Why the Public Supports the Human Rights of Prisoners and Asylum Seekers: An Experimental Approach

IF 1.5 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI:10.1177/10659129221143763
C. Crabtree, Jeong-Woo Koo, Amanda Murdie, Kiyoteru Tsutsui
{"title":"Why the Public Supports the Human Rights of Prisoners and Asylum Seekers: An Experimental Approach","authors":"C. Crabtree, Jeong-Woo Koo, Amanda Murdie, Kiyoteru Tsutsui","doi":"10.1177/10659129221143763","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What factors shape support for the human rights of prisoners and asylum seekers at the individual level? Although the human rights literature has expanded greatly in the last 30 years, comparatively little attention has been paid to (a) the many human rights outside of a very small set of physical or bodily integrity rights and (b) the role of public opinion. We build a theoretical model of various human rights as public opinion-related policy choices, developing the micro-foundations of public support for the human rights of vulnerable subpopulations. Drawing on the broader literature on public policy and international norms, we use experimental methods to test whether calls to rational effectiveness or international norm cascades improve support for the rights of prisoners and asylum seekers. Although we find baseline support for these rights in the United States and Canada, our findings also imply that rhetoric on the potential costs of human rights policy could reduce popular support, even when such policy is consistent with international norms.","PeriodicalId":51366,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly","volume":"76 1","pages":"1445 - 1459"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129221143763","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What factors shape support for the human rights of prisoners and asylum seekers at the individual level? Although the human rights literature has expanded greatly in the last 30 years, comparatively little attention has been paid to (a) the many human rights outside of a very small set of physical or bodily integrity rights and (b) the role of public opinion. We build a theoretical model of various human rights as public opinion-related policy choices, developing the micro-foundations of public support for the human rights of vulnerable subpopulations. Drawing on the broader literature on public policy and international norms, we use experimental methods to test whether calls to rational effectiveness or international norm cascades improve support for the rights of prisoners and asylum seekers. Although we find baseline support for these rights in the United States and Canada, our findings also imply that rhetoric on the potential costs of human rights policy could reduce popular support, even when such policy is consistent with international norms.
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
为什么公众支持囚犯和寻求庇护者的人权:一种实验方法
在个人层面上,哪些因素决定了对囚犯和寻求庇护者人权的支持?虽然人权文献在过去30年中有了很大的扩展,但相对而言,很少注意到(a)在极少数人身或身体完整权利之外的许多人权和(b)公众舆论的作用。我们建立了一个将各种人权作为民意相关政策选择的理论模型,发展了公众支持弱势亚群体人权的微观基础。借鉴有关公共政策和国际规范的广泛文献,我们使用实验方法来测试对理性有效性或国际规范级联的呼吁是否会改善对囚犯和寻求庇护者权利的支持。尽管我们在美国和加拿大发现了对这些权利的基本支持,但我们的研究结果也表明,关于人权政策潜在成本的言论可能会降低民众的支持,即使这些政策符合国际规范。
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
Political Research Quarterly
Political Research Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Political Research Quarterly (PRQ) is the official journal of the Western Political Science Association. PRQ seeks to publish scholarly research of exceptionally high merit that makes notable contributions in any subfield of political science. The editors especially encourage submissions that employ a mixture of theoretical approaches or multiple methodologies to address major political problems or puzzles at a local, national, or global level. Collections of articles on a common theme or debate, to be published as short symposia, are welcome as well as individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Disinformation and Regime Survival. A Deepening/Widening Tradeoff? Evidence from the GATT and WTO Ethnicity and Response to Internal Environmental Migrants in the United States Countering “Fake News” Through Public Education and Advertisements: An Experimental Analysis Deceptively Stable? How the Stability of Aggregate Abortion Attitudes Conceals Partisan Induced Shifts
×
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