点名和羞辱、政府信息和反弹效应:来自《禁止酷刑公约》的实验证据

IF 1 2区 社会学 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Human Rights Pub Date : 2022-04-04 DOI:10.1080/14754835.2021.2011710
Brian Greenhill, Dan Reiter
{"title":"点名和羞辱、政府信息和反弹效应:来自《禁止酷刑公约》的实验证据","authors":"Brian Greenhill, Dan Reiter","doi":"10.1080/14754835.2021.2011710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Conventional thinking proposes that naming and shaming pushes publics to oppose government policies that are claimed to violate human rights. We explore the extent to which international organizations’ (IOs’) efforts to name and shame target governments can be frustrated by the target governments’ efforts to advance a counter-narrative. We test this using a survey-based experiment that focuses on the use of prolonged solitary confinement in US prisons. The results suggest that government messaging has powerful effects on public opinion. These effects are more readily discernible than the effects of IO signals. We also find some limited evidence to suggest that messages from international nongovernmental organizations can, by themselves, elicit a backlash among the respondents. Surprisingly, we found similar effects among both Democrats and Republicans. This demonstrates important limitations to IOs’ naming and shaming tactics.","PeriodicalId":51734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Naming and shaming, government messaging, and backlash effects: Experimental evidence from the Convention Against Torture\",\"authors\":\"Brian Greenhill, Dan Reiter\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14754835.2021.2011710\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Conventional thinking proposes that naming and shaming pushes publics to oppose government policies that are claimed to violate human rights. We explore the extent to which international organizations’ (IOs’) efforts to name and shame target governments can be frustrated by the target governments’ efforts to advance a counter-narrative. We test this using a survey-based experiment that focuses on the use of prolonged solitary confinement in US prisons. The results suggest that government messaging has powerful effects on public opinion. These effects are more readily discernible than the effects of IO signals. We also find some limited evidence to suggest that messages from international nongovernmental organizations can, by themselves, elicit a backlash among the respondents. Surprisingly, we found similar effects among both Democrats and Republicans. This demonstrates important limitations to IOs’ naming and shaming tactics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2021.2011710\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2021.2011710","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

传统思想认为,点名羞辱会促使公众反对政府声称侵犯人权的政策。我们探讨了国际组织点名羞辱目标政府的努力在多大程度上会因目标政府提出反叙事的努力而受挫。我们使用一项基于调查的实验来测试这一点,该实验侧重于美国监狱中长期单独监禁的使用。研究结果表明,政府信息对公众舆论有着强大的影响。这些影响比IO信号的影响更容易辨别。我们还发现一些有限的证据表明,来自国际非政府组织的信息本身可能会引起受访者的强烈反对。令人惊讶的是,我们在民主党和共和党中都发现了类似的效果。这表明了IO的点名羞辱策略的重要局限性。
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
Naming and shaming, government messaging, and backlash effects: Experimental evidence from the Convention Against Torture
Abstract Conventional thinking proposes that naming and shaming pushes publics to oppose government policies that are claimed to violate human rights. We explore the extent to which international organizations’ (IOs’) efforts to name and shame target governments can be frustrated by the target governments’ efforts to advance a counter-narrative. We test this using a survey-based experiment that focuses on the use of prolonged solitary confinement in US prisons. The results suggest that government messaging has powerful effects on public opinion. These effects are more readily discernible than the effects of IO signals. We also find some limited evidence to suggest that messages from international nongovernmental organizations can, by themselves, elicit a backlash among the respondents. Surprisingly, we found similar effects among both Democrats and Republicans. This demonstrates important limitations to IOs’ naming and shaming tactics.
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
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
21.10%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Practitioner’s perspective on human rights education: Key resources Digital human rights storytelling and its palimpsests: (De-) constructed images of ethnic cleansing in Myanmar Ambiguous marital identity and conflict: A study of the half-widows in Jammu and Kashmir Stop blaming the farmer: Dispelling the myths of ‘misuse’ and ‘safe’ use of pesticides to protect health and human rights Dancing around gender expression and sex talk: LGBTQ+ asylum policy in the United States
×
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