Current research overstates American support for political violence

Abstract

Significance Recent political events show that members of extreme political groups support partisan violence, and survey evidence supposedly shows widespread public support. We show, however, that, after accounting for survey-based measurement error, support for partisan violence is far more limited. Prior estimates overstate support for political violence because of random responding by disengaged respondents and because of a reliance on hypothetical questions about violence in general instead of questions on specific acts of political violence. These same issues also cause the magnitude of the relationship between previously identified correlates and partisan violence to be overstated. As policy makers consider interventions designed to dampen support for violence, our results provide critical information about the magnitude of the problem.

A holistic view of conditional American support for political violence

“…The article’s ( 2 ) empirics are presented as a novel, necessary critique, but they largely replicate and extend the findings in our book ( 1 ), which we sent the authors several months before their publication. The article repeatedly cites our book but does not represent it.…”

“…We write to correct misrepresentations of our book ( 1 ) in Westwood et al.’s ( 2 ) article on the American public’s violent political views. The article strains to frame itself as a refutation, but, in fact, it counters a straw man.…”

Views of American Democracy and Society and Support for Political Violence: First Report from a Nationwide Population-Representative Survey

“…[11][12][13][14][15] Existing work has been criticized on multiple grounds, including failures to define violence, to determine whether support for political violence reflects support for violence generally, and to determine whether persons who endorse political violence are willing to engage in such violence themselves. 14,15 Many important and urgent questions remain insufficiently explored, or unexplored altogether. Does support for political violence reflect a general predisposition to violence as a means of solving problems?…”

“…11–15 Existing work has been criticized on multiple grounds, including failures to define violence, to determine whether support for political violence reflects support for violence generally, and to determine whether persons who endorse political violence are willing to engage in such violence themselves. 14, 15…”

“…9 Research on the prevalence and determinants of support for political violence in the US is sparse. [11][12][13][14][15] Existing work has been criticized on multiple grounds, including failures to define violence, to determine whether support for political violence reflects support for violence generally, and to determine whether persons who endorse political violence are willing to engage in such violence themselves. 14,15 Many important and urgent questions remain insufficiently explored, or unexplored altogether.…”