If They Endorse It, I Can't Trust It: How Outgroup Leader Endorsements Undercut Public Support for Civil War Peace Settlements

Haas, Nicholas; Khadka, Prabin B.

doi:10.1111/ajps.12519

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We similarly expect that COVID-19 policies from bipartisan coalitions of liberal and conservative elites will be supported more than policies from only liberal or conservative politicians. Ordinary people value political cooperation ( 41 , 42 ) and are responsive to whether proposals are backed by trusted political elites ( 43 , 44 ). Previous research suggests that people are more swayed by the stances of their fellow ingroup than outgroup members ( 22 , 23 ), making it unlikely that the mere presence of outgroup politicians will completely dampen support for bipartisan policies.…”

Section: Depolarizing Experts and Bipartisan Coalitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries

Flores

Cole

Dickert

et al. 2022

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political polarization impeded public support for policies to reduce the spread of COVID-19, much as polarization hinders responses to other contemporary challenges. Unlike previous theory and research that focused on the United States, the present research examined the effects of political elite cues and affective polarization on support for policies to manage the COVID-19 pandemic in seven countries (n = 12,955): Brazil, Israel, Italy, South Korea, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Across countries, cues from political elites polarized public attitudes toward COVID-19 policies. Liberal and conservative respondents supported policies proposed by ingroup politicians and parties more than the same policies from outgroup politicians and parties. Respondents disliked, distrusted, and felt cold toward outgroup political elites, whereas they liked, trusted, and felt warm toward both ingroup political elites and nonpartisan experts. This affective polarization was correlated with policy support. These findings imply that policies from bipartisan coalitions and nonpartisan experts would be less polarizing, enjoying broader public support. Indeed, across countries, policies from bipartisan coalitions and experts were more widely supported. A follow-up experiment replicated these findings among US respondents considering international vaccine distribution policies. The polarizing effects of partisan elites and affective polarization emerged across nations that vary in cultures, ideologies, and political systems. Contrary to some propositions, the United States was not exceptionally polarized. Rather, these results suggest that polarizing processes emerged simply from categorizing people into political ingroups and outgroups. Political elites drive polarization globally, but nonpartisan experts can help resolve the conflicts that arise from it.

show abstract

Section: Depolarizing Experts and Bipartisan Coalitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries

Flores

Cole

Dickert

et al. 2022

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Three distinct strands of inquiry have emerged from this literature, each with its associated strengths and limitations. First, a number of studies explicitly examine citizen attitudes towards ongoing peace processes and the support citizens are willing to lend in order to make peace settlements a reality (Fabbe, Hazlett, and Sınmazdemir 2019; Haas and Khadka 2020; Tellez 2019b). Thus far, most of these studies focus only on the immediate aftermath of fighting.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens in Peace Processes

Haaß

Hartzell

Ottmann

2022

Journal of Conflict Resolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizen engagement in and support for peace processes have been deemed important for sustainable peace after civil wars. Yet much of what we know about peace processes in civil wars centers on the interests of elite actors. This special feature aims to advance a research agenda focusing on citizens in peace processes to address this mismatch. In the introduction to the special feature, we first present empirical evidence situating citizens in relation to civil war peace processes. We then trace the current state of the literature on the roles of citizens in peace processes. Following that, we introduce a conceptual framework designed to improve scholarly analysis of the political behavior of citizens in peace processes. We also locate the individual contributions to the special feature within the framework in order to demonstrate its utility and as a means of helping to identify directions for future research.

show abstract

“…In addition, electoral competition facilitates political parties to put forth platforms and messages in favour of or against the different provisions included in a peace agreement that resonate with voters’ concerns. Recent research has demonstrated that citizens’ attitudes towards different components of the peace agreements signed in Colombia and South Sudan are driven by cues from polarising elites (Garbiras-Díaz et al, 2019; Haas and Khadka, 2020).…”

Section: How War and Political Experiences Shape Citizens’ Attitudes mentioning

confidence: 99%

Between Conflict and Politics: Understanding Popular Support for the FARC’s Political Involvement

Sánchez

Plata-Caviedes

2020

Journal of Politics in Latin America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political participation of former combatants is a central component of peace agreements. Similarly, people’s acceptance of political parties derived from such agreements is a crucial element towards peace building. Considering the peace deal between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC), we ask “What factors shape popular support for the FARC’s political involvement?” We argue that attitudes towards the political integration of the former guerrilla are influenced by conflict experiences and partisan identities. Relying on survey data, our results indicate that conflict experiences and political identities alone are not correlated with attitudes towards the political integration of former insurgents. However, public support for former combatants having a political party is associated with conflict experiences only for those who feel close to parties that took a hawkish stance towards the agreement.

show abstract

If They Endorse It, I Can't Trust It: How Outgroup Leader Endorsements Undercut Public Support for Civil War Peace Settlements

Cited by 17 publications

References 49 publications

Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries

Politicians polarize and experts depolarize public support for COVID-19 management policies across countries

Citizens in Peace Processes

Between Conflict and Politics: Understanding Popular Support for the FARC’s Political Involvement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About