Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.

Because the underdog in a conflict typically gains the support of observers, nations will often adopt a narrative that persuades both their domestic following and international allies that they are the true victim in the conflict. Three survey studies were conducted to assess the perceptions of citi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kimberly Matheson, Nyla Branscombe, Yechiel Klar, Hymie Anisman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220303
id doaj-b84f382b6cc44683bb3ebf2bcfb23a7b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b84f382b6cc44683bb3ebf2bcfb23a7b2021-03-03T20:33:14ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01147e022030310.1371/journal.pone.0220303Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.Kimberly MathesonNyla BranscombeYechiel KlarHymie AnismanBecause the underdog in a conflict typically gains the support of observers, nations will often adopt a narrative that persuades both their domestic following and international allies that they are the true victim in the conflict. Three survey studies were conducted to assess the perceptions of citizens of a third-party observer nation (Canada) in relation to two nations in conflict that differ in their historical persecution, namely the U.S. and Israel. Perceptions of the vulnerability of their safety and survival, and their strength to protect themselves against their opponents were hypothesized to mediate differences in the perceived justification for each nation's conflict actions. Study 1 (N = 91) supported this mediational model, with the U.S. seen as less vulnerable and more powerful than Israel, and perceptions of vulnerability accounting for differences in the justifiability of their respective conflict actions. Study 2 (N = 315) further demonstrated a moderating effect of Canadians' shared identity with the nations in conflict; only at lower levels of a shared identity was Israel perceived to be more vulnerable and the mediated relation with the perceived justifiability of its conflict actions retained. Study 3 was conducted 10 years later (2018), administering measures to an independent sample of Canadian participants (N = 300). Canadians were found to be significantly less likely to share a common identity with Americans than previously; once again, the mediating role of the perceived vulnerability of the nations in conflict and the justifiability of their actions was conditional on shared identification. The findings contribute to understanding influences on the credibility of victim claims by nations in conflict, as well as implications for how their actions are construed by citizens of a third-party observer nation.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220303
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kimberly Matheson
Nyla Branscombe
Yechiel Klar
Hymie Anisman
spellingShingle Kimberly Matheson
Nyla Branscombe
Yechiel Klar
Hymie Anisman
Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Kimberly Matheson
Nyla Branscombe
Yechiel Klar
Hymie Anisman
author_sort Kimberly Matheson
title Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
title_short Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
title_full Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
title_fullStr Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
title_full_unstemmed Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
title_sort observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: the relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Because the underdog in a conflict typically gains the support of observers, nations will often adopt a narrative that persuades both their domestic following and international allies that they are the true victim in the conflict. Three survey studies were conducted to assess the perceptions of citizens of a third-party observer nation (Canada) in relation to two nations in conflict that differ in their historical persecution, namely the U.S. and Israel. Perceptions of the vulnerability of their safety and survival, and their strength to protect themselves against their opponents were hypothesized to mediate differences in the perceived justification for each nation's conflict actions. Study 1 (N = 91) supported this mediational model, with the U.S. seen as less vulnerable and more powerful than Israel, and perceptions of vulnerability accounting for differences in the justifiability of their respective conflict actions. Study 2 (N = 315) further demonstrated a moderating effect of Canadians' shared identity with the nations in conflict; only at lower levels of a shared identity was Israel perceived to be more vulnerable and the mediated relation with the perceived justifiability of its conflict actions retained. Study 3 was conducted 10 years later (2018), administering measures to an independent sample of Canadian participants (N = 300). Canadians were found to be significantly less likely to share a common identity with Americans than previously; once again, the mediating role of the perceived vulnerability of the nations in conflict and the justifiability of their actions was conditional on shared identification. The findings contribute to understanding influences on the credibility of victim claims by nations in conflict, as well as implications for how their actions are construed by citizens of a third-party observer nation.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220303
work_keys_str_mv AT kimberlymatheson observerperceptionsofthejustifiabilityoftheactionsofnationsinconflicttherelativeimportanceofconveyingnationalvulnerabilityversusstrength
AT nylabranscombe observerperceptionsofthejustifiabilityoftheactionsofnationsinconflicttherelativeimportanceofconveyingnationalvulnerabilityversusstrength
AT yechielklar observerperceptionsofthejustifiabilityoftheactionsofnationsinconflicttherelativeimportanceofconveyingnationalvulnerabilityversusstrength
AT hymieanisman observerperceptionsofthejustifiabilityoftheactionsofnationsinconflicttherelativeimportanceofconveyingnationalvulnerabilityversusstrength
_version_ 1714821924631085056