Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1966. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2005. / Title from title page of source document. Document formatted into pages; contains 107 pages. Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2005. / Title from first page of PDF file. Document formatted into pages; contains xii, 302 p.; also includes graphics (some col.). Includes bibliographical references (p. 285-302). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center

Thesis (M.A.)--Florida State University, 2006. / Advisor: Jonathan Grant, Florida State University, College of Arts and Sciences, Dept. of History. Title and description from dissertation home page (viewed June 9, 2006). Document formatted into pages; contains v, 79 pages. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of North Texas, May, 2007. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Auckland, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 378-429). Also available electronically via World Wide Web in PDF format.

No description available.

The literature on authoritarian politics emphasises the threat unexpected shocks such as economic downturns or political and security challenges pose for regime stability. However, we know relatively little about how incumbents can influence the process by which citizens evaluate government performance and attribute blame in non-democratic regimes. To gain insights into these questions, I study how government responses to collective shocks to citizen income and security influence support for electoral authoritarian regimes, i.e. those that combine authoritarian practices with multiparty elections. I propose that when shocks make information about government performance publicly observable, illiberal governments can take action that moderates or ameliorates their effect on the levels of support they enjoy. Little constrained by constitutional rules, critical media or coalition partners, electoral authoritarians can use tactical redistribution to appease the discontented electorate on the one hand and propaganda to manipulate attributions of responsibility for the shock on the other. Repression against opposition parties and activists in this context is used rarely, and only after targeted transfers and propaganda have failed to prevent support from eroding and crowds from taking to the streets. The thesis illustrates arguments with the case of contemporary Russia - an electoral authoritarian regime with high levels of personalist rule - and leverages evidence from government and citizen responses to natural disasters, economic downturns, terror attacks and electoral protests. Empirical analysis combines original datasets on the framing of economic news in Kremlin-controlled media, the forced dismissals of government actors, the provision of tactical redistribution, and the use of repression against opposition parties and activists with over 60,000 responses from nationally and regionally representative public opinion surveys. Bringing new data and evidence from individual-level surveys to bear on the debate of how non-democratic governments manage public opinion, the thesis makes an original contribution to scholarship on authoritarian vulnerability and resilience.

This paper explores the environmental policies and practices of the U. S. Department of Defense (DoD) from the late 1950s until the mid 1990s in relation to the views and attitudes of the American people. While by no means a comprehensive examination of the military and each of the branches, this paper covers the general attitudes and rationales of the DoD as a whole. The time frame covered deviates from more obvious choices, such as "since World War II" or a specific decade, intentionally. Cutting off 15 or so years from each end could situate this work as the middle of a three -volume set for a number of reasons. For the starting time, nearly a generation passed since World War II. This allowed adequate time for the younger populace to play a role in the decisionmaking process. This also allowed for a beginning just prior to Sikes Act and America's renewed interest in the environment. At the other end, the terminus follows the end of the Cold War and two rounds of military downsizing. This set up a time of not only preventing environmental harm in the future, but also digging in and cleaning past harm for the future. As such, this leaves ample room for future work to concentrate on the time periods omitted here. The chapters cover the topic by decade with extra emphasis given to weather modification, which spanned multiple decades in such a manner thatcould not be effectively covered broken apart. For the latter decades, the focus follows more closely to Presidential Administrations. This method could not be fully utilized during the preceding discussion, in part due to the unique and revolutionary nature of the overall upheaval of the 1960s. The information included in the appendices provides a more detailed look into the ideas of the American people, which could not be included in the body of the text without detracting from the flow and readability. The appendices include a chapter on the public's responses to the General Social Surveys administered from 1972 to 1991. The questions examined have been grouped biennially in sequential even and odd years.

Religion and gender have been found to play significant roles in shaping po- litical attitudes such as party identification and ideology. While much of the focus has been on the "religion gap" and the "gender gap," little empirical research has explored how religion affects the political attitudes of men and women differently. Using a 2004 Pew survey, this study examines how religion and gender interact to affect four different areas of President Bush's approval in 2004: general approval, economic policy approval, foreign policy approval, and social policy approval. The results support a "religious gender gap" theory, where the effect of gender on presi- dential approval varies across levels of religious commitment. For general, economic policy, and foreign policy approval, secular men and women are more similar on average than highly religious men and women. For social policy approval, highly religious men and women are more similar on average than secular men and women.