Public perception of terrorism attacks: A conjoint experiment

IF 3.4 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Peace Research Pub Date : 2023-11-08 DOI:10.1177/00223433231200922
Jaroslaw Kantorowicz, Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Gerdien de Vries
{"title":"Public perception of terrorism attacks: A conjoint experiment","authors":"Jaroslaw Kantorowicz, Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Gerdien de Vries","doi":"10.1177/00223433231200922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In democratic societies, governments cannot act in isolation from public opinion. This is especially true regarding terrorism, where public perception is the instrument targeted by terrorists to achieve their political goals. Nevertheless, governments must also be able to resist public pressure and preserve individual rights. All this suggests that researching public perception of terrorist attacks is crucial. We make an important contribution in this direction by measuring the importance the public assigns to various attributes of terrorist attacks. Using novel methodology (conjoint experiment) and survey data from the UK and The Netherlands (N = 6,315), we find that people are concerned with attacks by immigrants (in the Netherlands), and by individuals acting as part of a terror cell, and with jihadist motivation. Furthermore, past experience with specific terrorist tactics drive preference to address such attacks more than others. In both countries people strongly focus on the severity of attacks, and under-weigh probabilities. The terror attack in the Netherlands in 2019 provided an opportunity to examine perception right after an actual attack. Also there we have found that people’s concerns are driven by experience with specific attacks. A better understanding of terrorism perception can inform policymakers about the gap between optimal strategies to combat terrorism and the expectations of the public.","PeriodicalId":48324,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peace Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Peace Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433231200922","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In democratic societies, governments cannot act in isolation from public opinion. This is especially true regarding terrorism, where public perception is the instrument targeted by terrorists to achieve their political goals. Nevertheless, governments must also be able to resist public pressure and preserve individual rights. All this suggests that researching public perception of terrorist attacks is crucial. We make an important contribution in this direction by measuring the importance the public assigns to various attributes of terrorist attacks. Using novel methodology (conjoint experiment) and survey data from the UK and The Netherlands (N = 6,315), we find that people are concerned with attacks by immigrants (in the Netherlands), and by individuals acting as part of a terror cell, and with jihadist motivation. Furthermore, past experience with specific terrorist tactics drive preference to address such attacks more than others. In both countries people strongly focus on the severity of attacks, and under-weigh probabilities. The terror attack in the Netherlands in 2019 provided an opportunity to examine perception right after an actual attack. Also there we have found that people’s concerns are driven by experience with specific attacks. A better understanding of terrorism perception can inform policymakers about the gap between optimal strategies to combat terrorism and the expectations of the public.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公众对恐怖袭击的看法:一项联合实验
在民主社会中,政府不能脱离公众舆论而采取行动。在恐怖主义方面尤其如此,公众的看法是恐怖分子实现其政治目标的工具。然而,政府也必须能够抵制公众压力,维护个人权利。所有这些都表明,研究公众对恐怖袭击的看法至关重要。通过衡量公众对恐怖袭击各种属性的重视程度,我们在这方面做出了重要贡献。使用新颖的方法(联合实验)和来自英国和荷兰的调查数据(N = 6,315),我们发现人们关心移民(在荷兰)的袭击,以及作为恐怖组织一部分的个人的袭击,以及圣战主义动机。此外,过去对特定恐怖主义战术的经验促使人们更倾向于解决这类袭击。在这两个国家,人们强烈关注袭击的严重性,而低估了可能性。2019年发生在荷兰的恐怖袭击提供了一个机会,可以在实际袭击发生后立即检查人们的认知。我们还发现,人们的担忧是由特定攻击的经验所驱动的。对恐怖主义认知的更好理解可以让决策者了解打击恐怖主义的最佳策略与公众期望之间的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Journal of Peace Research is an interdisciplinary and international peer reviewed bimonthly journal of scholarly work in peace research. Edited at the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO), by an international editorial committee, Journal of Peace Research strives for a global focus on conflict and peacemaking. From its establishment in 1964, authors from over 50 countries have published in JPR. The Journal encourages a wide conception of peace, but focuses on the causes of violence and conflict resolution. Without sacrificing the requirements for theoretical rigour and methodological sophistication, articles directed towards ways and means of peace are favoured.
期刊最新文献
It’s not just about jobs: The significance of employment quality for participation in political violence and protests in selected Arab Mediterranean countries Mapping advocacy support: Geographic proximity to outgroups and human rights promotion Divided loyalty: Are broadly recruited militaries less likely to repress nonviolent antigovernment protests? How critical junctures shape secessionist movement cohesion: Strategies, framing processes, and interorganizational relations before and after the 2017 referendum in Catalonia To compete or strategically retreat? The global diffusion of reconnaissance strike
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1