From the Interpersonal to the International: Understanding Commitment to the “War on Terror”

Agnew, Christopher R.; Hoffman, Aaron M.; Lehmiller, Justin J.; Duncan, Natasha T.

doi:10.1177/0146167207305540

Cited by 27 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This view fits well with findings that conservatives support governmental military spending to a greater extent than liberals, presumably because the military may protect against potential future threats (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994). Further corroborating this view, political conservatism has been associated with greater support for war (Agnew, Hoffman, Lehmiller, & Duncan, 2007;Grote, Frieze, & Schmidt, 1997), and this result extends to support for the current war in Iraq. Compared to liberals, conservatives were more in favor of military action to end Saddam Hussein's rule before the war started, and they were more likely to continue to think that the war was the right decision after public opinion started to turn (e.g., World Public Opinion, 2006).…”

Section: Political Orientation Support For War and Attribution Stylessupporting

confidence: 81%

Whose Fault Is it Anyway? Political Orientation, Attributions of Responsibility, and Support for the War in Iraq

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political orientation has been shown to be a strong predictor of attitudes toward war. Specifically, political conservatism has been associated with increased support for war and with decreased attribution of responsibility for war to one's own government. The present research aims to test whether the relationship between political orientation and support for the war in Iraq is mediated by attributions of government responsibility. In Study 1, survey data showed that the relationship between political orientation and support for the Iraq war was mediated by beliefs about the US government's motivations for the war. Study 2 provided a conceptual replication of the proposed mediation model and extended the findings from beliefs about US government motivations to perceived threat from the pre-war Iraqi government. Study 3 used an experimental paradigm to manipulate perceived threat to show that such beliefs directly affected support for the war. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Political Orientation Support For War and Attribution Stylessupporting

confidence: 81%

Whose Fault Is it Anyway? Political Orientation, Attributions of Responsibility, and Support for the War in Iraq

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, the investment model would predict that people use specific policy performance criteria to determine the value of persisting with the same policy. Agnew and colleagues (Agnew, Hoffman, Lehmiller, & Duncan, 2007) used the investment model to examine commitment to the "war on terror" waged by the United States under President George W. Bush. They conducted two experiments in which they simultaneously manipulated the three investment model constructs (a novel aspect of this research).…”

Section: Recent Applications Of the Investment Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Investment Model of Commitment Processes

Rusbult¹,

Agnew²,

Arriaga³

Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Edited by Van Lange, Kruglanski, and HigginsAuthor Note: With the exception of the section on origins of the theory, this chapter was prepared following the death of the first author, Caryl Rusbult, our mentor and dear friend. AbstractThe investment model of commitment processes is rooted in interdependence theory and emerged from the broader scientific zeitgeist of the 1960s and 1970s that sought to understand seemingly irrational persistence in social behavior. The investment model was developed originally to move social psychology beyond focusing only on positive affect in predicting persistence in a close interpersonal relationship. As originally tested, the investment model holds that commitment to a target is influenced by three independent factors: satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Commitment, in turn, is posited to mediate the effects of these three bases of dependence on behavior, including persistence. Commitment is presumed to bring about persistence by influencing a host of relationship maintenance phenomena. The investment model has proven to be remarkably generalizable across a range of commitment targets, including commitment toward both interpersonal (e.g., abusive relationships, friendships) and non-interpersonal (e.g., job, sports participation, support for public policies) targets.Empirical support for the investment model is presented as well as a review of recent applications of the model and a proposed extension of it.3

show abstract

“…Some studies (Agnew, Hoffman, Lehmiller, & Duncan, 2007;Federico, Golec, & Dial, 2005) have underlined the role of psychological reaction to terrorism in understanding public support for government antiterrorist policies. These studies have shown that terrorist events -when defined as being serious threats to national security -usually promote support for military actions.…”

Section: Terrorism and The War On Terrorismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support to military or humanitarian counterterrorism interventions: the effect of interpersonal and intergroup attitudes

Passini

Battistelli

2014

Int. j. psychol. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, new interest in terrorism and psychological factors related to supporting the war on terrorism has been growing in the field of psychology. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of various socio-political attitudes on the level of agreement with military and humanitarian counterterrorism interventions. 270 Italian participants responded to a news article concerning measures against terrorism. Half of the participants read an article regarding a military intervention while the other half read about a humanitarian intervention. They then evaluated the other type of intervention. Results showed that military intervention was supported by people with high authoritarian, dominant, ethnocentric attitudes and by people who attach importance to both positive and negative reciprocity norms. Instead, none of these variables was correlated with humanitarian intervention. Finally, there was a considerable influence of media on the acceptance of both interventions RESUMENRecientemente, ha estado creciendo en el campo de la psicología un nuevo interés en el terrorismo y los factores psicológicos relacionados al apoyo de la lucha contra el terrorismo. El objetivo de este estudio fue el de examinar el efecto de varias actitudes socio-políticas en el nivel de aceptación de las intervenciones contraterroristas humanitarias y militares. 270 participantes italianos respondieron a un artículo sobre medidas contras el terrorismo. La mitad de los participantes leyeron un artículo acerca de intervenciones militares mientras que el resto leyó sobre la intervención humanitaria. Luego, todos evaluaron el otro tipo de intervención. Los resultados mostraron que la intervención militar fue apoyada por personas con actitudes autoritarias, dominantes, y etnocéntricas y por personas que adscriben importancia a las normas de reciprocidad tanto negativas como positivas. En cambio, ninguna de estas variables fueron correlacionadas con la intervención humanitaria. Finalmente, había una influencia considerable de los medios de comunicación en la aceptación de ambas intervenciones. Palabras clave:Terrorismo, apoyo a la guerra, autoritarismo, etnocentrismo, medios de comunicación.

show abstract

From the Interpersonal to the International: Understanding Commitment to the “War on Terror”

Cited by 27 publications

References 41 publications

Whose Fault Is it Anyway? Political Orientation, Attributions of Responsibility, and Support for the War in Iraq

Whose Fault Is it Anyway? Political Orientation, Attributions of Responsibility, and Support for the War in Iraq

The Investment Model of Commitment Processes

Support to military or humanitarian counterterrorism interventions: the effect of interpersonal and intergroup attitudes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About