支持军事行动的“性别差距”的上升和下降:美国,1986-2011

Yuval Feinstein
{"title":"支持军事行动的“性别差距”的上升和下降:美国,1986-2011","authors":"Yuval Feinstein","doi":"10.1017/S1743923X17000228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the past several decades, many scholars of public opinion in the United States have argued that American women are less likely than American men to endorse military action as a means to deal with international problems. Evidence for this “gender gap” has been found in studies of public opinion during major international conflicts (Bendyna et al. 1996; Wilcox, Ferrara, and Allsop 1993), as well as studies of longitudinal trends that examined pooled data sets from multiple conflict periods (Berinsky 2009; Burris 2008; Fite, Genest, and Wilcox 1990; Shapiro and Mahajan 1986). Researchers sometimes view men's generally greater rates of support for military actions as part of a more general “gender gap” phenomenon in U.S. politics, but the cumulative evidence has suggested that foreign policy issues and questions of peace/war generate the widest and most consistent gender gaps (see Holsti 2004, 209–10 for a review).","PeriodicalId":203979,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Gender","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Rise and Decline of “Gender Gaps” in Support for Military Action: United States, 1986–2011\",\"authors\":\"Yuval Feinstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1743923X17000228\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the past several decades, many scholars of public opinion in the United States have argued that American women are less likely than American men to endorse military action as a means to deal with international problems. Evidence for this “gender gap” has been found in studies of public opinion during major international conflicts (Bendyna et al. 1996; Wilcox, Ferrara, and Allsop 1993), as well as studies of longitudinal trends that examined pooled data sets from multiple conflict periods (Berinsky 2009; Burris 2008; Fite, Genest, and Wilcox 1990; Shapiro and Mahajan 1986). Researchers sometimes view men's generally greater rates of support for military actions as part of a more general “gender gap” phenomenon in U.S. politics, but the cumulative evidence has suggested that foreign policy issues and questions of peace/war generate the widest and most consistent gender gaps (see Holsti 2004, 209–10 for a review).\",\"PeriodicalId\":203979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics & Gender\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics & Gender\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X17000228\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Gender","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X17000228","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

在过去的几十年里,许多研究美国舆论的学者认为,美国女性比美国男性更不可能支持将军事行动作为处理国际问题的手段。在对重大国际冲突期间公众舆论的研究中发现了这种“性别差距”的证据(Bendyna等人,1996;Wilcox, Ferrara, and Allsop 1993),以及纵向趋势研究,这些研究检查了来自多个冲突时期的汇总数据集(Berinsky 2009;伯2008;Fite, Genest, and Wilcox 1990;Shapiro and Mahajan 1986)。研究人员有时将男性对军事行动的普遍支持率视为美国政治中更普遍的“性别差距”现象的一部分,但累积的证据表明,外交政策问题和和平/战争问题产生了最广泛和最一致的性别差距(见Holsti 2004,209 - 10的评论)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Rise and Decline of “Gender Gaps” in Support for Military Action: United States, 1986–2011
In the past several decades, many scholars of public opinion in the United States have argued that American women are less likely than American men to endorse military action as a means to deal with international problems. Evidence for this “gender gap” has been found in studies of public opinion during major international conflicts (Bendyna et al. 1996; Wilcox, Ferrara, and Allsop 1993), as well as studies of longitudinal trends that examined pooled data sets from multiple conflict periods (Berinsky 2009; Burris 2008; Fite, Genest, and Wilcox 1990; Shapiro and Mahajan 1986). Researchers sometimes view men's generally greater rates of support for military actions as part of a more general “gender gap” phenomenon in U.S. politics, but the cumulative evidence has suggested that foreign policy issues and questions of peace/war generate the widest and most consistent gender gaps (see Holsti 2004, 209–10 for a review).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Women, Men, and Elections: Policy Supply and Gendered Voting Behaviour in Western Democracies. By Rosalind Shorrocks. New York: Routledge, 2022. 258 pp. $48.95 (paperback), $136.00 (hardcover). ISBN: 9780367353605. Gender and Violence Against Political Actors. Elin Bjarnegård and Pär Zetterberg. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2023. 312 pp. The Suffragist Peace: How Women Shape the Politics of War. Robert F. Trager and Joslyn N. Barnhart. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023. 272 pp. $19.99 (hardcover). ISBN: 9780197629758. Partisanship, Independence, and the Constitutive Representation of Women in the Canadian Senate Female Youth in Contemporary Egypt: Post-Islamism and a New Politics of Visibility. By Dina Hosni. New York: Routledge, 2023. 240 pp. $170.00 (cloth), ISBN: 9781032131689; $47.65 (eBook), ISBN: 9781003227960.
×
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