3,756 research outputs found
Why So Secretive? Unpacking Public Attitudes Towards Secrecy and Success in U.S. Foreign Policy
No full textReplication files for "Why So Secretive? Unpacking Attitudes Towards Secrecy and Success in U.S. Foreign Policy" by Rachel Myrick. See README for details
Why So Secretive? Unpacking Public Attitudes Towards Secrecy and Success in U.S. Foreign Policy
No full textReplication files for "Why So Secretive? Unpacking Attitudes Towards Secrecy and Success in U.S. Foreign Policy" by Rachel Myrick. See README for details
Supplemental Material - Public Reactions to Secret Negotiations in International Politics
No full textSupplemental Material for Public Reactions to Secret Negotiations in International Politics by Rachel Myrick in Journal of Conflict Resolution</p
Supplemental Material - Public Reactions to Secret Negotiations in International Politics
No full textSupplemental Material for Public Reactions to Secret Negotiations in International Politics by Rachel Myrick in Journal of Conflict Resolution</p
Replication Data for: Domestic Polarization and International Rivalry: How Adversaries Respond to America's Partisan Politics
No full textHow do foreign rivals perceive and respond to heightened domestic polarization in the United States? The conventional thinking is that polarization weakens and distracts the U.S., emboldening its adversaries. However, untested assumptions underlie this claim. We use two strategies to explore mechanisms linking domestic polarization and international rivalry. First, we field a survey experiment in China to examine how heightening perceptions of U.S. polarization affects public attitudes towards Chinese foreign policy. Second, we investigate how U.S. rival governments responded to an episode of extreme partisanship: the U.S. Capitol attacks on January 6, 2021. Drawing on ICEWS event data, we explore whether foreign rivals increased hostility towards the U.S. following the Capitol riots. Both studies fail to show robust evidence for the emboldening hypothesis. Extreme polarization has other negative consequences for American foreign policy, but we find no evidence that it makes adversaries materially more assertive towards the United States
Evidence-based transitional justice: incorporating public opinion into the field, with new data from Iraq and Ukraine
No full textThe field of “transitional justice” refers to a range of processes and mechanisms for accountability, truth-seeking, and reconciliation that governments and communities pursue in the aftermath of major societal traumas, including civil war, mass atrocities, and authoritarianism. This relatively new field emerged in the 1980s as scholars, practitioners, and policymakers looked for guidance to support post-authoritarian and post-communist transitions to democracy in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Since then, the field has grown rapidly—so rapidly that it is outpacing its capacity to learn from past mistakes. Recent methodological advances in the study of public attitudes about transitional justice through quantitative surveys and qualitative interview methods provide unprecedented insights into how different mechanisms—including domestic and international prosecutions, truth commissions, amnesty laws, and compensation—are perceived by their intended beneficiaries. The results have been troubling. Numerous studies in diverse contexts found that some of the most well-known transitional justice mechanisms, including those employed in South Africa, Rwanda, and Cambodia, failed to achieve their objectives of peacebuilding and reconciliation. In some cases, these policies had harmful consequences for their intended beneficiaries, including retraumatization and perceived “justice gaps” between victims’ preferred remedies and their actual outcomes.
There is an urgent need for the field of transitional justice to learn from this growing body of empirical research to develop evidence-based policies and programs that achieve their intended objectives. This Feature critically reviews the intellectual development of the field, consolidating empirical findings of relevant studies across disciplines—law, political science, sociology, economics, public health, psychology, and anthropology—and identifying open debates and questions for future research. We focus on research about public attitudes toward transitional justice in the communities directly impacted by conflict. In addition to reviewing previous research, we present new data from original public opinion surveys in Iraq and Ukraine relevant to ongoing transitional justice efforts in those countries. We use this evidence to identify lessons learned, including mistakes, in the design and implementation of previous transitional justice processes. We conclude by discussing the normative and prescriptive implications of our findings for efforts to improve future transitional justice laws and policies
Do donor motives matter? Investigating perceptions of foreign aid in the conflict in Donbas
No full textHow do the perceived motives of donor states shape recipient attitudes toward foreign aid in a conflict zone? This research note evaluates the impact of two frames that characterize the motives of foreign powers involved in a civil conflict in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine. These frames portray foreign actors as providing aid either to alleviate suffering during conflict (humanitarian frame) or to increase their power and influence in the recipient country (political influence frame). We demonstrate how framing impacts attitudes toward foreign assistance from the European Union and the Russian government among potential aid recipients in the Donbas. The results show that frames impact support for foreign aid from the European Union but have no effect on views of Russian aid. Counter to conventional expectations, aid provided for geopolitical, strategic reasons may be viewed as a positive, stabilizing force—even more than foreign aid provided for humanitarian reasons
Author interview: Q&A with Rachel O’Neill on Seduction: men, masculinity and mediated intimacy
No full textIn this author interview, we speak to Rachel O’Neill about her recent book, Seduction: Men, Masculinity and Mediated Intimacy, which offers an ethnographic study of the ‘seduction industry’. In the interview, she discusses the seduction industry as part of a continuum of mediated intimacy, the ways in which neoliberal rationalities are shaping masculine subjectivity today, how the book relates to contemporary discussions surrounding consent and women’s sexual agency and the particular challenges of undertaking this fieldwork. If you are interested in this interview, you can read a review of Seduction on LSE RB here. Q&A with Rachel O’Neill, author of Seduction: Men, Masculinity and Mediated Intimacy (Polity, 2018
Episode 3: Rachel Wightman, CSP Staff and Author
No full textIn this episode, CSP\u27s Associate Director of Instruction and Outreach, Rachel Wightman, shares about her new book, Faith and Fake News: A Guide to Consuming Information Wisely, including how she became interested in the topic, what led to the creation of this book, and why this topic is so important today
Rachel Swarns Book Event: The 272
No full textA conversation with Rachel Swarns, author of The GU272: The Families Who Were Enslaved And Sold To Build The American Catholic Church (Penguin Random House 2023). The conversation was moderated by Georgetown Professor Adam Rothman and hosted by Georgetown's Center for the Study of Slavery and Its Legacies
- …
