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. T. Clifton Morgan & Sally Howard Campbell, 1991. "Domestic Structure, Decisional Constraints, and War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(2), pages 187-211, June.
    2. Leonard Wendering & Marc Ratkovic & Thomas Gschwend & Henning Schoenenberger & Niki Scaplehorn, 2025. "Lessons from an AI-Sprint: a proposal for measuring human-AI cooperation in research," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-4, December.
    3. Martin Gassebner & Richard Jong‐A‐Pin & Jochen O. Mierau, 2011. "Terrorism And Cabinet Duration," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(4), pages 1253-1270, November.
    4. Mikko Mattila & Tapio Raunio, 2026. "Still Out of Touch? Parties and Their Voters on the EU Dimension," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 14.
    5. Leininger, Arndt & Schaub, Max, 2024. "Strategic Alignment in Times of Crisis: Voting at the Dawn of a Global Pandemic," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46(3), pages 1589-1607.
    6. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    7. Francisco Jose Veiga & Linda Goncalves Veiga, 2010. "The impact of local and national economic conditions on legislative election results," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(13), pages 1727-1734.
    8. 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.
    9. Sinha, Pankaj & Verma, Aniket & Shah, Purav & Singh, Jahnavi & Panwar, Utkarsh, 2020. "Prediction for the 2020 United States Presidential Election using Machine Learning Algorithm: Lasso Regression," MPRA Paper 103889, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Oct 2020.
    10. Geoffrey M. Ducanes & Steven Rood & Jorge Tigno, 2023. "Identity, Policy Satisfaction, Perceived Character: What factors explain President Duterte's popularity?," Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University, Working Paper Series 202305, Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University.
    11. 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.
    12. 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), revised 10 Jun 2026.
    13. William D. Nordhaus, 1989. "Alternative Approaches to the Political Business Cycle," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 20(2), pages 1-68.
    14. Antoine Auberger, 2011. "Popularity Functions for the French President and Prime Minister (1995-2007)," Working Papers halshs-00872313, HAL.
    15. Massimo Bordignon & Federico Franzoni & Matteo Gamalerio, 2023. "Is Populism reversible? Evidence from Italian local elections during the pandemic," DISCE - Working Papers del Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza def124, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    16. 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.
    17. Zheng Song, 2012. "Persistent Ideology And The Determination Of Public Policy Over Time," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(1), pages 175-202, February.
    18. Ruixing Cao, 2025. "Domestic terrorism and the allocation of US overseas defense spending," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(6), pages 2020-2032, November.
    19. 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).
    20. Benjamin T. Toll, 2019. "A Paradox in Polarization? Cross‐pressured Representatives and the Missing Incentive to Moderate," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 182(1), pages 61-96, March.

    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.