Warring from the virtual to the real: Assessing the public’s threshold for war over cyber security
Open accessAbstract
Accusations of Russian hacking in the 2016 US presidential election has raised the salience of cyber security among the American public. However, there are still a number of unanswered questions about the circumstances under which particular policy responses are warranted in response to a cyber-attack and the public’s attitudes about the conditions that justify this range of responses. This research investigates the attributes of a cyber-attack that affect public support for retaliation. It finds that cyber-attacks that produce American casualties dramatically increase support for retaliatory airstrikes compared to attacks with economic consequences. Assessments of attribution that have bipartisan support increase support to a lesser extent but for a broader range of retaliatory measures. The findings have important implications for ongoing debates about cyber security policy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
There is often greater room for public input in policy areas lacking broad consensus, since elites are more willing to follow popular views in these cases.
“Finally, there is often greater room for public input in policy areas lacking broad consensus, since elites are more willing to follow popular views in these cases (Kreps and Das 2017).”
From Public Opinion and Cyberterrorism (2023) · cites this paper as Kreps and Das 2017
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524 · see citing works
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,700 · see citing works
Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies
Perry, J. L., & Kingdon, J. W. (1985) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.2307/3323801 · Cited by 11,318 · see citing works
Agendas, alternatives, and public policies
Kingdon, J. W. (1984) · Cited by 8,032 · see citing works
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785 · see citing works
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion.
Kenski, H. C., & Zaller, J. R. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2074664 · Cited by 5,212 · see citing works
Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk
Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057 · Cited by 4,008 · see citing works
Rid, T., & Buchanan, B. (2015) · Journal of Strategic Studies · doi:10.1080/01402390.2014.977382 · Cited by 639 · see citing works
Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare
Schmitt, M. N. (2013) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139169288 · Cited by 599 · see citing works
Steenbergen, M. R., Edwards, E. E., & Vries, C. E. D. (2007) · European Union Politics · doi:10.1177/1465116507073284 · Cited by 448 · see citing works
Mass Public Decisions on Go to War: A Cognitive-Interactionist Framework
Herrmann, R. K., Tetlock, P. E., & Visser, P. S. (1999) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2585574 · Cited by 352 · see citing works
Quantifying Probabilistic Expressions
Mosteller, F. C., & Youtz, C. (1990) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177012242 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Nuclear Lessons for Cyber Security
Nye, J. J. S., & Joseph, S. (2011) · doi:10.21236/ada553620 · Cited by 176 · see citing works
Tipping the scales: the attribution problem and the feasibility of deterrence against cyberattack
Lindsay, J. (2015) · Journal of Cybersecurity · doi:10.1093/cybsec/tyv003 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
International Strategy for Cyberspace: Prosperity, Security, and Openness in a Networked World
Obama, B. (2011) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e688502011-001 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
The "Essential Domino" of Military Operations: American Public Opinion and the Use of Force
Klarevas, L. (2002) · International Studies Perspectives · doi:10.1111/1528-3577.t01-1-00107 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
International Law in Cyberspace
Koh, H. H. (2012) · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Gorman, S., & Barnes, J. E. (2011) · The Wall Street journal (Eastern ed. : Online)/The Wall Street journal. Eastern edition · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Strategic aspects of cyberattack, attribution, and blame
Edwards, B., Furnas, A. C., Forrest, S., & Axelrod, R. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1700442114 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Perspectives for Cyber Strategists on Law for Cyberwar
Dunlap, C. J. (2011) · Duke Law Scholarship Repository (Duke University) · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Mačák, K. (2016) · Journal of Conflict and Security Law · doi:10.1093/jcsl/krw014 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
(2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717492.001.0001 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kreps, S. E., & Schneider, J. G. (2018) · Journal of Cybersecurity · doi:10.1093/cybsec/tyz007 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Self-citationPublic Opinion and Foreign Electoral Intervention
Tomz, M. R., & WEEKS, J. L. P. (2020) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055420000064 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Cyberattacks, Psychological Distress, and Military Escalation: An Internal Meta-Analysis
Shandler, R., Gross, M. L., & Canetti, D. (2022) · Journal of Global Security Studies · doi:10.1093/jogss/ogac042 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Cyber Terrorism and Public Support for Retaliation – A Multi-Country Survey Experiment
Shandler, R., Gross, M. L., Backhaus, S., & Canetti, D. (2021) · British Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0007123420000812 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Shandler, R., Gross, M. L., & Canetti, D. (2021) · Contemporary Security Policy · doi:10.1080/13523260.2020.1868836 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Introduction: Cyber-conflict – Moving from speculation to investigation
Shandler, R., & Canetti, D. (2024) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/00223433231219441 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Leal, M. M., & Musgrave, P. (2022) · Conflict Management and Peace Science · doi:10.1177/07388942221111069 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Hedgecock, K., & Sukin, L. (2023) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/00220027231153580 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Public Opinion and Cyberterrorism
Shandler, R., Kostyuk, N., & Oppenheimer, H. (2023) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfad006 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Baram, G. (2023) · Journal of Cyber Policy · doi:10.1080/23738871.2023.2184708 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Cheerleading in Cyberspace: How the American Public Judges Attribution Claims for Cyberattacks
Leal, M. M., & Musgrave, P. (2022) · Foreign Policy Analysis · doi:10.1093/fpa/orac003 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Tip-toeing through the Tulips with Congress
Nedal, D. K., & Schramm, M. V. (2025) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009598019 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Arsenault, A. C., Kreps, S. E., Snider, K. L. G., & Canetti, D. (2024) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/00223433241233960 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citationAnswering the Call: Why Aid Allies in Cyber Conflict?
Gomez, M. A., & Winger, G. H. (2024) · International Interactions · doi:10.1080/03050629.2024.2441660 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Big Data and Cyber Security: A Visual Analytics Perspective
Suvodeep Mazumdar, A., & Wang, J. (2018) · Computer communications and networks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-92624-7_16 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Public opinion and alliance commitments in cybersecurity an attack against all?
Gomez, M. A., & Winger, G. H. (2024) · International Interactions · doi:10.1080/03050629.2024.2310014 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Traditional written media coverage and cybersecurity events: the NSA case
Silva, M. G. T., de Mello, A. C. R., & Nishijima, M. (2022) · Opinião Pública · doi:10.1590/1807-01912022281268 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Public Opinion and Alliance Commitments in Cybersecurity: An Attack Against All?Preprint
Gomez, M. A., & Winger, G. H. (2023) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/bcwhu
- Authors
- Kreps, S., & Das, D.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kreps, Sarah
- Venue
- Research & Politics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-04
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 2053-1680 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2581332009
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 3.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2025-09-30)
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Research & Politics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Keywords
- cybersecurity, public opinion, cyberattacks, retaliation, 2016 US presidential election, attribution of cyberattacks, bipartisan support, casualties, cybersecurity policy
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
