Can Elites Escape Blame by Explaining Themselves? Suspicion and the Limits of Elite Explanations

Robison, Joshua

doi:10.1017/s000712342000071x

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, politicians who appear to pander receive more negative evaluations (McGraw, Lodge, and Jones 2002). This aversion persists even when citizens get divergent explanations for a politician's behavior; explanations that highlight possible ulterior motives outweigh positive justifications for the politician's behavior, regardless of information credibility (Robison 2021). Social psychologists find a similar aversion in relationships between individuals (Fein, Hilton, and Miller 1990;Fein and Hilton 1994;Kunstman et al 2016;Mayo 2015;Major et al 2016).…”

Section: Aversion To Insinceritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, negative frames-ones that speculate about foreign countries' ulterior motivesmight limit the persuasive power of assistance. Individuals are naturally averse to insincerity (e.g., Hibbing and Alford 2004;McGraw 2003;Robison 2021). For example, politicians who appear to pander receive more negative evaluations (McGraw, Lodge, and Jones 2002).…”

Section: Aversion To Insinceritymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceived Motives of Public Diplomacy Influence Foreign Public Opinion

Rhee¹,

Crabtree²,

Horiuchi³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although many countries engage in public diplomacy, we know relatively little about the conditions under which their efforts create foreign support for their desired policy outcomes. Drawing on the psychological theory of "insincerity aversion," we argue that the positive effects of public diplomacy on foreign public opinion are attenuated and potentially even eliminated when foreign citizens become suspicious about possible hidden motives. To test this theory, we fielded a survey experiment involving divergent media frames of a real Russian medical donation to the U.S. early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that an adapted news article excerpt describing Russia's donation as genuine can decrease American citizens' support for sanctions on Russia. However, exposing respondents to information suggesting that Russia had political motivations for their donation is enough to cancel out the positive effect. Our findings suggest theoretical implications for the literature on foreign public opinion in international relations, particularly about the circumstances under which countries can manipulate the attitudes of other countries' citizens

show abstract

Section: Aversion To Insinceritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Aversion To Insinceritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived Motives of Public Diplomacy Influence Foreign Public Opinion

Rhee¹,

Crabtree²,

Horiuchi³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, negative frames—ones that speculate about foreign countries’ ulterior motives—might limit the persuasive power of assistance. Individuals are naturally averse to insincerity (e.g., Hibbing & Alford, 2004 ; McGraw, 2003 ; Robison, 2021 ). For example, politicians who appear to pander receive more negative evaluations (McGraw et al, 2002 ).…”

Section: Perceived Motives Of Public Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, politicians who appear to pander receive more negative evaluations (McGraw et al, 2002 ). This aversion persists even when citizens get divergent explanations for a politician’s behavior; explanations that highlight possible ulterior motives outweigh positive justifications for the politician’s behavior, regardless of information credibility (Robison, 2021 ). Social psychologists find a similar aversion in relationships between individuals (Fein et al, 1990 ; Fein & Hilton, 1994 ; Kunstman et al, 2016 ; Mayo, 2015 ; Major et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Perceived Motives Of Public Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived Motives of Public Diplomacy Influence Foreign Public Opinion

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although many countries engage in public diplomacy, we know relatively little about the conditions under which their efforts create foreign support for their desired policy outcomes. Drawing on the psychological theory of “insincerity aversion,” we argue that the positive effects of public diplomacy on foreign public opinion are attenuated and potentially even eliminated when foreign citizens become suspicious about possible hidden motives. To test this theory, we fielded a survey experiment involving divergent media frames of a real Russian medical donation to the U.S. early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that an adapted news article excerpt describing Russia’s donation as genuine can decrease American citizens’ support for sanctions on Russia. However, exposing respondents to information suggesting that Russia had political motivations for their donation is enough to cancel out the positive effect. Our findings suggest theoretical implications for the literature on foreign public opinion in international relations, particularly about the circumstances under which countries can manipulate the attitudes of other countries’ citizens. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11109-022-09849-4.

show abstract

“…would therefore be especially valuable-investigating, for example, how the presence of competing explanatory frames might shape the link between consultations and blame attribution in the real world (see Robison, 2021).…”

Section: Supplementary Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Public Consultations Reduce Blame Attribution? The Impact of Consultation Characteristics, Gender, and Gender Attitudes

Kevins

Vis

2021

Polit Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can public consultations—gatherings organised to solicit constituent opinions—reduce the blame attributed to elected representatives whose decisions end up backfiring? Using two pre-registered survey experiments conducted on nationally representative samples of US respondents, we examine whether the effectiveness of consultations as a blame avoidance tool may be shaped by: (1) consultation characteristics, especially regarding whether or not representatives align their policies, either actively or passively, with constituent opinion; and (2) elected representative and constituent characteristics, especially regarding a representative’s gender and constituents’ gender attitudes. Results suggest that public consultations are indeed liable to decrease blame attribution, just so long as constituent opinion is not explicitly opposed to the representative’s decision. Active alignment with constituent opinion, however, does not appear to be a requirement for decreased blame attribution—and effects related to gender and gender attitudes are also largely absent. These findings are important for scholars seeking to better understand blame attribution, clarifying how public consultations might help politicians to pre-empt blame by reducing clarity of responsibility.

show abstract

Can Elites Escape Blame by Explaining Themselves? Suspicion and the Limits of Elite Explanations

Cited by 12 publications

References 54 publications

Perceived Motives of Public Diplomacy Influence Foreign Public Opinion

Perceived Motives of Public Diplomacy Influence Foreign Public Opinion

Perceived Motives of Public Diplomacy Influence Foreign Public Opinion

Do Public Consultations Reduce Blame Attribution? The Impact of Consultation Characteristics, Gender, and Gender Attitudes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About