RAPID: Red lines and Negotiables: How Exposure to Wartime Violence Influences Support for Peace Settlements

该项目将研究暴露于战时环境如何影响公众对不同可能的和平解决方案的支持。接触暴力会导致公民对任何和平解决方案采取强硬态度吗？还是让他们更愿意接受和平解决方案，以结束暴力？为了回答这些问题，该项目将进行一系列调查和调查实验，看看哪些类型的和平协议被认为是可以接受的，反之，哪些和平条款是不可接受的。对公众在战时能够接受的和平解决方案的不同潜在条款进行可信的估计，是一个至关重要的国家安全问题，它可以影响国家领导人在战时谈判和战争结束问题上的政策。生活在外国侵略暴力中的公众愿意接受什么样的和平解决方案？遭受暴力和流离失所如何影响这些态度？这些都是理解战争结束的关键问题。在这个项目中，研究人员提出了一种新的理论，即暴露于战时暴力如何通过将可谈判的解决条款变成“红线”而使人们在某些问题上更加坚定决心，同时在其他解决条款上变得越来越灵活。该项目采用调查实验方法，以及对自我报告和观察性暴力暴露的新测量方法与行政数据相结合，将在战时考虑不同可能的和平计划时，测试公民何时以及为何同时参与义务论（红线）和结果主义（可协商）推理的假设。该项目的研究成果将对公众舆论、战时谈判和战争结束的国内原因等问题的学术研究做出创新和重大贡献。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

This project will study how exposure to wartime conditions influences public support for different possible peace settlements. Does exposure to violence lead citizens to take a hardline approach to any peace settlements? Or does it make them more open to peace settlements in order to end the violence? To answer these questions, the project will conduct a series of surveys and survey experiments looking at which types of peace deals are considered acceptable, and conversely which terms of terms peace are unacceptable. Finding credible estimates of different potential terms of peace settlements that publics would accept during wartime is a crucial national security question that can influence the policies of national leaders on questions of wartime negotiations and war termination. What kind of peace settlements would a public living through the violence of a foreign invasion be willing to accept? How does exposure to violence and displacement influence these attitudes? These are crucial questions to understanding war termination. In this project researchers develop a novel theory of how exposure to wartime violence leads people to harden resolve on certain issues by turning negotiable terms of settlement into “red lines,” while being increasingly flexible on other terms of settlement. Using a survey experimental approach, along with novel measurements of self-reported and observational exposure to violence paired with administrative data, this project will test hypotheses when and why citizens engage in both deontological (red lines) and consequentialist (negotiables) reasoning during wartime when considering different possible peace plans. The results of this project will make innovative and significant contributions to scholarship on questions relating to the causes of public opinion, wartime negotiations, and the domestic sources of war termination.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.