Under what circumstances will the public support military intervention in other countries? Recent answers have focused on the importance of identity and attachment to one’s nation to explain variation in public support. We posit that some segments of the public are more willing than others to support military action even when there is perceived risk due to a psychological attachment to veterans. We distinguish kinship, geographic, and psychological forms of propinquity and argue that the psychological attachment of an individual to a group drives disparate attitudes about military force when their group is threatened. Using a unique national data set, we examine public attitudes across a range of hypothetical and actual military interventions and find that psychological attachment, measured using identity fusion, helps to explain the pattern of support across interventions. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our findings on the use of force literature.
AlthausScott L.BramlettBrittany H.GimpelJames G.2012. “When War Hits Home: The Geography of Military Losses and Support for War in Time and Space.” Journal of Conflict Resolution56 (3): 382–412.
2.
AnsolabehereStephen. 2006. Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 2006. ICPSR30141-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi:10.3886/ICPSR30141.v1.
3.
AnsolabehereStephenSchaffnerBrian F.2011. “Re-examining the Validity of Different Survey Modes for Measuring Public Opinion in the U.S.: Findings from a 2010 Multi-Mode Comparison.” Paper presented at the AAPOR Annual Conference, Phoenix, AZ, May 12–15.
4.
BerinskyAdam J.DruckmanJames N.2007. “The Polls—Review: Public Opinion Research and Support for the Iraq War.” Public Opinion Quarterly71 (1): 126–41.
5.
BoussiosEmanuelColeStephen. 2012. “An Analysis of Under What Conditions Americans Support the Use of Military Force Abroad in Terrorist and Humanitarian Situations.” Journal of Applied Security Research7 (4): 417–38.
6.
BrutgerRyanKertzerJoshua D.2018. “A Dispositional Theory of Reputation Costs.” International Organization72:693–724.
7.
BuhrmesterWilliam T.FraserJonathan A.LanmanMichael D.WhitehouseHarveySwannWilliam B.Jr.2015. “When Terror Hits Home: Identity Fused Americans Who Saw Boston Bombing Victims as ‘Family’ Provided Aid.” Self and Identity14 (3): 253–70.
8.
FeaverPeterKohnRichard H.2001. Soldiers and Civilians: The Civil-military Gap and American National Security. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.
FedericoChristopher M.GolecAgnieszkaDialJessica L. 2005. “The Relationship between the Need for Closure and Support for Military Action Against Iraq: Moderating Effects of National Attachment.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin31 (5): 621–32.
10.
FredmanLeah A.BuhrmesterMichael D.GomezAngelFraserWilliam T.TalaifarSanazBrannonSkylar M.SwannWilliam B.2015. “Identity Fusion, Extreme Pro-group Behavior, and the Path to Defusion.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass9 (9): 468–80.
11.
GartnerScott Sigmund. 2008. “The Multiple Effects of Casualties on Public Support for War: An Experimental Approach.” American Political Science Review102 (1): 95–106.
12.
GartnerScott Sigmund. 2010. “Evaluating Claims of Social Connection to International Conflict Casualties.” International Interactions35 (3): 352–64.
13.
GómezAngelBrooksMatthew L.BuhrmesterMichael D.VázquezAlexandraJettenJolandaSwannWilliam B.Jr.2011. “On the Nature of Identity Fusion: Insights Into the Construct and a New Measure.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology100 (5): 918–33.
14.
GómezÁngelVázquezAlexandra. 2015. “The Power of ‘Feeling One’ with a Group: Identity Fusion and Extreme Pro-group Behaviours.” International Journal of Social Psychology30 (3): 481–511.
15.
GriesPeter. 2014. The Politics of American Foreign Policy: How Ideology Divides Liberals and Conservatives Over Foreign Affairs. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
16.
HalloranMichael J.KashimaEmiko S. 2004. “Social Identity and Worldview Validation: The Effects of Ingroup Identity Primes and Mortality Salience on Value Endorsement.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin30 (7): 915–25.
17.
HerrmannRichard K.2017. “How Attachments to the Nation Shape Beliefs about the World: A Theory of Motivated Reasoning.” International Organization 71 (Suppl. 1): S61–S84.
18.
HerrmannRichard K.IserniaPierangeloSegattiPaolo. 2009. “Attachment to the Nation and International Relations: Dimensions of Identity and Their Relationship to War and Peace.” Political Psychology30 (5): 721–54.
19.
KamCindy D.KinderDonald R.2007. “Terror and Ethnocentrism: Foundations of American Support for the war on Terrorism.” The Journal of Politics69 (2): 320–38.
20.
KinderDonald R.KamCindy D.2010. Us against Them: Ethnocentric Foundations of American Opinion. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
21.
KochMichael T.NicholsonStephen P.2016. “Death and Turnout: The Human Costs of War and Voter Participation in Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science60 (4): 932–46.
22.
KrepsSarahMaxeySarah. 2018. “Mechanisms of Morality: Sources of Support for Humanitarian Intervention.” Journal of Conflict Resolution62 (8): 1814–42.
23.
KruegerJames S.PedrazaFrancisco I.2012. “Missing Voices War Attitudes among Military Service-Connected Civilians.” Armed Forces & Society38 (3): 391–412.
24.
KruegerJames S.PedrazaFrancisco I.2015. “Ties That Bind: Revisiting Context, Identity, and Attitudes.” Research & Politics2 (3): 1–15.
25.
KruegerJames S.PedrazaFrancisco I.2018. “The End of the Dichotomy: The Effect of Social Proximity to Prototype and Periphery Group Members on Political Attitudes.” Social Science Quarterly99 (2): 762–73.
26.
LauRichard R.BrownThad A.SearsDavid O. 1978. “Self-Interest and Civilians’ Attitudes toward the Vietnam War.” Public Opinion Quarterly42 (4): 464–82.
27.
LittmanRebeccaPaluckElizabeth Levy. 2015. “The Cycle of Violence: Understanding Individual Participation in Collective Violence.” Political Psychology 36 (S1): 79–99.
28.
MaderMatthias. 2015. “Citizens’ Perceptions of Policy Objectives and Support for Military Action: Looking for Prudence in Germany.” Journal of Conflict Resolution61 (6): 1290–1314. doi:10.1177/0022002715603099.
29.
NewsonMarthaBuhrmesterMichaelWhitehouseHarvey. 2016. “Explaining Lifelong Loyalty: The Role of Identity Fusion and Self-Shaping Group Events.” PLoS ONE11 (8): e0160427.
30.
PettigrewThomas F.TroppLinda R.WagnerUlrichChristOliver. 2011. “Recent Advances in Intergroup Contact Theory.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations35 (3): 271–80.
31.
RathbunBrian C.KertzerJoshua D.ReiflerJasonGorenPaulScottoThomas J.2016. “Taking Foreign Policy Personally: Personal Values and Foreign Policy Attitudes.” International Studies Quarterly60 (1): 124–37.
32.
ReiflerJasonClarkeHarold D.ScottoThomas J.SandersDavidStewartMarianne C.WhiteleyPaul. 2014. “Prudence, Principle and Minimal Heuristics: British Public Opinion toward the Use of Military Force in Afghanistan and Libya.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations16 (1): 28–55.
33.
SegalMady. 1986. “The Military and the Family as Greedy Institutions.” Armed Forces & Society13 (1): 9–38.
34.
SkocpolThedaWilliamsonVanessa. 2016. The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35.
SwannWilliam B.JrBuhrmesterMichael D. 2015. “Identity Fusion.” Current Directions in Psychological Science24 (1): 52–57.
36.
SwannWilliam B.JrBuhrmesterMichael D.GómezAngelJettenJolandaBastianBrockVázquezAlexandraAriyantoAmarina, et al. 2014. “What Makes a Group Worth Dying for? Identity Fusion Fosters Perception of Familial Ties, Promoting Self-sacrifice.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology106 (6): 912–26.
37.
SwannWilliam B.JrGómezAngelHuiciCarmenJrMoralesJ.JrHixonJ Gregory. 2010. “Identity Fusion and Self-Sacrifice: Arousal as a Catalyst of Pro-group Fighting, Dying, and Helping Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology99 (5): 824–41.
38.
SwannWilliam B.JrGómezÁngelConor SeyleD.MoralesJ.HuiciCarmen. 2009. “Identity Fusion: The Interplay of Personal and Social Identities in Extreme Group Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology96 (5): 995–1011.
39.
SwannWilliam B.JrGomezAngelVazquezAlexandraGuillamonAntonioSegoviaSantiagoCarilloBeatriz. 2015. “Fusion with the Cross-Gender Group Predicts Genital Sex Reassignment Surgery.” Archives of Sexual Behavior44 (5): 1313–8.
40.
SwannWilliam B.JrJettenJolandaGómezAngelWhitehouseHarveyBastianBrock. 2012. “When Group Membership Gets Personal: A Theory of Identity Fusion.” Psychological Review119 (3): 441–56.
41.
VázquezAlexandraGómezAngelOrdoñanaJuan R.ParedesBorja. 2015. “From Interpersonal to Extended Fusion: Relationships between Fusion with Siblings and Fusion with the Country.” International Journal of Social Psychology30 (3): 512–20.
42.
WolakJenniferDawkinsRyan. 2017. “The Roots of Patriotism Across Political Contexts.” Political Psychology38 (3): 391–408.
43.
WrightGerald C.JrEriksonRobert S.McIverJohn P. 1987. “Public Opinion and Policy Liberalism in the American States.” American Journal of Political Science31 (4): 980–1001.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
