Politics and Society After Violent Conflict

In this dissertation, I examine how elite rhetoric about past inter-group violence affects citizens’ post-conflict social and political attitudes. To do so, I conducted a survey experiment in the post-conflict country of Bosnia. In the first substantive chapter, I find that when individuals are reminded of the violence that was committed against their co-ethnics, they adopt negative views of out-group members. However, in the subsequent chapter, I find little evidence that this rhetoric induces individuals to ostracize co-ethnics who socially engage with out-groups. Combined, these findings indicate that (1) rhetoric about past violence makes reconciliation less likely by engendering negative attitudes toward out-groups, but (2) individuals who are open to inter-group engagement can still be effective conduits for positive inter-group contact. The next chapter considers how this kind of rhetoric impacts citizens’ views of ethnic and multi-ethnic parties. I find that it reduces support for ethnic parties but not multi-ethnic ones. This suggests that recalling past violence generates negative attitudes toward the political actors who are the most clearly responsible for the original breakdown in peace: ethnic parties. Finally, in the last substantive chapter, I show that rhetoric about past violence does not significantly affect policy preferences. This provides reason for optimism in post-conflict societies, where elites may have little incentive to keep war memories alive because citizens’ policy preferences are unlikely to respond in expected ways to such manipulation

Roll-Call Vote Selection: Implications for the Study of Legislative Politics

Roll-call votes provide scholars with the opportunity to measure many quantities of interest. However, the usefulness of the roll-call sample depends on the population it is intended to represent. After laying out why understanding the sample properties of the roll-call record is important, we catalogue voting procedures for 145 legislative chambers, finding that roll calls are typically discretionary. We then consider two arguments for discounting the potential problem: (a) roll calls are ubiquitous, especially where the threshold for invoking them is low or (b) the strategic incentives behind requests are sufficiently benign so as to generate representative samples. We address the first defense with novel empirical evidence regarding roll-call prevalence and the second with an original formal model of the position-taking argument for roll-call vote requests. Both our empirical and theoretical results confirm that inattention to vote method selection should broadly be considered an issue for the study of legislative behavior

Policy preferences in a post-war environment

Can reminders of violence committed in the past influence citizens’ policy preferences in the present? Prior work has found that under the threat of violence individuals prioritize safety and adopt policy views aimed at reducing the threat. Elites can then strategically employ concerns over personal safety and security to shape the public’s preferences. I contribute to this literature by conducting an exploratory study of whether invocations of violence committed in the past shape preferences in the long-term, years after the actual violence has ended. To do so, I fielded an experiment on a large ( N  = 1125) and nationally representative sample of respondents in Bosnia, the site of a major ethnic civil war in 1992–1995. I did not find evidence that reminders of wartime violence in and of themselves affect policy preferences. Ultimately, this study represents a first cut at a neglected question in the literature and has implications that could motivate future research on the relationship between violent conflict and policy preferences

Replication Data for: "Policy Preferences in a Post-War Environment"

Replication Data for: "Policy Preferences in a Post-War Environment

Replication Data for: How Exposure to Violence Affects Ethnic Voting

How does wartime exposure to ethnic violence affect the political preferences of ordinary citizens? Are high-violence communities more or less likely to reject the politicization of ethnicity post-war? We argue that community-level experience with wartime violence solidifies ethnic identities, fosters intra-ethnic cohesion and increases distrust toward non-co-ethnics, thereby making ethnic parties the most attractive channels of representation and contributing to the politicization of ethnicity. Employing data on wartime casualties at the community level and pre- as well as post-war election results in Bosnia, we find strong support for this argument. The findings hold across a number of robustness checks. Using post-war survey data, we also provide evidence that offers suggestive support for the proposed causal mechanism