Convention All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: International Studies Association URL: http://www.isanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p99922_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Josiger, William. "Fear Factor: The Impact of Terrorism on Public Opinion in the United States and Great Britain" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-05-25 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p99922_index.html>

Josiger, W. J. , 2006-03-22 "Fear Factor: The Impact of Terrorism on Public Opinion in the United States and Great Britain" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA Online <PDF>. 2009-05-25 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p99922_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Abstract: At its heart terrorism is about fear. While terrorist attacks destroy, maim and kill, the intended audience for these attacks is almost always the whole body politic and the terrorist?s goal is to strike fear into their hearts. But how successful are these attacks in achieving this goal; do terrorist attacks really have a debilitating impact on a countries? morale? Does the impact of an attack vary as a function of the attack?s characteristics? Do certain types of attacks have the opposite impact, instead of paralyzing the public, rallying them to a central goal, as was the case after the September 11, 2001 attacks? Are there trends that exist across national boundaries? This study seeks to understand the fear-causing impact of terrorist attacks by examining a useful proxy: public opinion polls. By combining the ITERATE dataset of terrorist activities with public opinion poll results for 1979 ? 2004, I examine the impact of terrorist attacks in the United States and Great Britain on public perceptions and fear. I find that public awareness and perceived importance of terrorism increase following terrorist attacks. This increased salience does not, however, consistently generate widespread fear or cause the public to lose faith in the government. In particular, the public?s fear of terrorism and its support for the government vary in conjunction with the human and material costs associated with recent attacks, the types of people targeted and the types of weapons used. This variation lends support to the work of Bruce Jentleson and others suggesting that, even in the context of a terrorist incident, the public exercises some prudence when offering its support to the government.The results also suggest terrorists may use different types of attacks depending on the objectives they seek to accomplish. If, for example, terrorists seek to change U.S. behavior but minimize the possibility of a retaliatory strike, they may choose targets and means that increase fear of terrorism and disapproval of the government. If, on the other hand, their goal is to gain local political benefits or symbolic gains by goading the U.S. into action, as perhaps Bin Laden was trying to do on September 11, then they would likely chose targets and means that would increase the policy salience of terrorism and mobilize the public to demand policy responses on the international and domestic levels. The results suggest that terrorists that choose their targets and strategies poorly will likely be self-defeating. More importantly, these results suggest that with knowledge of the terrorists? objectives, policymakers can better anticipate the characteristics of future incidents.

Nous sommes tous Am�ricains�: The relationship between identifying with the victims of terrorist attacks, mortality salience, and support for restrictions on civil liberties in fighting the War on Terror

Public Prudence, the Policy Salience of Terrorism and Presidential Approval following Terrorist Incidents

Heterogeneity and Level of Public Support for European Integration: Exploring the Dynamics of European Policy-Making