Skip Navigation



Public Opinion Quarterly Advance Access published online on February 18, 2007
Public Opinion Quarterly, doi:10.1093/poq/nfl049
This Article
Right arrow Summary
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
71/1/126    most recent
nfl049v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berinsky, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Druckman, J. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The Polls—Review

Public Opinion Research and Support for the Iraq War

Adam J. Berinsky and James N. Druckman

Address correspondence to James N. Druckman, e-mail: druckman{at}northwestern.edu

Professors Peter Feaver, Christopher Gelpi, and Jason Reifler's theory of the determinants of public support for war has received a great deal of attention among academics, journalists, and policymakers. They argue that support for war hinges on initial support for military action and the belief in the success of the war. In this review, we take a critical and constructive view of their work, focusing on methodological concerns. We discuss the dependent variable used by the authors—individual casualty tolerance—and argue that it is an insufficient measure of war support. We also make the case that their independent variables of interest—initial support for war and evaluation of war success—may, in fact, be best understood as indicators of latent support for the war more generally. Finally, we discuss the need for more research into the determinants of support for war, focusing on core values and elite rhetoric as potential variables for continued and future study.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
W. A. Boettcher III and M. D. Cobb
"Don't Let Them Die in Vain": Casualty Frames and Public Tolerance for Escalating Commitment in Iraq
Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2009; 53(5): 677 - 697.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Conflict Management and Peace ScienceHome page
S. S. Gartner
Secondary Casualty Information: Casualty Uncertainty, Female Casualties, and Wartime Support
Conflict Management and Peace Science, April 1, 2008; 25(2): 98 - 111.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Opin QHome page
C. Gelpi and J. Reifler
The Polls--Review: Reply to Berinsky and Druckman: Success Still Matters
Public Opin Q, March 1, 2008; 72(1): 125 - 133.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.