Abstract

This research experiment investigated whether the nuclear taboo was more influential on participants when considering the use of nuclear weapons, or if the participants were influenced more by cost-benefit analysis when deciding to use nuclear weapons. In this study, we presented a fake military scenario to respondents with a total of eight different versions that either did or did not include: genocide, high casualties, and nuclear weapons. Participants could then select whether they agreed, disagreed, or needed more information as there answer. Breaking respondents down into these three groups, the results show that for all three respondent groups the independent variable with the strongest effect was nuclear weapons. The weakest variable was high casualty rates, while genocide had the second strongest effect on the respondents' decision-making process. These findings indicate that respondents were affected by the nuclear taboo and were less likely to cost-benefit analyze when giving their answer to the military proposal.

Thesis Completion

2019

Semester

Spring

Thesis Chair/Advisor

Dolan, Thomas

Degree

Bachelor of Arts (B.A.)

College

College of Sciences

Department

Political Science

Language

English

Access Status

Open Access

Release Date

5-1-2019

Download

Share

COinS
 

Accessibility Statement

This item was created or digitized prior to April 24, 2027, or is a reproduction of legacy media created before that date. It is preserved in its original, unmodified state specifically for research, reference, or historical recordkeeping. In accordance with the ADA Title II Final Rule, the University Libraries provides accessible versions of archival materials upon request. To request an accommodation for this item, please submit an accessibility request form.