Explaining Divergent Attitudes Toward Lethal Drone Strikes

Stephen Ceccoli and John Bing

Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 2015, vol. 38, issue 2, 146-166

Abstract: Although lethal drone strikes have become a central component of the U.S. campaign against international terrorism, the program remains a low salience issue with considerable bi-partisan consensus and a supportive U.S. general public. This article explains American attitudes toward lethal drone strikes by testing arguments based on partisanship and ideology, core values and abstract beliefs, and elite cues. Results suggest that respondent core values and governmental cues offer important insights. Consequently, the political environment under certain conditions may not frame important issues in such a way that the general public is likely to gain a knowledgeable understanding of the alternatives.

Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1057610X.2014.981103 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:uterxx:v:38:y:2015:i:2:p:146-166

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/uter20

DOI: 10.1080/1057610X.2014.981103

Access Statistics for this article

Studies in Conflict and Terrorism is currently edited by Bruce Hoffman

More articles in Studies in Conflict and Terrorism from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().