IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v61y2017i8p1795-1815.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Surprising Events and Surprising Opinions

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Paolino

Abstract

The academic debate concerning public opinion about war focuses upon two explanations: cost/benefits and partisan cues. Both sides of this debate use laboratory experiments to estimate the influence of events and cues, but Gelpi is notable for using a well-designed experiment to compare the theories simultaneously. He argues that his results support the cost/benefits explanation as “surprising events†that counter individuals’ prior attitudes have significantly more effect than “surprising opinions†upon people’s attitudes toward the Iraq War. His analysis, however, considers only the direction, but not the strength, of people’s attitudes toward the war. Additionally, the measure of source credibility for determining the influence of cues is not optimal. When the analysis accounts for attitude strength and uses a better measure of source credibility, the results show little support for the effect of surprising events and markedly greater support for the influence of partisan cues.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Paolino, 2017. "Surprising Events and Surprising Opinions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(8), pages 1795-1815, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:61:y:2017:i:8:p:1795-1815
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002715616167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002715616167
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002715616167?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. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    2. Aldrich, John H. & Sullivan, John L. & Borgida, Eugene, 1989. "Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates “Waltz Before a Blind Audience?”," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 123-141, March.
    3. Lupia,Arthur & McCubbins,Mathew D., 1998. "The Democratic Dilemma," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521584487, May.
    4. Baum, Matthew A. & Groeling, Tim, 2010. "Reality Asserts Itself: Public Opinion on Iraq and the Elasticity of Reality," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(3), pages 443-479, July.
    5. Gartner, Scott Sigmund, 2008. "The Multiple Effects of Casualties on Public Support for War: An Experimental Approach," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 95-106, February.
    6. David A. M. Peterson, 2004. "Certainty or Accessibility: Attitude Strength in Candidate Evaluations," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 513-520, July.
    7. Krosnick, Jon A. & Kinder, Donald R., 1990. "Altering the Foundations of Support for the President Through Priming," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 84(2), pages 497-512, June.
    8. Mueller, John E., 1971. "Trends in Popular Support for the Wars in Korea and Vietnam 1," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 358-375, June.
    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. Christopher Gelpi, 2010. "Performing on Cue? The Formation of Public Opinion Toward War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(1), pages 88-116, February.
    2. Christopher Gelpi, 2017. "Democracies in Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(9), pages 1925-1949, October.
    3. Jensen, Carsten & Naumann, Elias, 2016. "Increasing pressures and support for public healthcare in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(6), pages 698-705.
    4. Brad R. Taylor, 2020. "The psychological foundations of rational ignorance: biased heuristics and decision costs," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 70-88, March.
    5. Dukhong Kim, 2014. "Affect and Public Support for Military Action," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(4), pages 21582440145, December.
    6. Michael Hannon, 2022. "Are knowledgeable voters better voters?," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 29-54, February.
    7. Miroslav Nincic & Barbara Hinckley, 1991. "Foreign Policy and the Evaluation of Presidential Candidates," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(2), pages 333-355, June.
    8. Shane P Singh & Meili Swanson, 2017. "How issue frames shape beliefs about the importance of climate change policy across ideological and partisan groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, July.
    9. Ferreira, Simão & Campos, Carlos & Marinho, Beatriz & Rocha, Susana & Fonseca-Pedrero, Eduardo & Barbosa Rocha, Nuno, 2022. "What drives beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracy theories? The role of psychotic-like experiences and confinement-related factors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    10. Christenson, Dino P. & Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2017. "Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 407-417.
    11. Brendan Nyhan, 2011. "The limited effects of testimony on political persuasion," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 283-312, September.
    12. Scott Feld & Samuel Merrill & Bernard Grofman, 2014. "Modeling the effects of changing issue salience in two-party competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 465-482, March.
    13. Virginia A. Chanley, 1999. "U.S. Public Views of International Involvement from 1964 to 1993," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(1), pages 23-44, February.
    14. Anders Gustafsson, 2019. "Busy doing nothing: why politicians implement inefficient policies," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 282-299, September.
    15. David Altman, 2002. "Prospects for E-Government in Latin America: Satisfaction With Democracy, Social Accountability, and Direct Democracy," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 5-20, December.
    16. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    17. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    18. Mochon, Daniel & Schwartz, Janet, 2024. "The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    19. Donald Wittman, 2008. "Targeted political advertising and strategic behavior by uninformed voters," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 87-100, January.
    20. Viktor BOCHARNIKOV & Sergey SVESHNIKOV & Stepan VOZNYAK & Vladimir YUZEFOVICH, 2010. "Model For Revelation Of Unfriendly Information Impacts In Mass-Media Which Are Directed On Change Of Public Opinion," Management Research and Practice, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2(1), pages 21-38, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:jocore:v:61:y:2017:i:8:p:1795-1815. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.