Abstract
Our study examines respondents’ perceptions of terrorism and counterterrorism in the USA during the 2016 presidential campaign. It does so by conducting an experiment where a group of respondents were randomly assigned to a vivid example of a terrorist attack and another group did not receive this treatment. The study’s results find opposing individual perceptions of the job government is doing to protect the country from terrorism and on differences among respondents as to the root causes of terrorism. Our research points to one explanation of this difference: Americans feel there is little they can do about terrorism and though the government is working to protect the nation, the public feels the government cannot stop, only prevent, terrorist acts from occurring. This causes the public to shift their perceptions of terrorism away from questions of efficient public policy responses to one of values. The experiment suggests heightened levels of fear among 2016 Trump voters who received the treatment compared to both Republican voters and Clinton supporters, though control and treatment groups also showed variation. Finally, this work highlights a major challenge for counter-terrorism policymakers in dealing with a highly polarized public. Recent electoral campaigns have demonstrated that politicians are actively trying to politicize terrorism. This work provides evidence that these efforts are resonating among the public. The danger of politicizing terrorism is that it blocks efforts to find common ground, between polarized groups in society in keeping the nation safe.
References
Aldrich, J. H., J. L. Sullivan, and E. Borgida. 1989. “Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates ‘Waltz Before a Blind Audience?” American Political Science Review 83 (1): 123–131.10.2307/1956437Search in Google Scholar
American National Election Survey (ANES). 2016. “ANES 2016 Pilot Study” Accessed via https://electionstudies.org/project/anes-2016-pilot-study/.Search in Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry. 1996. “Uniformed Voters: Information Effects in Presidential Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 40: 194–230.10.2307/2111700Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, James. 2000. The American Campaigns: U.S. Presidential Elections and the National Vote. College Station: Texas A&M Press.Search in Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela J. 1988. “The Role of Social Groups in Political Thinking.” British Journal of Political Science 18: 51–76.10.1017/S0007123400004956Search in Google Scholar
Converse, Phillip. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, edited by David Apter. New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Martha. 2000. “The Psychology of Terrorism: An Agenda for the 21st Century.” Political Psychology 21 (2): 405–420.10.1111/0162-895X.00195Search in Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1978. “Economic Retrospective Voting in American National Elections: A Micro-Analysis.” American. Journal of Political Science 22 (2): 426–443.10.2307/2110623Search in Google Scholar
Fisher, Stephen. 2009. “Valence Issue: Quick Overview.” In The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics, edited by Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Fridkin Kahn, Kim, and Patrick J. Kenney. 1999. Spectacle of United States Senate Campaigns, 67–70. Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691227924Search in Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 1996. “The Media’s Role in Forming Voters’ National Economic Evaluations in 1992.” American Journal of Political Science 40 (2): 372–395.10.2307/2111629Search in Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 2001. “Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization.” American Political Science Review 95 (3): 619–629.10.1017/S0003055401003045Search in Google Scholar
Kam, Cindy D. 2006. “Political Campaigns and Open Minded Thinking.” The Journal of Politics 68 (4): 931–945.10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00481.xSearch in Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions Under Risk.” Econometrica 47 (2): 263–291.10.21236/ADA045771Search in Google Scholar
Lerner, Jennifer S., and Dacher Kelter. 2000. “Beyond Valence: Toward a Model of Emotion-Specific Influences on Judgement and Choice.” Cognition and Emotion 14 (4): 473–493.10.1080/026999300402763Search in Google Scholar
McCullagh, P., and J. A. Nelder. 1989. Generalized Linear Models. 2nd ed. London: Chapman & Hall/CRC.10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6Search in Google Scholar
NBC News. 2016. “NBC News/SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll.” NBC News January 5th. Accessed via https://www.scribd.com/doc/294643292/NBC-News-SurveyMonkey-Weekly-Election-Tracking-Poll on May 7, 2019.Search in Google Scholar
NY Times. 2015. “Fear of Terrorism Lifts Donald Trump in New York Times/CBS Poll” NY Times December 10th. Accessed via https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/us/politics/fear-of-terrorism-lifts-donald-trump-in-new-york-times-cbs-poll.html on May 7, 2019.Search in Google Scholar
Shaw, Daron R. 1999. “A Study of Presidential Campaign Event Effects From 1952–1992.” The Journal of Politics 61 (2): 387–422.10.2307/2647509Search in Google Scholar
Weisberg, Herbert F., and Dino P. Christenson. 2006. “Changing Horses in Wartime? The 2004 Presidential Election.” Political Behavior 29: 279–304.10.1007/s11109-007-9026-9Search in Google Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511818691Search in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
The online version of this article offers supplementary material (DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2018-0023).
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
