Historically, the US appears to have responded inconsistently to similar acts of
terrorism in two different ways, using either a law enforcement or military response.
These legal and military responses can be either unilateral or multilateral. This study
attempts to determine when each type of response is preferred by decisionmakers, both
political leaders and their citizens. The hypotheses suggesting that a response is
preferred depending upon terrorist attack success, location, and the terrorists' sociocultural
similarities are tested in three experiments and examined in a case study. These
three variables are believed, as suggested by the Cognitive Calculus concept, to cause an
emotional reaction amongst the respondents resulting in them having a higher preference
for the military and unilateral options. Whether or not the respondents were
experiencing an emotional reaction was studied in each experiment as well as being
tested in the third experiment by examining the respondents? selection of options based
upon their success rates. The case study examined US government responses to the First
World Trade Center bombing, the Bojinka Plot, the Khobar Towers bombing, and the September 11, 2001 attacks. The results of the experiments and case study suggest a
calm and deliberative response by the respondents to acts of terrorism, with a greater
preference for legal and multilateral responses to terrorism.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:tamu.edu/oai:repository.tamu.edu:1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2009-12-7331 |
| Date | 2009 December 1900 |
| Creators | Allan, Matthew W. |
| Contributors | Geva, Nehemia |
| Source Sets | Texas A and M University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Book, Thesis, Electronic Dissertation, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds