Breaking Bad? How Survey Experiments Prime Americans for War Crimes

Carpenter, Charli; Montgomery, Alexander H.; Nylen, Alexandria

doi:10.1017/s1537592720002376

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 66 publications

(63 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When confronting North Korea, these populations must grapple with the potential for harm coming to themselves and their loved ones. We thus predict only limited support for the nuclear option even absent vivid imagery (Koch and Wells 2021) or international law priming (Carpenter, Montgomery, and Nylen 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Under the Umbrella: Nuclear Crises, Extended Deterrence, and Public Opinion

Allison

Herzog

2022

Journal of Conflict Resolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How robust is public support for extended nuclear deterrence in patron and client states? Recent studies have improved scholarly understanding of US public opinion about nuclear weapon use against non-nuclear adversaries. Yet, there is limited knowledge of public attitudes regarding retaliation for nuclear strikes against US allies. We develop a theoretical typology of nuclear crises and investigate this phenomenon with a novel survey experiment ( n = 6,623). Americans, Japanese, and South Koreans viewed realistic emergency alert messages about a most-likely case for nuclear retaliation: a North Korean missile attack on a US ally protected by the nuclear umbrella. Support for nuclear retaliation is low in all three countries, with important cross-national differences. Favorability increases with North Korean nuclear first-use, but it remains limited nonetheless. Surprisingly, US “tripwire” troop casualties do not increase Americans’ demands for nuclear retaliation. These findings have important implications for the study of nuclear crises and practice of extended deterrence.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Under the Umbrella: Nuclear Crises, Extended Deterrence, and Public Opinion

Allison

Herzog

2022

Journal of Conflict Resolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We also stressed that any use of force in war must obey the law of war ( jus in bello ), where the key principles are military necessity, distinction and proportionality, particularly with respect to civilian non-combatants. This debriefing item serves to counteract the conditioning effects of our experiment, in line with the calls for a more societally responsible approach to experimental survey research examining public attitudes toward the use of force (Carpenter, Montgomery and Nylen, 2021).…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 91%

The lesser evil? Experimental evidence on the strength of nuclear and chemical weapon “taboos”

Smetana

Vranka

Rosendorf

2022

Conflict Management and Peace Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present findings of a survey experiment on a sample of 2350 American and British citizens, in which we examined attitudes towards nuclear and chemical strikes. Our findings demonstrate that even though the public accurately judges nuclear weapons as more destructive and indiscriminate, it is still more averse to the use of chemical than nuclear weapons. Our follow up study has shown that individuals are significantly more likely to associate chemical weapons with “rogue states” and terrorists, and associate nuclear weapons with modern powers. The findings contribute to scholarship on the “taboos” surrounding the (non-)use of WMDs in world politics.

show abstract

“…We also stressed that any use of force must obey the law of war (jus in bello), where the key principles are military necessity, distinction, and proportionality. This debriefing item was meant to counteract possible conditioning effects of our experiment, in line with recent calls for a more responsible approach to public opinion surveys portraying the use of military force (Carpenter, Montgomery, and Nylen 2020).…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Moscow with a Mushroom Cloud? Russian Public Attitudes to the Use of Nuclear Weapons in a Conflict with NATO

Smetana¹,

Onderčo²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>This preprint presents findings of an original survey experiment on public attitudes toward nuclear use conducted on a representative sample of Russian citizens. We randomly assigned our participants to experimental treatments with vignettes describing a military conflict between Russia and NATO in the Baltics, where Moscow considered a limited nuclear “escalate-to-deescalate” strike to avert defeat. Our findings show that Russians are significantly more averse to nuclear strikes than to the corresponding use of conventional missiles. The participants disapproved similarly of a demonstrative nuclear explosion in an unpopulated area and of nuclear strikes in a more escalated scenario. We also found associations between the moral values of individuals and strike support corresponding to earlier studies in the United States. Finally, our participants reported similar concerns about both nuclear and conventional strikes, with the worry about civilian casualties and the suffering of victims at the top of the list across experimental treatments.</p>

show abstract

Breaking Bad? How Survey Experiments Prime Americans for War Crimes

Cited by 17 publications

References 66 publications

Under the Umbrella: Nuclear Crises, Extended Deterrence, and Public Opinion

Under the Umbrella: Nuclear Crises, Extended Deterrence, and Public Opinion

The lesser evil? Experimental evidence on the strength of nuclear and chemical weapon “taboos”

From Moscow with a Mushroom Cloud? Russian Public Attitudes to the Use of Nuclear Weapons in a Conflict with NATO

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About