Conrad et al.

Courtenay R. Conrad, Sarah E. Croco, Brad T. Gomez, Will H. Moore
Published online: 16 September 2017, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Contact email for authors:
- Brad T. Gomez: bgomez@fsu.edu
- Courtenay R. Conrad: cconrad2@ucmerced.edu
- Sarah E. Croco: scroco@umd.edu

Research Question: When do Americans support the government's use of torture?
Main Argument: Perceptions of threat decrease the power of public opinion as a bulwark against government torture.
Survey Results: Majority of Americans oppose torture, but support increases for detainees perceived as threatening (e.g., those with Arabic names or accused of terrorism).
Conclusion: Public opinion is malleable and poses a weak constraint against torture, emphasizing the need for institutional protections of human rights.
Data Repository: Data and replication files available at Harvard Dataverse.

Context: Democratic institutions allow citizens to voice opposition to human rights violations, influencing leaders.
Research Findings: Public perceptions correlate with government repression rates across countries (Anderson et al. 2002, 2005; Carlson and Listhaug 2007).
Democratic Characteristics: Democracies generally show less human rights violations than autocracies (Poe and Tate 1994; Richards 1999; Cingranelli and Filippov 2010).
Individual Differences: Support for human rights protections varies by demographics (age, gender, ideology) (Wemlinger 2014; Haider-Markel and Vieux 2008; Mayer et al. 2014).
Focus of Study: Effects of situational factors on individuals' attitudes toward torture, specifically:
- Racial/Ethnic identity of detainee.
- Nature of allegations (terrorism vs. other crimes).

Public Opinion as Constraint: Requires widespread rejection of torture, independent of situational context.
Targeted Abuse: Torture primarily affects individuals perceived as threatening (criminals, dissidents, marginalized individuals) (Rejali 2007).
Perceptions of Threat: Elicit discriminatory attitudes leading to support for coercive government policies like torture (Kinder and Sears 1981; Quillian 1995; Bobo 1999).

Objective: Evaluate how individual and detainee characteristics affect public support for torture.
Findings: Show causal evidence that support for torture increases when detainees are perceived as threatening:
1. Arab descent.
2. Motives connected to terrorism.
Connection to Previous Research: Support is malleable, especially under perceived domestic or international threats (Davenport 2007; Conrad et al. 2010; Downes 2011; Hendrix and Wong 2013).

Public opinion showed significant shifts post-terror events (2001, 2004) regarding torture policies in the U.S. (Gronke et al. 2010; Miller 2011; Amnesty International 2014).
Statistics: Majority (over 50%) of polled Americans reject torture under various conditions, though significant support exists under threats of terrorism.
Partisan Influence: Approximately 80% of Republicans, 60% Independents, and 40% of Democrats supported torture during the Obama administration.
Gender Differences: Women, generally, exhibit less support for torture than men (Haider-Markel and Vieux 2008).

Significant shifts in public sentiment concerning the use of torture when potentially faced with threats:
- Post-9/11 era marked heightened support for abusive practices against perceived threats.
Immediate Contexts: Torture often perceived as necessary for national security, exemplified by statements from officials like Jose Rodriguez.
Conditions for Consensus: Majority participation in disapproval and non-affection to situational context is crucial for public opinion to act as a constraint against torture.

Citizens’ support for torture increases when:
- Detainee is part of a racial/ethnic minority (particularly Arabs).
- Allegations are framed around terrorism.
Theoretical Implication: Individuals' evaluations of perceived threats lead to increased support for punitive responses against outgroup members.

Conducted as part of the 2012 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES).
Sample Description: Nationally representative, opt-in sample collected via YouGov/Polimetrix.
Definition of Torture: Provided prior to questioning, referencing Article 1 of the UN CAT. Results indicate lower willingness to support torture when respondents are made aware of its definition.

Hypothesis 1: Americans are more supportive of torture for detainees perceived to be Arab or Latino.
Hypothesis 2: Americans are more supportive of torture for detainees labeled as terrorists.

Randomly assigned to conditions regarding detainee identity (e.g., Arab, Latino, or Caucasian) and allegation type (crime vs terrorism).
Statistical analysis shows support for torture escalates significantly under conditions triggering perceptions of threat.

Findings: Support for torture rises markedly for Arabs accused of terrorism, outperforming other groups significantly in statistical analysis (mean differences significant).

Overall Argument: Americans' support for torture is significantly influenced by perceptions of threat.
Key Insight: Human rights institutions may not serve their intended purpose due to malleable public opinion, particularly under threat conditions.
Future Directions for Research: Understanding the dynamics between public opinion, threat perceptions, and the impact on human rights advocacy.