{"title":"退出但投入观众成本?复制Levy等人(2015)","authors":"Makito Takei, Philip Paolino","doi":"10.1093/fpa/orad008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Levy et al. (2015) propose that inconsistency audience costs are caused in two ways: backing out of military commitment or backing into foreign conflicts. We replicate their experiment in July–August, 2021. Like many other studies, we find evidence for audience costs caused by backing out. However, our findings indicate that, unlike Levy et al., citizens are no less supportive of a leader who backs into a military conflict despite an initial commitment to stay out than one who behaves consistently. This study has significant theoretical and methodological implications. Theoretically, the importance of inconsistency in audience cost literature may be overstated or inconsistency audience costs may be bounded by temporal domains or contexts. Methodologically, our study emphasizes the necessity of replications because major findings can become conventional wisdom without such additional analysis.","PeriodicalId":46954,"journal":{"name":"Foreign Policy Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Backing Out but Backing In Audience Costs? A Replication of Levy et al. (2015)\",\"authors\":\"Makito Takei, Philip Paolino\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/fpa/orad008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Levy et al. (2015) propose that inconsistency audience costs are caused in two ways: backing out of military commitment or backing into foreign conflicts. We replicate their experiment in July–August, 2021. Like many other studies, we find evidence for audience costs caused by backing out. However, our findings indicate that, unlike Levy et al., citizens are no less supportive of a leader who backs into a military conflict despite an initial commitment to stay out than one who behaves consistently. This study has significant theoretical and methodological implications. Theoretically, the importance of inconsistency in audience cost literature may be overstated or inconsistency audience costs may be bounded by temporal domains or contexts. Methodologically, our study emphasizes the necessity of replications because major findings can become conventional wisdom without such additional analysis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foreign Policy Analysis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foreign Policy Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orad008\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foreign Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orad008","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
Levy et al.(2015)提出,不一致受众成本的产生有两种方式:退出军事承诺或退出对外冲突。我们在2021年7月至8月重复了他们的实验。像许多其他研究一样,我们发现了退缩会造成观众成本的证据。然而,我们的研究结果表明,与Levy等人不同的是,公民对一个最初承诺不参与军事冲突的领导人的支持程度并不低于一个行为一贯的领导人。本研究具有重要的理论和方法意义。从理论上讲,受众成本文献中不一致的重要性可能被夸大了,或者受众成本不一致可能受到时间域或上下文的限制。在方法上,我们的研究强调重复的必要性,因为主要的发现可以在没有额外分析的情况下成为传统智慧。
Backing Out but Backing In Audience Costs? A Replication of Levy et al. (2015)
Levy et al. (2015) propose that inconsistency audience costs are caused in two ways: backing out of military commitment or backing into foreign conflicts. We replicate their experiment in July–August, 2021. Like many other studies, we find evidence for audience costs caused by backing out. However, our findings indicate that, unlike Levy et al., citizens are no less supportive of a leader who backs into a military conflict despite an initial commitment to stay out than one who behaves consistently. This study has significant theoretical and methodological implications. Theoretically, the importance of inconsistency in audience cost literature may be overstated or inconsistency audience costs may be bounded by temporal domains or contexts. Methodologically, our study emphasizes the necessity of replications because major findings can become conventional wisdom without such additional analysis.
期刊介绍:
Reflecting the diverse, comparative and multidisciplinary nature of the field, Foreign Policy Analysis provides an open forum for research publication that enhances the communication of concepts and ideas across theoretical, methodological, geographical and disciplinary boundaries. By emphasizing accessibility of content for scholars of all perspectives and approaches in the editorial and review process, Foreign Policy Analysis serves as a source for efforts at theoretical and methodological integration and deepening the conceptual debates throughout this rich and complex academic research tradition. Foreign policy analysis, as a field of study, is characterized by its actor-specific focus. The underlying, often implicit argument is that the source of international politics and change in international politics is human beings, acting individually or in groups. In the simplest terms, foreign policy analysis is the study of the process, effects, causes or outputs of foreign policy decision-making in either a comparative or case-specific manner.