Where do hawks and doves fly when shots are fired

Bibliographic Data

ID6316664
AuthorsOsman Sabri Kiratli (0000-0001-9963-3542, Bogaziçi University, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume27
Issue6
Pages1172-1183
Publication date2021-11-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueParty Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1354-0688 • E-ISSN: 1460-3683
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1354068820939777
OpenAlexW4205093194
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited58

This paper explores the diverging electoral impact of instigating high-hostility militarized interstate disputes (MIDs) on the votes shares of hawkish, right-wing and dovish, left-wing incumbents, respectively. More specifically, I propose that deploying troops electorally harms doves and benefits hawks. I test this hypothesis via two studies. Study-1 presents a macro-level analysis of an incumbent’s electoral performance in a dataset covering 389 elections in 27 democratic countries between 1950 and 2010. With the objective of capturing heterogeneity of individual voting behavior at the appropriate level, Study-2 scrutinizes cross-national survey results from Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) covering 19 elections in 6 democracies. Multilevel models across both studies concur that in times of conflict, voters become significantly less supportive of dovish, left-wing incumbents and slightly more so of hawkish, right-wing ones compared to times of peace. The results also suggest that doves lose particularly substantial support from their co-partisans and ideologically left leaners

Biology · Democracy · Hostility · Ideology · Left-wing politics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Right wing · Sociology · Test (biology · Voting · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOI