Can Appeals for Peace Promote Tolerance and Mitigate Support for Extremism? Evidence from an Experiment with Adolescents in Burkina Faso

IF 3.2 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Journal of Experimental Political Science Pub Date : 2021-04-29 DOI:10.1017/XPS.2022.1

Allison N. Grossman, W. Nomikos, N. Siddiqui

引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract Recent efforts to improve attitudes toward outgroups and reduce support for extremists in violent settings report mixed results. Donors and aid organizations have spent millions of dollars to amplify the voices of moderate religious figures to counter violent extremism in West Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. Despite this investment, we know little about whether such messaging persuades the primary recruits of violent extremist organizations: at-risk youth in fragile settings. In this paper, we consider whether pro-peace religious messaging can promote social cohesion among school-age respondents in Burkina Faso. Using a survey experiment, we find little evidence that such messages affect reported attitudes or behaviors toward religious extremism and find instead that it can have the unintended effect of increasing intolerance toward ethnic others. Our findings carry lessons about the inadvertent priming of ethnic identities that can result in a backlash effect among certain societal segments.

查看原文本刊更多论文

呼吁和平能促进宽容并减轻对极端主义的支持吗？布基纳法索青少年实验的证据

摘要最近为改善对外部群体的态度和减少对暴力环境中极端分子的支持所做的努力报告了喜忧参半的结果。捐助者和援助组织已花费数百万美元，扩大温和派宗教人士的声音，以打击西非、中东和南亚的暴力极端主义。尽管有这项投资，但我们对这种信息是否能说服暴力极端主义组织的主要招募者——脆弱环境中的高危青年——知之甚少。在本文中，我们考虑了支持和平的宗教信息是否能促进布基纳法索学龄受访者的社会凝聚力。通过一项调查实验，我们几乎没有发现证据表明这些信息会影响人们对宗教极端主义的态度或行为，相反，我们发现它可能会产生意想不到的影响，增加对其他族裔的不容忍。我们的研究结果为种族身份的无意启动提供了教训，这可能会在某些社会阶层中产生反弹效应。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Experimental Political Science Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

8.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Experimental Political Science (JEPS) features cutting-edge research that utilizes experimental methods or experimental reasoning based on naturally occurring data. We define experimental methods broadly: research featuring random (or quasi-random) assignment of subjects to different treatments in an effort to isolate causal relationships in the sphere of politics. JEPS embraces all of the different types of experiments carried out as part of political science research, including survey experiments, laboratory experiments, field experiments, lab experiments in the field, natural and neurological experiments. We invite authors to submit concise articles (around 4000 words or fewer) that immediately address the subject of the research. We do not require lengthy explanations regarding and justifications of the experimental method. Nor do we expect extensive literature reviews of pros and cons of the methodological approaches involved in the experiment unless the goal of the article is to explore these methodological issues. We expect readers to be familiar with experimental methods and therefore to not need pages of literature reviews to be convinced that experimental methods are a legitimate methodological approach. We will consider longer articles in rare, but appropriate cases, as in the following examples: when a new experimental method or approach is being introduced and discussed or when novel theoretical results are being evaluated through experimentation. Finally, we strongly encourage authors to submit manuscripts that showcase informative null findings or inconsistent results from well-designed, executed, and analyzed experiments.