Skip to main content

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
Cancel
×
Home
Article
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Volume 107 , Issue 1
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
    Log in Register Recommend to librarian
  • Cited by 8
  • Cited by
    Crossref Citations
    Crossref logo
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Gartzke, Erik and Kroenig, Matthew 2016. Nukes with Numbers: Empirical Research on the Consequences of Nuclear Weapons for International Conflict. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 19, Issue. 1, p. 397.

    Koschut, Simon 2016. Normative Change and Security Community Disintegration.

    Butt, Ahsan I. 2015. Do nuclear weapons affect the guns-butter trade-off? Evidence on nuclear substitution from Pakistan and beyond. Conflict, Security & Development, Vol. 15, Issue. 3, p. 229.

    Clifford, Scott and Jerit, Jennifer 2015. Do Attempts to Improve Respondent Attention Increase Social Desirability Bias?. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 79, Issue. 3, p. 790.

    Holmes, Marcus and Traven, David 2015. Acting Rationally Without Really Thinking: The Logic of Rational Intuitionism for International Relations Theory. International Studies Review, p. n/a.

    Hyde, Susan D. 2015. Experiments in International Relations: Lab, Survey, and Field. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 18, Issue. 1, p. 403.

    Machida, Satoshi 2014. Who Supports Nuclear Armament in Japan? Threat Perceptions and Japan's Nuclear Armament. Asian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 22, Issue. 2, p. 128.

    TOMZ, MICHAEL R. and WEEKS, JESSICA L. P. 2013. Public Opinion and the Democratic Peace. American Political Science Review, Vol. 107, Issue. 04, p. 849.

    ×

Atomic Aversion: Experimental Evidence on Taboos, Traditions, and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons

  • DARYL G. PRESS (a1), SCOTT D. SAGAN (a2) and BENJAMIN A. VALENTINO (a1)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000597
  • Published online: 06 February 2013
Abstract

How strong are normative prohibitions on state behavior? We examine this question by analyzing anti-nuclear norms, sometimes called the “nuclear taboo,” using an original survey experiment to evaluate American attitudes regarding nuclear use. We find that the public has only a weak aversion to using nuclear weapons and that this aversion has few characteristics of an “unthinkable” behavior or taboo. Instead, public attitudes about whether to use nuclear weapons are driven largely by consequentialist considerations of military utility. Americans’ willingness to use nuclear weapons increases dramatically when nuclear weapons provide advantages over conventional weapons in destroying critical targets. Americans who oppose the use of nuclear weapons seem to do so primarily for fear of setting a negative precedent that could lead to the use of nuclear weapons by other states against the United States or its allies in the future.

Copyright
COPYRIGHT: © American Political Science Association 2013
Corresponding author
Daryl G. Press is Associate Professor, Department of Government, Dartmouth College, 6108 Silsby Hall, Hanover, NH 03755 (daryl.press@dartmouth.edu).
Scott D. Sagan is Caroline S.G. Munro Professor, Department of Political Science, and Senior Fellow, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, Encina Hall, 616 Serra Street, Stanford, CA 94305 (ssagan@stanford.edu).
Benjamin A. Valentino is Associate Professor, Department of Government, Dartmouth College, 6108 Silsby Hall, Hanover, NH 03755 (benv@dartmouth.edu).
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Matthew A. Baum , and Philip B. K. Potter. 2008. “The Relationship between Mass Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 39–65.
Adam J Berinsky . 2009. In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Robert P. Berrens , Alok Bohara, Hank Jenkins-Smith, Carol Silva, and David Weimer. 2003. “The Advent of Internet Surveys for Political Research: A Comparison of Telephone and Internet Samples.” Political Analysis 11 (1): 1–22.
Matthew Bolton , and Thomas Nash. 2010. “The Role of Middle Power–NGO Coalitions in Global Policy: The Case of the Cluster Munitions Ban.” Global Policy 1 (2): 172–84.
Deborah Jordan Brooks , and Benjamin A. Valentino. 2011. “A War of One's Own: Understanding the Gender Gap in Support for War.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75 (2): 270–86.
Mark A. Costanzo , and Ellen Gerrity. 2009. “The Effects and Effectiveness of Using Torture as an Interrogation Device: Using Research to Inform the Policy Debate.” Social Issues and Policy Review 3 (1): 179–210.
Richard C Eichenberg . 2005. “Victory Has Many Friends: U.S. Public Opinion and the Use of Military Force, 1981–2005.” International Security 30 (1): 140–77.
Janet Finch . 1987. “The Vignette Technique in Survey Research.” Sociology 21 (1): 105–14.
Martha Finnemore , and Kathryn Sikkink. 2001. “Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 4: 391–416.
Ole R Holsti . 2004. Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Jacques E Hymans . 2006. The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation: Identity, Emotions, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruce W Jentleson . 1992. “The Pretty Prudent Public: Post Post-Vietnam American Opinion on the Use of Military Force.” International Studies Quarterly 36 (1): 49–73.
Friedrich V Kratochwil . 1989. Rules, Norms, and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bradley Lian , and John R. Oneal. 1993. “Presidents, the Use of Military Force, and Public Opinion.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 37 (2): 277–300.
Ryder McKeown . 2009. “Norm Regress: U.S. Revisionism and the Slow Death of the Torture Norm.” International Relations 23 (1): 5–25.
Barry R Posen . 1997. “U.S. Security in a Nuclear-Armed World.” Security Studies 6 (3): 1–31.
William C Potter . 2010. “The NPT and the Sources of Nuclear Restraint.” Daedalus 139 (1): 68–81.
Philip J. Powlick , and Andrew Z. Katz. 1998. “Defining the American Public Opinion/Foreign Policy Nexus.” Mershon International Studies Review 42 (1): 29–61.
David M Rosen . 2007. “Child Soldiers, International Humanitarian Law, and the Globalization of Childhood.” American Anthropologist 109 (2): 296–306.
Scott D Sagan . 1996. “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?: Three Models in Search of a Bomb.” International Security 21 (3): 54–88.
Scott D Sagan . 2004. “Realist Perspectives on Ethical Norms and Weapons of Mass Destruction.” In Ethics and Weapons of Mass Destruction, eds. Sohail Hashmi and Steven Lee. New York: Cambridge University Press, 73–95.
Scott D Sagan . 2011. “The Causes of Nuclear Weapons Proliferation.” Annual Review of Political Science 14: 225–44.
David Sanders , Harold Clarke, Marianne C. Stewart, and Paul Whiteley. 2007. “Does Mode Matter for Modeling Political Choice?” Political Analysis 15 (3): 257–85.
Beth Simmons , and Lisa Martin. 2002. “International Organizations and Institutions.” In the Handbook of International Relations, eds. Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A Simmons. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 192–211.
Sonali Singh , and Christopher Way. 2004. “The Correlates of Nuclear Proliferation: A Quantitative Test.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 48 (6): 859–85.
Nina Tannenwald . 2007. The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-use of Nuclear Weapons since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Michael Tomz . 2007. “Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach.” International Organization 61 (4): 821–40.
Alexander Wendt . 1999. A Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Request permission
Cancel
Confirm
×