The role of societal cues in explaining attitudes toward international organizations: the least likely case of authoritarian contexts

IF 1.8 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Research Exchange Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1080/2474736x.2020.1771189
Mujtaba Isani, Bernd Schlipphak
{"title":"The role of societal cues in explaining attitudes toward international organizations: the least likely case of authoritarian contexts","authors":"Mujtaba Isani, Bernd Schlipphak","doi":"10.1080/2474736x.2020.1771189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How strong are societal cues – understood as the linkage between heuristics present in society and the object of evaluation – compared to elite cues in influencing citizens’ attitudes toward international politics? Our general argument is that societal cues have so far been underestimated in their effectiveness. More specifically, we argue that societal cues may have a direct effect or significantly diminish the effect of elite cues even in authoritarian contexts, when both cues are used at the same time. To test our hypotheses, we turn to cueing effects on citizens’ UN attitudes in two Middle Eastern countries: Saudi Arabia and Jordan. First, we depict that anti-Americanism is a significant and substantial heuristic in shaping Arab attitudes toward the UN. Thereafter, the results of a self-administered survey experiment show that governmental cues significantly and substantially affect public UN favorability. While cueing citizens with a heuristic linking the US to the UN has no direct effect in itself, it substantially weakens the effect of the governmental cues when both are employed at the same time. We outline the important implications of these findings at the end of the article.","PeriodicalId":20269,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Exchange","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2474736x.2020.1771189","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Exchange","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736x.2020.1771189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

ABSTRACT How strong are societal cues – understood as the linkage between heuristics present in society and the object of evaluation – compared to elite cues in influencing citizens’ attitudes toward international politics? Our general argument is that societal cues have so far been underestimated in their effectiveness. More specifically, we argue that societal cues may have a direct effect or significantly diminish the effect of elite cues even in authoritarian contexts, when both cues are used at the same time. To test our hypotheses, we turn to cueing effects on citizens’ UN attitudes in two Middle Eastern countries: Saudi Arabia and Jordan. First, we depict that anti-Americanism is a significant and substantial heuristic in shaping Arab attitudes toward the UN. Thereafter, the results of a self-administered survey experiment show that governmental cues significantly and substantially affect public UN favorability. While cueing citizens with a heuristic linking the US to the UN has no direct effect in itself, it substantially weakens the effect of the governmental cues when both are employed at the same time. We outline the important implications of these findings at the end of the article.
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
社会线索在解释对国际组织态度中的作用:威权主义背景下最不可能的情况
摘要在影响公民对国际政治的态度方面,社会线索(被理解为社会中存在的启发式方法和评估对象之间的联系)与精英线索相比有多强?我们的一般论点是,到目前为止,社会线索的有效性被低估了。更具体地说,我们认为,即使在威权主义背景下,当两种线索同时使用时,社会线索也可能具有直接影响或显著削弱精英线索的影响。为了检验我们的假设,我们研究了沙特阿拉伯和约旦这两个中东国家公民对联合国态度的暗示效应。首先,我们描述了反美主义在塑造阿拉伯人对联合国的态度方面是一种重要而实质性的启发。此后,一项自我管理的调查实验的结果表明,政府暗示对公众对联合国的好感度产生了重大影响。虽然用将美国与联合国联系起来的启发式方法提示公民本身没有直接影响,但当两者同时使用时,它大大削弱了政府提示的效果。我们在文章末尾概述了这些发现的重要意义。
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 Exchange
Political Research Exchange POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
39 weeks
期刊最新文献
Online repression and transnational social movements: Thailand and the #MilkTeaAlliance Did Russia’s invasion of Ukraine unite Europe? Cohesion and divisions of the European Parliament on Twitter Quantifying the ideational context: political frames, meaning trajectories and punctuated equilibria in Spanish mainstream press during the Catalan nationalist challenge Breakdown by disengagement: Tunisia’s transition from representative democracy Merging the Great Patriotic War and Russian warfare in Ukraine. A case-study of Russian military patriotic clubs in 2022
×
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