The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Are Voters Sensitive to Terrorism? Direct Evidence from the Israeli Electorate
Abstract
This article relies on the variation of terror attacks across time and space as an instrument to identify the causal effects of terrorism on the preferences of the Israeli electorate. We find that the occurrence of a terror attack in a given locality within three months of the elections causes an increase of 1.35 percentage points on that locality's support for the right bloc of political parties out of the two blocs vote. This effect is of a significant political magnitude because of the high level of terrorism in Israel and the fact that its electorate is closely split between the right and left blocs. Moreover, a terror fatality has important electoral effects beyond the locality where the attack is perpetrated, and its electoral impact is stronger the closer to the elections it occurs. Interestingly, in left-leaning localities, local terror fatalities cause an increase in the support for the right bloc, whereas terror fatalities outside the locality increase the support for the left bloc of parties. Given that a relatively small number of localities suffer terror attacks, we demonstrate that terrorism does cause the ideological polarization of the electorate. Overall, our analysis provides strong empirical support for the hypothesis that the electorate shows a highly sensitive reaction to terrorism.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures
Tiebout, C. M. (1956) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/257839 · Cited by 13,222
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641
Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion
Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2008) · doi:10.2307/j.ctvcm4j72 · Cited by 5,051
Education, Poverty and Terrorism: Is There a Causal Connection?
Krueger, A. B., & Malečková, J. (2003) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/089533003772034925 · Cited by 1,362
Cited by
Terrorism and Voting: The Effect of Rocket Threat on Voting in Israeli Elections
GETMANSKY, A., & ZEITZOFF, T. (2014) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055414000288 · Cited by 351
Social Identification and Ethnic Conflict
SAMBANIS, N., & SHAYO, M. (2013) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055413000038 · Cited by 268
How the Public Defines Terrorism
Huff, C., & Kertzer, J. D. (2018) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12329 · Cited by 173
Voters versus terrorists: Analyzing the effect of terrorist events on voter turnout
Robbins, J., Hunter, L., & Murray, G. R. (2013) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343313479814 · Cited by 91
The effects of local socio-political events on group cohesion in online far-right communities
Bliuc, A.-M., Betts, J. M., Faulkner, N., Vergani, M., Chow, R. J., Iqbal, M., & Best, D. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0230302 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- BERREBI, C., & KLOR, E. F.
- Venue
- American Political Science Review
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2008-08
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 279-301
- ISSN
- 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5943
- OpenAlex
- W3122986715
- Cited by
- 410
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 46.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Are Voters Sensitive to Terrorism? Direct Evidence from the Israeli Electorate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0003055408080246
- The paper
- BERREBI, C., & KLOR, E. F. (2008). Are Voters Sensitive to Terrorism? Direct Evidence from the Israeli Electorate. American Political Science Review. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055408080246
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.