When it comes to cybersecurity incidents – public opinion matters. But how do voters form opinions in the aftermath of cyberattacks that are shrouded in ambiguity? How do people account for the uncertainty inherent in cyberspace to forge preferences following attacks? This article seeks to answer these questions by introducing an uncertainty threshold mechanism predicting the level of attributional certainty required for the public to support economic, diplomatic or military responses following cyberattacks. Using a discrete-choice experimental design with 2025 US respondents, we find lower attributional certainty is associated with less support for retaliation, yet this mechanism is contingent on the suspected identity of the attacker and partisan identity. Diplomatic allies possess a reservoir of good will that amplifies the effect of uncertainty, while rivals are less often given the benefit of the doubt. We demonstrate that uncertainty encourages the use of cognitive schemas to overcome ambiguity, and that people fall back upon pre-existing and politically guided views about the suspected country behind an attack. If the ambiguity surrounding cyberattacks has typically been discussed as an operational and strategic concern, this article shifts the focus of attention to the human level and positions the mass public as a forgotten yet important party during cyber conflict.

中文翻译：

---

网络攻击和舆论——不确定性对引导偏好的影响

当谈到网络安全事件时——公众舆论很重要。但是，在模糊不清的网络攻击之后，选民如何形成意见呢？人们如何解释网络空间固有的不确定性，以在攻击后形成偏好？本文试图通过引入不确定性阈值机制来回答这些问题，该机制可预测公众支持网络攻击后的经济、外交或军事反应所需的归因确定性水平。使用 2025 名美国受访者的离散选择实验设计，我们发现较低的归因确定性与较少的报复支持相关，但这种机制取决于攻击者的可疑身份和党派身份。外交盟友拥有大量善意，这会放大不确定性的影响，而竞争对手则很少会从怀疑中受益。我们证明，不确定性鼓励使用认知模式来克服模糊性，并且人们会求助于关于攻击背后的可疑国家的预先存在的和受政治指导的观点。如果围绕网络攻击的模糊性通常被视为操作和战略问题来讨论，那么本文将注意力的焦点转移到人类层面，并将大众定位为网络冲突期间被遗忘但重要的一方。