Cited by 1History and International RelationsWorld Wars: History, Literature, and ImpactPolitical and Economic history of UK and US

The Press, Public Opinion, Arms Limitation, and Government Policy in Britain, 1932-34: Some Preliminary Observations

Krull, Catherine, McKercher, B.J.C.·2002·Diplomacy & Statecraft

Abstract

One of the least understood issues concerning interwar Britain is the connection between public opinion and the development and implementation of foreign and defence policy. And what is true generally of these crucial elements of interwar British statecraft is doubly so for perhaps their most nettled subset: disarmament. Public opinion polling did not begin in Britain till 1937; yet in 1932-34, when Britain played a leading role in the League of Nations-sponsored World Disarmament Conference, government ministers and their civil service and armed forces advisors sought to produce policy for this conference that would balance between limiting the national armoury and protecting national and Imperial security. Their reading of public opinion was crucial; but so, too, was the reading that the opposition parties and extra-parliamentary interest groups did and the subsequent pressures that they brought to bear on the government. This article offers some preliminary observations on the efficacy of using the national press as a means both of assessing public attitudes and of connecting the public debate over disarmament policy with policymaking within the British government.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/714000335

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Although the RIIA, WLIPF, and LNU never ceased fulfilling their mandates to prevent another war of 1914-1918 proportions, the general public was moved to interest themselves in foreign and defence policy questions only in moments of crisis.

    “But although the RIIA, the WLIPF, and the LNU never ceased in fulfilling their mandates to ensure another war of 1914-1918 proportions did not break out again, the general public was moved to interest themselves in foreign and defence policy questions only in moments of crisis.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krull, C., & McKercher, B. J. C.
Venue
Diplomacy & Statecraft
Published
2002-09
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
103-136
ISSN
  • 0959-2296 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-301X
OpenAlex
W2090473891
Cited by
1
References
0
Citations by year
2012: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Diplomacy and Statecraft (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › History and International Relations
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › World Wars: History, Literature, and Impact
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political and Economic history of UK and US
Keywords
arms limitation, disarmament policy, public opinion, press, interwar Britain, foreign policy, defense policy, League of Nations, opposition parties, interest groups, imperial security

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