| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
191539
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The study explores terrorism threat perceptions, focusing on the American public’s views of conventional and cyber-terrorism methods. Based on a national survey data, we find that when asked about the likelihood and the extent of threat associated with each type of terror method, citizens make clear and significant distinctions. Furthermore, these distinctions translate to variations in counter-terrorism policy preferences. Our analyses reveal that, considering the low level of knowledge of complex security issues, measuring citizens’ `true attitudes’ requires using survey instruments with lower level of abstraction, which force respondents to ‘stop and think’, and better reflect their associated opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
178663
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Public perceptions of terrorism are out of line with reality. How can perceptions be changed? Using a 4 × 2 experimental design with a national sample of U.S. adults, we examine how source of information and details provided impact views of terrorism. Sources, details, and individual-level factors—Islamophobia, trust in media, and trust in science—impact perceived accuracy of terrorism data. Many people updated their views on terrorism after reading factual information, yet only trust in science was related with this change. In short, people can be persuaded by factual information on terrorism, but it is less clear why they change beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|