File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Muddying the Waters: How Perceived Foreign Interference Affects Public Opinion on Protest Movements

TitleMuddying the Waters: How Perceived Foreign Interference Affects Public Opinion on Protest Movements
Authors
Issue Date1-Jan-2024
PublisherCambridge University Press
Citation
American Political Science Review, 2024, p. 1-18 How to Cite?
Abstract

Does foreign interference help or harm protest movements? An extensive literature has debated this question but focuses on observational data, obscuring a crucial mechanism for protest success: its effect on public attitudes. We argue that public accusations of foreign meddling damage protest groups by reducing public support. In survey experiments conducted in the United States and Canada, we find that credible accusations of foreign interference erode support by discrediting protester groups among sympathizers and inflaming nationalist fears. Indeed, such accusations delegitimize protest movements even among those sympathetic to the cause. Conditional factors, such as the type of foreign assistance or the identity of the meddling state, have no impact. These findings reveal how referencing foreign backing is a potent discrediting tactic—it influences public opinion, a critical determinant for protest outcomes.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/350421
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 5.9
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 5.070

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChow, Wilfred M-
dc.contributor.authorLevin, Dov H-
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-29T00:31:29Z-
dc.date.available2024-10-29T00:31:29Z-
dc.date.issued2024-01-01-
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Political Science Review, 2024, p. 1-18-
dc.identifier.issn0003-0554-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/350421-
dc.description.abstract<p>Does foreign interference help or harm protest movements? An extensive literature has debated this question but focuses on observational data, obscuring a crucial mechanism for protest success: its effect on public attitudes. We argue that public accusations of foreign meddling damage protest groups by reducing public support. In survey experiments conducted in the United States and Canada, we find that credible accusations of foreign interference erode support by discrediting protester groups among sympathizers and inflaming nationalist fears. Indeed, such accusations delegitimize protest movements even among those sympathetic to the cause. Conditional factors, such as the type of foreign assistance or the identity of the meddling state, have no impact. These findings reveal how referencing foreign backing is a potent discrediting tactic—it influences public opinion, a critical determinant for protest outcomes.</p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherCambridge University Press-
dc.relation.ispartofAmerican Political Science Review-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.titleMuddying the Waters: How Perceived Foreign Interference Affects Public Opinion on Protest Movements-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0003055424000327-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85191067296-
dc.identifier.spage1-
dc.identifier.epage18-
dc.identifier.eissn1537-5943-
dc.identifier.issnl0003-0554-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats