IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v107y2026i2ne70142.html

Understanding Responses to Global Terrorism: How Do Americans React to Terror and How Does It Impact Opinion on the Use of Force?

Author

Listed:
  • Neilan S. Chaturvedi
  • Tom Le

Abstract

Objectives Building on theories of social identity and ethnocentrism, this study asks whether Americans express stronger empathy and greater support for the use of force, intervention, and enhanced interrogation when victims of terrorism are culturally similar to themselves. Methods Using an original survey experiment, participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a control story, a news story describing a terrorist attack in Istanbul, or a parallel story describing an attack in London. Participants then rated their support for the use of military force, American involvement abroad, other nations’ right to respond militarily, and the use of enhanced interrogation. Regression models controlled for partisanship, ideology, and demographics. Results Exposure to the London (Western) attack significantly increased support for military force, American involvement, and torture relative to both the Istanbul and control conditions. These shifts were driven primarily by Democrats, liberals, and 2016 Clinton voters—groups typically less supportive of coercive measures. Conclusion Findings suggest that ethnocentric empathy meaningfully shapes public opinion on security and human rights. When terrorism affects culturally “in‐group” nations, even left‐leaning Americans become more permissive toward violence and torture.

Suggested Citation

  • Neilan S. Chaturvedi & Tom Le, 2026. "Understanding Responses to Global Terrorism: How Do Americans React to Terror and How Does It Impact Opinion on the Use of Force?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 107(2), March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:107:y:2026:i:2:n:e70142
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.70142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.70142
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.70142?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
    ---><---

    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:107:y:2026:i:2:n:e70142. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.