Paving the road to war with group membership, appraisal antecedents, and anger

Abstract

This study uses appraisal theory, functionalist approach to emotions, and recent theory on group emotions as a basic framework to model the genesis of supporting military action. During the year after the events of 9/11, 588 college students participated in a series of four studies that assessed religious affiliation, appraisal antecedents, anger response to viewing photographs of the 9/11 attack, and support for military action. Structural equation modeling demonstrated that the relation between support for the war and attitudes toward terrorism and relevance could be explained adequately by a model in which anger mediated the effects of attitudes and relevance on support. Attitudes toward terrorism were further identified as mediators that could explain the group effect by Christians. The result was not only generalizable across the conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in terms of how consent for war manifests itself--outright calls for bloodshed versus more subtle, politically loaded, posturing (e.g. entreaties to "support our troops").

Anxiety as a Barrier to Information Processing in the Event of a Cyberattack

“…The same caution also applies to reports from government as well as think tanks especially when the line between raising awareness of a threat and threat inflation becomes blurry. Much of the discussion after 9/11 has focused on information control by the U.S. government and the effects of the disinformation on America's collective decision to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq (Cheung‐Blunden & Blunden, ; Lewandowsky, Stritzke, Freund, Oberauer, & Krueger, ). What we showed here is a more subtle (even cavalier) form of misinformation because it appears as though anxiety can erode information from within.…”

Angry at the Unjust, Scared of the Powerful

“…Cheung-Blunden and Blunden (2008) showed that anger mediates the effect of many terrorism-related attitudes on support ANGER AND FEAR TOWARD TERRORISM 7 for war, post September 11 th . Likewise, Sadler, Lineberger, Correll, and Park (2005) showed that people who responded to terrorist attacks with anger endorsed an aggressive military response, blaming the September 11 th attacks on fanaticism and poor security.…”

Lone‐Actor Terrorists’ Emotions and Cognition: An Evaluation Beyond Stereotypes

“…In other words, "the elicitation as well as the differentiation of emotions is based on a process of appraisal or evaluation," and particular "associations between emotions and specific patterns of appraisals" develop over time (Kuppens, Van Mechelen, Smits & De Boeck, 2003, p. 254). Moreover, as Cheung-Blunden and Blunden (2008b) or Halperin, Sharvit, and Gross (2011) have documented, group membership shapes individuals' appraisal of a situation and therefore their emotional responses. Second, each emotion is "experienced as psychologically distinctive, and involves markedly different patterns of behaviour," or action tendencies (Lazarus, 1999, p. 657).…”

“…Importantly for the present enquiry, the appraisal and action‐tendency of anger have been well theorized and documented. Anger is produced by appraisals shaped by perceptions of goal obstacle, other accountability, and arrogant entitlement (Kuppens, Van Mechelen, Smits, & De Boeck, ) and is therefore strongly associated with antagonistic action tendencies (e.g., Betancourt & Blair, ; Cheung‐Blunden & Blunden, ; Frijda, ; Kuppens, Van Mechelen, Smits, & De Boeck ; Roseman, Wiest, & Swartz, ). Papps and O'Carroll () also highlight the role of anger in aggressive behavior, and Agnew () similarly argues that “anger or frustration … create pressure for corrective action, and crime is one possible response” (Agnew, , p. 319).…”