant ships). On the question of trade with America the British parties split. As Horsman argues, "Some restrictions on neutral commerce were essential for England in this period. That this restriction took such an extreme form after 1807 stemmed not only from the effort to defeat Napoleon, but also from the undoubted jealousy of America's commercial prosperity that existed in England. America was unfortunate in that for most of the period from 1803 to 1812 political power in England was held by a group that was pledged not only to the defeat of France, but also to a rigid maintenance of Britain's commercial supremacy."[12] That group was weakened by Whigs friendly to the U.S. in mid-1812 and the policies were reversed, but too late for the U.S. had already declared war. By 1815 Britain was no longer controlled by politicians dedicated to commercial supremacy, so that cause had vanished.
The British were hindered by weak diplomats in Washington (such as David Erskine) who misrepresented British policy and by communications that were so slow the Americans did not learn of the reversal of policy until they had declared war.
When Americans proposed a truce based on British ending impressment, Britain refused, because it needed those sailors. Horsman explains, "Impressment, which was the main point of contention between England and America from 1803 to 1807, was made necessary primarily because of England's great shortage of seamen for the war against Napoleon. In a similar manner the restrictions on American commerce imposed by England's Orders in Council, which were the supreme cause of complaint between 1807 and 1812, were one part of a vast commercial struggle being waged between England and France." [12]
Creating an Indian barrier state between U.S. and Canada[edit]
The British also had the long-standing goal of creating an Indian barrier state, a large "neutral" Indian state that would cover most of the Old Northwest and be a barrier between the western parts of the United States and Canada. It would be independent of the United States and under the tutelage of the British, who would use it to block American expansion and to build up their control of the fur trade.[13] They made the demand as late as 1814 at the peace conference, but dropped the demand. Their position had been weakened by the collapse of Tecumseh's Confederacy after the Battle of the Thames, but the British also simply no longer considered the goal worth conflict with the United States. Much of the proposed buffer state remained largely under British and Indian control throughout the war.[9][14]
American goals[edit]
There were several immediate stated causes for the U.S. declaration of war. First, a series of trade restrictions called the Orders in Council (1807) introduced by Britain to impede American trade with France, a country with which Britain was at war; the U.S. contested these restrictions as illegal under international law.[2] Second, the impressment (forced recruitment) of U.S. citizens into the Royal Navy. Third, the alleged British military support for American Indians who were offering armed resistance to the United States.[3] An unstated but powerful motivation for the Americans was the need to uphold national honor in the face of British insults (such as the Chesapeake affair.)[4] There also may have been an American desire to annex Canada.
British support for Indian raids[edit]
Indians based in the Northwest Territory, comprising the modern states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, had organized in opposition to American settlement, and were being supplied with weapons by British traders in Canada. Britain was not trying to provoke a war, and at one point cut its allocations of gunpowder to the tribes, but it was trying to build up its fur trade and friendly relations with potential military allies.[15] Although Britain had ceded the area to the United States in the Treaty of Paris in 1783, it had the long-term goal of creating a "neutral" or buffer Indian state in the area that would block further American growth.[16] The Indian nations generally followed Tenskwatawa (the Shawnee Prophet and the brother of Tecumseh, who since 1805 had preached his vision of purifying his society by expelling the "Children of the Evil Spirit" (the American settlers).[17]
Pratt says:
"There is ample proof that the British authorities did all in their power to hold or win the allegiance of the Indians of the Northwest with the expectation of using them as allies in the event of war. Indian allegiance could be held only by gifts, and to an Indian no gift was as acceptable as a lethal weapon. Guns and ammunition, tomahawks and scalping knives were dealt out with some liberality by British agents."[18]
Raiding grew more common in 1810 and 1811; Westerners in Congress found the raids intolerable and wanted them permanently ended.[19][20]
American expansionism[edit]
Historians have considered the idea that American expansionism was one cause of the war. The American expansion into the Northwest—Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin—was being blocked by Indians and that was a major cause animating the Westerners. American historian Walter Nugent in his history of American expansionism argues that expansion into the Midwest "was not the only American objective, and indeed not the immediate one area but it was an objective."[21]
Annexation[edit]
More controversy is the question whether an American war goal was to permanently acquire Canadian lands (especially western Ontario), or whether it was planned to seize the area temporarily as a bargaining chip. The American desire for Canadian land has been a staple in Canadian public opinion since the 1830s, and was much discussed among historians before 1940, but has become less popular since then. The idea was first developed by Marxist historian Louis M. Hacker and refined by diplomatic specialist Julius Pratt.[22] In 1925, Pratt argued that Western Americans were incited to war by the prospect of seizing Canada.[23] Pratt's argument supported the belief of many Canadians, especially in Ontario, where fear of American expansionism was a major political element. To this day the notion still survives among Canadians.[24]
In 2010 American historian Alan Taylor examined the political dimension of the annexation issue as Congress debated whether to declare war in 1811-12. The Federalist party was strongly opposed to war and to annexation, as were the northeastern states. The majority in Congress was held by the Jeffersonian Republican party, which split on the issue. One faction wanted to permanently expel Britain and annex Canada. John Randolph of Roanoke, representing Virginia, commented, "Agrarian greed not maritime right urges this war. We have heard but one word - like the whipporwill's one monotonous tone: Canada! Canada! Canada!"[25]The other faction, based in the South, said that acquiring new territory in the north would give the northern states too much power, and opposed the incorporation into Canada of a Catholic population which it viewed as "unfit by faith, language and illiteracy for republican citizenship." The Senate held a series of debates, and twice voted on proposals to explicitly endorse annexation, neither of which passed, although the second one only failed because of a proviso stating that Canada could be returned to British rule after being annexed. War was declared with no mention of annexation although widespread support existed among the War Hawks for it. Some Southerners supported expansionism; Tennessee Senator Felix Grundy considered it essential to acquire Canada to preserve domestic political balance, arguing that annexing Canada would maintain the free state-slave state balance, which might otherwise be thrown off by the acquisition of Florida and the settlement of the southern areas of the new Louisiana Purchase.[26]
Even James Monroe and Henry Clay, key officials in the government, expected to gain at least Upper Canada from a successful war. Interestingly, American commanders like General William Hull and Alexander Smythe issued proclamations to Canadians and their troops assuring them that annexations would in fact occur during the war. Smythe wrote to his troops that when they entered Canada "You enter a country that is to become one with the United States. You will arrive among a people who are to become your fellow-citizens." [27]
Seizing Canada as a bargaining chip[edit]
Today historians generally agree that an invasion and temporary seizure of Canada was the Central American military strategy once the war began. Given British control of the oceans, there was no other way to actively fight against British interests. President Madison believed that food supplies from Canada were essential to the British overseas empire in the West Indies, and that an American seizure would be an excellent bargaining chip at the peace conference. During the war, some Americans speculated that they might as well keep all of Canada. Thomas Jefferson, for example, although now out of power, argued that expulsion of British interests from nearby Canada would remove a long-term threat to American republicanism. New Zealand historian J.G.A. Stagg argues that Madison and his advisors believed that conquest of Canada would be easy and that economic coercion would force the British to come to terms by cutting off the food supply for their highly valuable West Indies sugar colonies. Furthermore, possession of Canada would be a valuable bargaining chip. Stagg suggests frontiersmen demanded the seizure of Canada not because they wanted the land (they had plenty), but because the British were thought to be arming the Indians and thereby blocking settlement of the west.[28] As Horsman concludes, "The idea of conquering Canada had been present since at least 1807 as a means of forcing England to change her policy at sea. The conquest of Canada was primarily a means of waging war, not a reason for starting it."[29] Hickey flatly states, "The desire to annex Canada did not bring on the war." [30] Brown (1964) concludes, "The purpose of the Canadian expedition was to serve negotiation not to annex Canada."[31] Burt, a Canadian scholar, but also a professor at an American university, agrees completely, noting that Foster, the British minister to Washington, also rejected the argument that annexation of Canada was a war goal.[32] However, Foster also rejected the possibility of a declaration of war, despite having dinner with several of the more prominent War Hawks, so his judgement in these matters can be questioned.
However, historian J. C. A. Stagg states that, "... had the War 1812 been a successful military venture, the Madison administration would have been reluctant to have returned occupied Canadian territory to the enemy."[33] Other authors concur, one stating, "Expansion was not the only American objective, and indeed not the immediate one. But it was an objective",[34] and that "The American yearning to absorb Canada was long-standing...In 1812 it became part of a grand strategy."[35] Another suggests that "Americans harboured 'manifest destiny' ideas of Canadian annexation throughout the nineteenth century."[36] A third states that "[t]he [American] belief that the United States would one day annex Canada had a continuous existence from the early days of the War of Independence to the War of 1812 [and] was a factor of primary importance in bringing on the war."[37] Another says that "acquiring Canada would satisfy America's expansionist desires" .[38] Historian Spencer Tucker tells us that "War Hawks were eager to wage war with the British, not only to end Indian depredations in the Midwest but also to seize Canada and perhaps Spanish Florida."[39]
Inhabitants of Ontario[edit]
The majority of the inhabitants of Upper Canada (Ontario) were Americans, some of them exiled (United Empire Loyalists) and most of them recent immigrants. The Loyalists were extremely hostile to union with the U.S., while the other settlers seem to have been uninterested and remained neutral during the war. The Canadian colonies were thinly populated and only lightly defended by the British Army, and some Americans believed that the many in Upper Canada would rise up and greet an American invading army as liberators.[40] The combination implied an easy conquest. Once the war began retired president Thomas Jefferson warned that the British presence posed a grave threat, pointing to "The infamous intrigues of Great Britain to destroy our government....and with the Indians to Tomahawk our women and children, prove that the cession of Canada, their fulcrum for these Machiavellian levers, must be a sine qua non at a treaty of peace. Jefferson predicted in late 1812, "the acquisition of Canada this year, as far as the neighborhood of Quebec, will be a mere matter of marching, and will give us the experience for the attack on Halifax, the next and final expulsion of England from the American continent."[41]
Maass argued in 2015 that the expansionist theme is a myth that goes against the "relative consensus among experts that the primary U.S. objective was the repeal of British maritime restrictions. He argues that consensus among scholars is that The United States went to war "because six years of economic sanctions had failed to bring Britain to the negotiating table, and threatening the Royal Navy’s Canadian supply base was their last hope." However, he also notes that many historians continue to publish in support of expansionism as a cause, and that even those opposed to the idea continue to include caveats regarding "possible expansionism underlying US motives". Maass agrees that theoretically expansionism might have tempted Americans, but finds that "leaders feared the domestic political consequences of doing so. Notably, what limited expansionism there was focused on sparsely populated western lands rather than the more populous eastern settlements [of Canada]." [42]
Violations of American rights[edit]
The long wars between Britain and France (1793–1815) led to repeated complaints by the U.S. that both powers violated America's right as a neutral to trade with both sides. Furthermore, Americans complained loudly that British agents in Canada were supplying munitions to hostile Native American tribes living in United States territory.
Starting in the mid-1790s the Royal Navy, short of manpower, began boarding American merchant ships in order to seize American and British sailors from American vessels. Although this policy of impressment was supposed to reclaim only British subjects, the law of Britain and most countries defined nationality by birth whereas the United States allowed individuals who had been resident in America for some time to adopt American citizenship. There were, therefore, large numbers of individuals who were British by British law but American by American law. The confusion was compounded by the refusal of Jefferson and Madison to issue any official citizenship documents: their position was that all persons serving on American ships were to be regarded as US citizens and that no further evidence was required. This stance was motivated by the advice of Albert Gallatin, who had calculated that half of American deep-sea merchant seamen - 9,000 men - were British subjects. Allowing the Royal Navy to reclaim these men would destroy both the US economy and the vital customs revenue of the government.[43] Any sort of accommodation would jeopardize these men, and so concords such as the proposed Monroe-Pinkney Treaty (1806) between the U.S. and Britain were rejected by Jefferson.
To fill the need for some sort of identification, US consuls provided unofficial papers. However, these relied on unverifiable declarations by the individual concerned for evidence of citizenship, and the large fees paid for the documents made them a lucrative sideline. In turn, British officers- short of personnel and convinced, not entirely unreasonably, that the US flag covered a large number of British deserters- tended to treat such papers with scorn. Between 1806 and 1812 about 6,000 seamen were impressed and taken against their will into the Royal Navy[44] of which 3,800 were subsequently released.[45]
Honor[edit]
Historian Norman Risjord has emphasized the central importance of honour as a cause the war.[46] Americans of every political stripe saw the need to uphold national honor, and to reject the treatment of the United States by Britain as a third class nonentity. Americans talked incessantly about the need for force in response.[47] This quest for honor was a major cause of the war in the sense that most Americans who were not involved in mercantile interests or threatened by Indian attack strongly endorsed the preservation of national honor.[48] The humiliating attack by the HMS Leopard against the USS Chesapeake in June 1807 was a decisive event.[49] Many Americans called for war, but Jefferson held back, insisting that economic warfare would prove more successful. Jefferson initiated economic warfare, especially in the form of embargoing or refusing to sell products to Britain. It proved a failure, that did not deter the British but it seriously damaged American industry had alienated the mercantile cities of the Northeast that were so seriously hurt. Historians have demonstrated the motive power of honor in shaping public opinion in a number of states, including Massachusetts,[50] Ohio,[51] Pennsylvania,[52][53] Tennessee,[54] and Virginia,[55] as well as the territory of Michigan.[56] On June 3, 1812, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, chaired by fire-eater John C. Calhoun called for a declaration of war in ringing phrases, denouncing Britain's "lust for power," "unbounded tyranny," and "mad ambition." James Roark says, "These were fighting words in a war that was in large measure about insult and honor."[57] Calhoun reaped much of the credit.[58]
In terms of honour, the conclusion of the war, especially the spectacular defeat of the main British invasion army at New Orleans, did restore the American sense of honor. Historian Lance Banning says:
National honour, the reputation of republican government, and the continuing supremacy of the Republican party had seemed to be at stake.... National honour had [now] been satisfied....Americans celebrated the end of the struggle with a brilliant burst of national pride. They felt that they had fought a second war for independence, and had won. If little had been gained, nothing had been lost in a contest the greatest imperial power on the earth.[59]
It is not clear whether the British acknowledged American honor, because when peace was signed, impressment remained legal. Nevertheless, the practice ended because the Napoleonic wars had ended and the Royal Navy no longer required as many men.
American economic motivations[edit]
The failure of Jefferson's embargo and Madison's economic coercion, according to Horsman, "made war or absolute submission to England the only alternatives, and the latter presented more terrors to the recent colonists. The war hawks came from the West and the South, regions that had supported economic warfare and were suffering the most from British restrictions at sea. The merchants of New England earned large profits from the wartime carrying trade, in spite of the numerous captures by both France and England, but the western and southern farmers, who looked longingly at the export market, were suffering a depression that made them demand war".[60]
Incidents leading up to the war[edit]
This dispute came to the forefront with the Chesapeake-Leopard Affair of 1807, when the British warship HMS Leopard fired on and boarded the American warship USS Chesapeake, killing three and carrying off four deserters from the Royal Navy. (Only one was a British citizen and he was subsequently hanged; the other three were American citizens and were later returned, though the last two not until 1812.) The American public was outraged by the incident, and many called for war in order to assert American sovereignty and national honor.
The Chesapeake-Leopard Affair followed closely on the similar Leander Affair, which had resulted in President Jefferson banning certain British warships and their captains from American ports and waters. Whether in response to this incident or the Chesapeake-Leopard Affair, President Jefferson banned all foreign armed vessels from American waters, except those bearing dispatches. In December 1808, an American officer expelled the schooner HMS Sandwich from Savannah, Georgia, after she had entered with dispatches for the British Consul there.
Meanwhile, Napoleon's Continental System (beginning 1806) and the British Orders in Council (1807) established embargoes that made international trade precarious. From 1807 to 1812, about 900 American ships were seized as a result.[61] The U.S. responded with the Embargo Act of 1807, which prohibited American ships from sailing to any foreign ports and closed American ports to British ships. Jefferson's embargo was especially unpopular in New England, where merchants preferred the indignities of impressment to the halting of overseas commerce. This discontent contributed to the calling of the Hartford Convention in 1814.
The Embargo Act had no effect on Great Britain and France and was replaced by the Non-Intercourse Act of 1809, which lifted all embargoes on American shipping except for those bound for British or French ports. As this proved to be unenforceable, the Non-Intercourse Act was replaced in 1810 by Macon's Bill Number 2. This lifted all embargoes but offered that if either France or Great Britain were to cease their interference with American shipping, the United States would reinstate an embargo on the other nation. Napoleon, seeing an opportunity to make trouble for Great Britain, promised to leave American ships alone, and the United States reinstated the embargo with Great Britain and moved closer to declaring war.[62]
Exacerbating the situation, Sauk Indians who controlled trade on the Upper Mississippi were displeased with the U.S. Government after the 1804 treaty between Quashquame and William Henry Harrison. This treaty ceded Sauk territory in Illinois and Missouri to the U.S.; the Sauk felt this treaty was unjust, that Quashquame was unauthorized to sign away land, and that he was unaware of what he was signing. The establishment of Fort Madison in 1808 on the Mississippi further aggravated the Sauk, and led many, including Black Hawk, to side with the British before the war broke out. Sauk and allied Indians, including the Ho-Chunk (Winnebago), were very effective fighters for the British on the Mississippi, helping to defeat Fort Madison and Fort McKay in Prairie du Chien.
Oxford historian Paul Langford looks at the decisions by the British government in 1812:
The British ambassador in Washington [Erskine] brought affairs almost to an accommodation, and was ultimately disappointed not by American intransigence but by one of the outstanding diplomatic blunders made by a Foreign Secretary. It was Canning who, in his most irresponsible manner and apparently out of sheer dislike of everything American, recalled the ambassador Erskine and wrecked the negotiations, a piece of most gratuitous folly. As a result, the possibility of a new embarrassment for Napoleon turned into the certainty of a much more serious one for his enemy. Though the British cabinet eventually made the necessary concessions on the score of the Orders-in-Council, in response to the pressures of industrial lobbying at home, its action came too late…. The loss of the North American markets could have been a decisive blow. As it was by the time the United States declared war, the Continental System [of Napoleon] was beginning to crack, and the danger correspondingly diminishing. Even so, the war, inconclusive though it proved in a military sense, was an irksome and expensive embarrassment which British statesman could have done much more to avert.[63]
Declaration of war[edit]
In the United States House of Representatives, a group of young Democratic-Republicans known as the "War Hawks" came to the forefront in 1811, led by Speaker of the House Henry Clay of Kentucky and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. The War Hawks advocated going to war against Great Britain for all of the reasons listed above, though concentrating on the grievances more than the territorial expansion.
On the first of June 1812, President James Madison gave a speech to the U.S. Congress, recounting American grievances against Great Britain, though not specifically calling for a declaration of war. After Madison's speech, the House of Representatives quickly voted (79 to 49) to declare war, and the Senate by 19 to 13. The conflict formally began on 18 June 1812 when Madison signed the measure into law. This was the first time that the United States had declared war on another nation, and the Congressional vote would prove to be the closest vote to declare war in American history. None of the 39 Federalists in Congress voted in favor of the war; critics of war subsequently referred to it as "Mr. Madison's War." [64]
See also[edit]
Chronology of the War of 1812
Opposition to the War of 1812
Results of the War of 1812
War of 1812
War of 1812 bibliography
Notes[edit]
Jump up ^ Jasper M. Trautsch, "The Causes of the War of 1812: 200 Years of Debate," Journal of Military History (Jan 2013) 77#1 pp 273-293.
^ Jump up to: a b Caffery, pp.56–58
^ Jump up to: a b Caffery, pp.101–104
^ Jump up to: a b Norman K. Risjord, "1812: Conservatives, War Hawks, and the Nation's Honor." William And Mary Quarterly 1961 18(2): 196–210. in JSTOR
Jump up ^ Bowler, pp. 11–32
Jump up ^ George Canning, Address respecting the war with America, Hansard (House of Commons), 18 February 1813
Jump up ^ Fregosi, Paul (1989). Dreams of Empire. Hutchinson. p. 328. ISBN 0-09-173926-8.
Jump up ^ J.C.A Stagg (1983), Mr Madison's War, pg. 4
^ Jump up to: a b Dwight L. Smith, "A North American Neutral Indian Zone: Persistence of a British Idea" Northwest Ohio Quarterly 1989 61(2–4): 46–63
Jump up ^ Francis M. Carroll, A Good and Wise Measure: The Search for the Canadian-American Boundary, 1783–1842, 2001, page 23
Jump up ^ Horsman (1962) p. 264
^ Jump up to: a b Horsman (1962) p. 265
Jump up ^ Dwight L. Smith"A North American Neutral Indian Zone: Persistence of a British Idea." Northwest Ohio Quarterly 61#2-4 (1989): 46-63.
Jump up ^ Francis M. Carroll (2001). A Good and Wise Measure: The Search for the Canadian-American Boundary, 1783-1842. U. of Toronto Press. p. 24.
Jump up ^ Mark Zuehlke, For Honour's Sake: The War of 1812 and the Brokering of an Uneasy Peace (2006) pp 62–62
Jump up ^ Dwight L. Smith, "A North American Neutral Indian Zone: Persistence of a British Idea", Northwest Ohio Quarterly (1989) 61 (2–4): 46–63.
Jump up ^ Timothy D. Willig. Restoring the Chain of Friendship: British Policy and the Indians of the Great Lakes, 1783–1815 (2008) p. 207.
Jump up ^ Julius W. Pratt, A history of United States foreign-policy (1955) p 126
Jump up ^ David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler, eds. Encyclopedia of the War of 1812 (1997) pp. 253, 504
Jump up ^ Zuehlke, For Honour's Sake, p 62
Jump up ^ Walter Nugent, Habits of Empire: A History of American Expansionism (2009) ch 3, quoted on page 73.
Jump up ^ Hacker (1924); Pratt (1925). Goodman (1941) refuted the idea and even Pratt gave it up. Pratt (1955)
Jump up ^ Julius W. Pratt, "Western Aims in the War of 1812." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review (1925): 36-50. in JSTOR
Jump up ^ W. Arthur Bowler, "Propaganda in Upper Canada in the War of 1812," American Review of Canadian Studies (1988) 28:11–32; C.P. Stacey, "The War of 1812 in Canadian History" in Morris Zaslow and Wesley B. Turner, eds. The Defended Border: Upper Canada and the War of 1812 (Toronto, 1964)
Jump up ^ Fregosi 1989, p. 328.
Jump up ^ John Roderick Heller (2010). Democracy's Lawyer: Felix Grundy of the Old Southwest. p. 98.
Jump up ^ Alan Taylor, The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies (2010) pp 137-40.
Jump up ^ Stagg (1983)
Jump up ^ Horsman (1962) p. 267
Jump up ^ Hickey (1990) p. 72.
Jump up ^ Brown p. 128.
Jump up ^ Burt (1940) pp 305–10.
Jump up ^ Stagg 1983, p. 4.
Jump up ^ Nugent, p. 73.
Jump up ^ Nugent, p. 75.
Jump up ^ Carlisle & Golson 2007, p. 44.
Jump up ^ Pratt 1925, p. [page needed].
Jump up ^ David Heidler,Jeanne T. Heidler, The War of 1812, pg4[full citation needed]
Jump up ^ Tucker 2011, p. 236.
Jump up ^ Fred Landon, Western Ontario and the American Frontier (1941) pp 12–22
Jump up ^ James Laxer (2012). Tecumseh and Brock: The War of 1812. p. 129.
Jump up ^ Richard W. Maass, “Difficult to Relinquish Territory Which Had Been Conquered”: Expansionism and the War of 1812," Diplomatic History (Jan 2015) 39#1 pp 70-97 doi: 10.1093/dh/dht132 Abstract Online
Jump up ^ Rodger, Command of the Ocean, p565
Jump up ^ Hickey (1989) p. 11
Jump up ^ Rodger, Command of the Ocean, p566
Jump up ^ Norman K. Risjord, "1812: Conservatives, War Hawks and the Nation's Honor." William and Mary Quarterly: A Magazine of Early American History (1961): 196-210. in JSTOR
Jump up ^ Robert L. Ivie, "The metaphor of force in prowar discourse: The case of 1812." Quarterly Journal of Speech 68#3 (1982) pp: 240-253.
Jump up ^ Bradford Perkins, The causes of the War of 1812: National honor or national interest? (1962).
Jump up ^ Spencer Tucker and Frank T. Reuter, Injured Honor: The Chesapeake-Leopard Affair, June 22, 1807 (Naval Institute Press, 1996)
Jump up ^ William Barlow and David O. Powell. "Congressman Ezekiel Bacon of Massachusetts and the Coming of the War of 1812." Historical Journal of Massachusetts 6#2 (1978): 28.
Jump up ^ William R. Barlow, "Ohio’s Congressmen and the War of 1812." Ohio History 72 (1963): 175-94.
Jump up ^ Victor Sapio, Pennsylvania and the War of 1812 (University Press of Kentucky, 2015)
Jump up ^ Martin Kaufman, "War Sentiment in Western Pennsylvania: 1812." Pennsylvania History (1964): 436-448.
Jump up ^ William A. Walker, "Martial Sons: Tennessee Enthusiasm for the War of 1812." Tennessee Historical Quarterly 20.1 (1961): 20+
Jump up ^ Edwin M. Gaines, "The Chesapeake Affair: Virginians Mobilize to Defend National Honor." The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography (1956): 131-142.
Jump up ^ William Barlow, "The Coming of the War of 1812 in Michigan Territory." Michigan History 53 (1969): 91-107.
Jump up ^ James L. Roark; Patricia Cline Cohen; et al. (2011). Understanding the American Promise. p. 259.
Jump up ^ James H. Ellis (2009). A Ruinous and Unhappy War: New England and the War of 1812. Algora Publishing. pp. 75–76.
Jump up ^ Lance Banning (1980). The Jeffersonian Persuasion: Evolution of a Party Ideology. Cornell UP. p. 295.
Jump up ^ Horsman (1962) p. 266
Jump up ^ Hickey (1989) p. 19
Jump up ^ Napoleon had no intention of honoring promise: Hickey, p. 22; Horsman, p. 188.
Jump up ^ Paul Langford, Modern British Foreign Policy: The Eighteenth Century: 1688-1815 (1976) p 228
Jump up ^ Journal of the Senate of the United States of America, 1789–1873
References[edit]
Adams, Henry. History of the United States during the Administrations of James Madison (5 vol 1890–91; 2 vol Library of America, 1986). ISBN 0-940450-35-6 Table of contents, the classic political-diplomatic history
Benn, Carl. The War of 1812 (2003).
Brown, Roger H. The Republic in Peril: 1812 (1964). on American politics
Burt, Alfred L. The United States, Great Britain, and British North America from the Revolution to the Establishment of Peace after the War of 1812. (1940)
Goodman, Warren H. "The Origins of the War of 1812: A Survey of Changing Interpretations," Mississippi Valley Historical Review (1941)28#1 pp 171–86. in JSTOR
Hacker, Louis M. "Western Land Hunger and the War of 1812," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, (1924), 10#3 pp 365–95. in JSTOR
Heidler, Donald & J, (eds) Encyclopedia of the War of 1812 (2004) articles by 70 scholars from several countries
Hickey, Donald. The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict. University of Illinois Press, 1989. ISBN 0-252-06059-8, by leading American scholar
Hickey, Donald R. Don't Give Up the Ship! Myths of the War of 1812. (2006) ISBN 0-252-03179-2
Horsman, Reginald. The Causes of the War of 1812 (1962).
Kaplan, Lawrence S. "France and Madison's Decision for War 1812," The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. 50, No. 4. (Mar., 1964), pp. 652–671. in JSTOR
Maass, Richard W. "'Difficult to Relinquish Territory Which Had Been Conquered': Expansionism and the War of 1812," Diplomatic History (Jan 2015) 39#1 pp 70–97 doi: 10.1093/dh/dht132
Perkins, Bradford. Prologue to war: England and the United States, 1805–1812 (1961) full text online free, detailed diplomatic history by American scholar
Perkins, Bradford. Castlereagh and Adams: England and the United States, 1812·1823 (1964) excerpt; online review
Perkins, Bradford. (1962). The Causes of the War of 1812. Krieger
Pratt, Julius W. A History of United States Foreign Policy (1955)
Pratt, Julius W. (1925b.) Expansionists of 1812
Pratt, Julius W. "Western War Aims in the War of 1812," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 12 (June, 1925), 36–50. in JSTOR
Risjord, Norman K. "1812: Conservatives, War Hawks, and the Nation's Honor," William and Mary Quarterly, 18#2 ( 1961), 196–210. in JSTOR
Smelser, Marshall. The Democratic Republic 1801–1815 (1968) general survey of American politics & diplomacy
Stagg, John C. A. Mr. Madison's War: Politics, Diplomacy, and Warfare in the Early American republic, 1783–1830. (1983), major overview (by New Zealand scholar)
Stagg, John C. A. "James Madison and the 'Malcontents': The Political Origins of the War of 1812," William and Mary Quarterly (Oct., 1976) in JSTOR
Stagg, John C. A. "James Madison and the Coercion of Great Britain: Canada, the West Indies, and the War of 1812," in The William and Mary Quarterly (Jan., 1981) in JSTOR
Taylor, Alan. The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies (2010)
Taylor, George Rogers, ed. The War of 1812: Past Justifications and Present Interpretations (1963)
Trautsch, Jasper M. "The Causes of the War of 1812: 200 Years of Debate," Journal of Military History (Jan 2013) 77#1 pp 273–293
Updyke, Frank A. The diplomacy of the War of 1812 (1915) online free
External links[edit]
Reading list on the Causes of the War of 1812 compiled by the United States Army Center of Military History
[hide]
v
t
e
War of 1812
Battles
Campaigns
Origins
Chronology
Results
People
Isaac Brock
Andrew Jackson
Francis Scott Key
James Madison
Laura Secord
Tecumseh
Places
Fort Detroit/Shelby
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky
Battles
Baltimore
Beaver Dams
Chateauguay
Crysler's Farm
Frenchtown
Lundy's Lane
New Orleans
Queenston Heights
Spur's Defeat
Thames
Washington
Songs
"The Bold Canadian"
"The Hunters of Kentucky"
"The Star-Spangled Banner"
Other
Books
Opposition in United States
War of 1812 Bicentennial
Related
Tecumseh's War
Creek War
Portal
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Origins_of_the_War_of_1812&oldid=829788037"
Categories:
War of 1812
Causes of wars
Hidden categories:
Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from June 2013
Articles needing more detailed references
Use dmy dates from March 2012
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
日本語
Edit links
This page was last edited on 10 March 2018, at 20:30.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: li

values: float:right;clear:right;width:auto;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values: United States declaration of war upon the United Kingdom

values:
/wiki/Chesapeake-Leopard_Affair
mw-redirect
Chesapeake-Leopard Affair

values: Edit section: Creating an Indian barrier state between U.S. and Canada

values:
/wiki/Old_Northwest
mw-redirect
Old Northwest

values: Edit section: British support for Indian raids

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/Federalist_party
mw-redirect
Federalist party

values: Edit section: Seizing Canada as a bargaining chip

values: Edit section: Violations of American rights

values: Territorial evolution of the United States

values:
/wiki/Monroe-Pinkney_Treaty
mw-redirect
Monroe-Pinkney Treaty

values:
/wiki/Chesapeake%E2%80%93Leopard_Affair
mw-redirect
Chesapeake–Leopard Affair

values: Edit section: American economic motivations

values: Edit section: Incidents leading up to the war

values:
/wiki/Non-Intercourse_Act
mw-redirect
Non-Intercourse Act

values:
/wiki/Fort_Madison
mw-redirect
Fort Madison

values:
/wiki/Black_Hawk_(chief)
mw-redirect
Black Hawk (chief)

values:
/wiki/Prairie_du_Chien
mw-redirect
Prairie du Chien

values: Democratic-Republican Party (United States)

values: Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives

values:
/wiki/Congress_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Congress of the United States

values:
/wiki/Federalist_Party_(United_States)
mw-redirect
Federalist Party (United States)

values:
/wiki/Chronology_of_the_War_of_1812
mw-redirect
Chronology of the War of 1812

values: Opposition to the War of 1812 in the United States

values:
/wiki/War_of_1812_bibliography
mw-redirect
War of 1812 bibliography

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1918543

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1891784

values: This citation requires a reference to the specific page or range of pages in which the material appears. (June 2013)

values: A more detailed citation is required. (June 2013)

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/pss/1896211

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1916658

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1921716

values:
nofollow
external text
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1916855

values:
/wiki/Battles_of_the_War_of_1812
mw-redirect
Battles of the War of 1812

values: Isaac Brock portrait 1, from The Story of Isaac Brock (1908)-2.png

values:
navbox-image
6
width:1px;padding:0px 2px 0px 0px

values:
/wiki/File:James_Madison.jpg
image
James Madison

values:
navbox-image
6
width:1px;padding:0px 0px 0px 2px

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from June 2013

values: Category:Articles needing more detailed references

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Origins_of_the_War_of_1812
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: 米英戦争の原因 – Japanese

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Origins_of_the_War_of_1812 rootpage-Origins_of_the_War_of_1812 skin-vector action-view