IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i5p1761-1772.html

Generating Support for a Hypothetical War: Presidential Cues and Justifications

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Gooch

Abstract

Objective Support for wars that involve the United States typically divides by party identification among American voters, leading many scholars to believe that voters need only a partisan cue to go along with war. However, presidents do not endorse war in isolation; instead, they justify it with a variety of reasons ranging from minimal to extensive. Causally identifying these factors—partisan cues and justifications—can be challenging because (1) both occur simultaneously and (2) measured opinion on war usually occurs after the public has been exposed to both. Method This study leverages experimental evidence that randomizes presidential cues (an actual sitting president) and justifications about a hypothetical (and unnecessary) war in which elites have not staked out positions. Results Results show that a presidential endorsement alone does not generate support for a hypothetical war, but the inclusion of a justification, even one that is minimal, can increase support for war and improve presidential approval. Overall support still remains low for a hypothetical war and is concentrated among in‐partisans. Conclusion These results imply that a segment of the American public will go along with war, but the reach is limited to their own party.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Gooch, 2020. "Generating Support for a Hypothetical War: Presidential Cues and Justifications," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1761-1772, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:5:p:1761-1772
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12849
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12849
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12849?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mueller, John E., 1970. "Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson1," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(1), pages 18-34, March.
    2. Bullock, John G., 2011. "Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 496-515, August.
    3. Michaela Mattes & Jessica L. P. Weeks, 2019. "Hawks, Doves, and Peace: An Experimental Approach," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(1), pages 53-66, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mikko Mattila & Tapio Raunio, 2026. "Still Out of Touch? Parties and Their Voters on the EU Dimension," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 14.
    2. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    3. William G. Nomikos & Dahjin Kim & Gechun Lin, 2025. "American social media users have ideological differences of opinion about the War in Ukraine," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-7, December.
    4. Chen, Daniel L. & Levonyan, Vardges & Yeh, Susan, 2016. "Policies Affect Preferences: Evidence from Random Variation in Abortion Jurisprudence," IAST Working Papers 16-58, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    5. Antoine Auberger, 2011. "Popularity Functions for the French President and Prime Minister (1995-2007)," Working Papers halshs-00872313, HAL.
    6. Toke S. Aidt & Francisco José Veiga & Linda Gonçalves Veiga, 2007. "Election Results and Opportunistic Policies: An Integrated Approach," NIPE Working Papers 24/2007, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    7. Jetter, Michael & Molina, Teresa, 2022. "Persuasive agenda-setting: Rodrigo Duterte’s inauguration speech and drugs in the Philippines," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Kyle Haynes, 2017. "Diversionary conflict: Demonizing enemies or demonstrating competence?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(4), pages 337-358, July.
    9. Barry Eichengreen & Orkun Saka & Cevat Giray Aksoy, 2024. "The Political Scar of Epidemics," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(660), pages 1683-1700.
    10. Gavriilidis, Konstantinos & Kallinterakis, Vasileios & Montone, Maurizio, 2024. "Political uncertainty and institutional herding," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Eva‐Maria Trüdinger & Achim Hildebrandt & Sebastian Jäckle & Jonas Löser, 2021. "Responding to Policy Signals? An Experimental Study on Information about Policy Adoption and Data Retention Policy Support in Germany," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(2), pages 830-843, March.
    12. Nicholas Biddle & Matthew Gray & Ian McAllister, 2024. "Federalism and Confidence in Australian Governments During the COVID-19 Pandemic," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 54(2), pages 257-282.
    13. Henrik Jordahl, 2012. "Erratum to: An economic analysis of voting in Sweden," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 385-385, January.
    14. Ahlquist, John S. & Ichino, Nahomi & Wittenberg, Jason & Ziblatt, Daniel, 2018. "How do voters perceive changes to the rules of the game? Evidence from the 2014 Hungarian elections," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 906-919.
    15. Kelly Morrison & Daniela Donno & Burcu Savun & Perisa Davutoglu, 2025. "Competing judgments: Multiple election observers and post-election contention," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 293-321, June.
    16. Andrés Cendales & Jhon Mora & Santiago Arroyo, 2015. "Sobre las democracias locales en el Pacífico colombiano y su incidencia en la política pública de agua potable en el periodo 2008-2011," Revista Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, CIE, issue 83, pages 161-192.
    17. Abhijit Ramalingam & Brock V. Stoddard, 2021. "Does reducing inequality increase cooperation?​," GRU Working Paper Series GRU_2021_022, City University of Hong Kong, Department of Economics and Finance, Global Research Unit.
    18. Susan Hannah Allen, 2008. "The Domestic Political Costs of Economic Sanctions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(6), pages 916-944, December.
    19. Toke Aidt & Francisco Veiga & Linda Veiga, 2011. "Election results and opportunistic policies: A new test of the rational political business cycle model," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 21-44, July.
    20. Rogers, Todd & Nickerson, David W., 2013. "Can Inaccurate Beliefs about Incumbents be Changed? And Can Reframing Change Votes?," Working Paper Series rwp13-018, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:5:p:1761-1772. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.