IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v67y2023i7-8p1537-1563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elite Cues and Public Attitudes Towards Military Alliances

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Alley

Abstract

Do elite cues exert extensive, conditional or minimal influence on public support for military alliances in the United States? I assess the boundaries of elite leadership on public opinion towards alliances by dividing partisan respondents into wings based on isolationism and militant assertiveness. If co-partisan elite cues change public attitudes across three or four wings within their party, elites exert extensive influence. Elite cues exert conditional influence if they reach two party wings, and minimal influence if they impact one or no wings. Using two conjoint survey experiments to examine public attitudes towards forming and maintaining international alliances, I find that elite cues exert extensive influence, but some individuals hold rigid alliance attitudes. Staunch alliance supporters in the Democratic party and consistent alliance skeptics in the Republican party both discount elite cues. Therefore, elites can lead most party wings with alliance cues, but intra-party divisions can constrain their influence.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Alley, 2023. "Elite Cues and Public Attitudes Towards Military Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(7-8), pages 1537-1563, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:67:y:2023:i:7-8:p:1537-1563
    DOI: 10.1177/00220027221143963
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00220027221143963
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00220027221143963?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. Joshua D. Kertzer & Ryan Brutger, 2016. "Decomposing Audience Costs: Bringing the Audience Back into Audience Cost Theory," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(1), pages 234-249, January.
    2. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    3. Barberã , Pablo & Casas, Andreu & Nagler, Jonathan & Egan, Patrick J. & Bonneau, Richard & Jost, John T. & Tucker, Joshua A., 2019. "Who Leads? Who Follows? Measuring Issue Attention and Agenda Setting by Legislators and the Mass Public Using Social Media Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 883-901, November.
    4. Erik Gartzke & Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, 2004. "Why Democracies May Actually Be Less Reliable Allies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(4), pages 775-795, October.
    5. repec:cup:apsrev:v:113:y:2019:i:04:p:883-901_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Tomz, Michael & Weeks, Jessica L.P. & Yarhi-Milo, Keren, 2020. "Public Opinion and Decisions About Military Force in Democracies," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(1), pages 119-143, January.
    7. Anselm Hager & Hanno Hilbig, 2020. "Does Public Opinion Affect Political Speech?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 921-937, October.
    8. Brian Greenhill, 2020. "How can international organizations shape public opinion? analysis of a pair of survey-based experiments," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 165-188, January.
    9. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    10. Poast, Paul, 2012. "Does Issue Linkage Work? Evidence from European Alliance Negotiations, 1860 to 1945," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(2), pages 277-310, April.
    11. Tim Haesebrouck, 2019. "Who follows whom? A coincidence analysis of military action, public opinion and threats," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 56(6), pages 753-766, November.
    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. Claire L Adida & Adeline Lo & Melina R Platas, 2019. "Americans preferred Syrian refugees who are female, English-speaking, and Christian on the eve of Donald Trump’s election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Aaron R Kaufman, 2020. "Implementing novel, flexible, and powerful survey designs in R Shiny," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Gomez, Miguel Alberto & Winger, Gregory, 2023. "Public Opinion and Alliance Commitments in Cybersecurity: An Attack Against All?," SocArXiv bcwhu, Center for Open Science.
    4. Lala Muradova & Ross James Gildea, 2021. "Oil wealth and US public support for war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, January.
    5. Asif Efrat & Omer Yair, 2023. "International rankings and public opinion: Compliance, dismissal, or backlash?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 607-629, October.
    6. Allison Carnegie & Joshua D. Kertzer & Keren Yarhi-Milo, 2023. "Democratic Peace and Covert Military Force: An Experimental Test," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(2-3), pages 235-265, February.
    7. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    8. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    9. Benoit Aubert & Jane Li & Markus Luczak-Roesch & Thierry Warin, 2021. "La détermination des agendas de discussion par les médias sociaux," CIRANO Project Reports 2021rp-12, CIRANO.
    10. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Robert Kubinec, 2018. "Patrons or Clients? Measuring and Experimentally Evaluating Political Connections of Firms in Morocco and Jordan," Working Papers 1280, Economic Research Forum, revised 26 Dec 2018.
    13. Heap, Shaun P. Hargreaves & Koop, Christel & Matakos, Konstantinos & Unan, Asli & Weber, Nina Sophie, 2021. "We Cannot Disagree Forever! Reality Polarization and Citizens’ Post-Pandemic Fiscal Adjustment Preferences," SocArXiv 69tup, Center for Open Science.
    14. Bruce Desmarais, 2012. "Lessons in disguise: multivariate predictive mistakes in collective choice models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 719-737, June.
    15. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Measuring Group Differences in High‐Dimensional Choices: Method and Application to Congressional Speech," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1307-1340, July.
    16. E. Keith Smith & Dennis Kolcava & Thomas Bernauer, 2024. "Stringent sustainability regulations for global supply chains are supported across middle-income democracies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    17. Vrânceanu, Alina & Dinas, Elias & Heidland, Tobias & Ruhs, Martin, 2023. "The European refugee crisis and public support for the externalisation of migration management," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 279441, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    18. Xiaojun Li & Dingding Chen, 2021. "Public opinion, international reputation, and audience costs in an authoritarian regime," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(5), pages 543-560, September.
    19. Schläpfer, Felix, 2016. "Democratic valuation (DV): Using majority voting principles to value public services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 36-42.
    20. Terrence L. Chapman & Huimin Li, 2023. "Can IOs influence attitudes about regulating “Big Tech”?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 725-751, October.

    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:67:y:2023:i:7-8:p:1537-1563. 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.