外交政策的民意会影响精英的偏好吗?来自2022年美国对俄罗斯制裁的证据

IF 2.4 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Anton Peez, Felix S Bethke
{"title":"外交政策的民意会影响精英的偏好吗?来自2022年美国对俄罗斯制裁的证据","authors":"Anton Peez, Felix S Bethke","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Does public opinion on international affairs affect elites’ policy preferences? Most research assumes that it does, but this key assumption is difficult to test empirically given limited research access to elite decision-makers. We examine elite responsiveness to public opinion on sanctioning Russia during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. We fielded a preregistered experiment within the 2022 TRIP survey of US foreign policy practitioners, offering a rare opportunity for a fairly large elite survey experiment ($N = 253$). We used contemporary public polling highly supportive of increasing sanctions as an information treatment. Our research design, involving a salient issue and real-world treatment, substantially expands on previous work. Exposure to the treatment raises elite support for increasing sanctions from 68.0 percent to 76.3 percent (+8.3 pp.). While meaningful, this effect is smaller than those identified elsewhere. We argue that this difference is driven by pretreatment dynamics related to issue salience and ceiling effects and is therefore all the more notable. We provide evidence for substantial treatment effect heterogeneity depending on subject-matter expertise, degree of involvement in political decision-making, and gender, but not party identification. While our results support previous research, they highlight issues of external validity and the context-dependence of elite responsiveness.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Public Opinion on Foreign Policy Affect Elite Preferences? Evidence from the 2022 US Sanctions against Russia\",\"authors\":\"Anton Peez, Felix S Bethke\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/isq/sqae145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Does public opinion on international affairs affect elites’ policy preferences? Most research assumes that it does, but this key assumption is difficult to test empirically given limited research access to elite decision-makers. We examine elite responsiveness to public opinion on sanctioning Russia during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. We fielded a preregistered experiment within the 2022 TRIP survey of US foreign policy practitioners, offering a rare opportunity for a fairly large elite survey experiment ($N = 253$). We used contemporary public polling highly supportive of increasing sanctions as an information treatment. Our research design, involving a salient issue and real-world treatment, substantially expands on previous work. Exposure to the treatment raises elite support for increasing sanctions from 68.0 percent to 76.3 percent (+8.3 pp.). While meaningful, this effect is smaller than those identified elsewhere. We argue that this difference is driven by pretreatment dynamics related to issue salience and ceiling effects and is therefore all the more notable. We provide evidence for substantial treatment effect heterogeneity depending on subject-matter expertise, degree of involvement in political decision-making, and gender, but not party identification. While our results support previous research, they highlight issues of external validity and the context-dependence of elite responsiveness.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Studies Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Studies Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae145\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae145","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

国际事务上的民意会影响精英们的政策偏好吗?大多数研究都认为是这样的,但由于对精英决策者的研究渠道有限,这个关键假设很难进行实证检验。我们考察了精英阶层对2022年俄罗斯入侵乌克兰期间制裁俄罗斯的公众舆论的反应。我们在2022年美国外交政策从业者的TRIP调查中进行了预注册实验,为相当大的精英调查实验提供了难得的机会(N = 253美元)。我们使用了高度支持增加制裁的当代公众投票作为信息处理。我们的研究设计,涉及一个突出的问题和现实世界的治疗,大大扩展了以前的工作。暴露在这种治疗中,精英们对增加制裁的支持从68.0%增加到76.3%(+8.3页)。虽然有意义,但这种影响比其他地方发现的要小。我们认为,这种差异是由与问题显著性和天花板效应相关的预处理动态驱动的,因此更加值得注意。我们提供的证据表明,实质性的治疗效果异质性取决于受试者的专业知识、参与政治决策的程度和性别,而不是政党认同。虽然我们的结果支持以前的研究,但他们强调了外部效度和精英反应的上下文依赖性问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Public Opinion on Foreign Policy Affect Elite Preferences? Evidence from the 2022 US Sanctions against Russia
Does public opinion on international affairs affect elites’ policy preferences? Most research assumes that it does, but this key assumption is difficult to test empirically given limited research access to elite decision-makers. We examine elite responsiveness to public opinion on sanctioning Russia during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. We fielded a preregistered experiment within the 2022 TRIP survey of US foreign policy practitioners, offering a rare opportunity for a fairly large elite survey experiment ($N = 253$). We used contemporary public polling highly supportive of increasing sanctions as an information treatment. Our research design, involving a salient issue and real-world treatment, substantially expands on previous work. Exposure to the treatment raises elite support for increasing sanctions from 68.0 percent to 76.3 percent (+8.3 pp.). While meaningful, this effect is smaller than those identified elsewhere. We argue that this difference is driven by pretreatment dynamics related to issue salience and ceiling effects and is therefore all the more notable. We provide evidence for substantial treatment effect heterogeneity depending on subject-matter expertise, degree of involvement in political decision-making, and gender, but not party identification. While our results support previous research, they highlight issues of external validity and the context-dependence of elite responsiveness.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: International Studies Quarterly, the official journal of the International Studies Association, seeks to acquaint a broad audience of readers with the best work being done in the variety of intellectual traditions included under the rubric of international studies. Therefore, the editors welcome all submissions addressing this community"s theoretical, empirical, and normative concerns. First preference will continue to be given to articles that address and contribute to important disciplinary and interdisciplinary questions and controversies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信