Reassessing Support for Political Aggression and Violence in the United States

Abstract Recent events have driven a surge in scholarly attention to public support for political violence in the United States. Yet, research paints a conflicting picture about the levels and correlates of support for violence. We argue that these disagreements are partly due to researchers’ measurement choices. After reviewing common practices and identifying measurement challenges, we introduce a measure designed to overcome these problems that allows respondents to choose their target of aggression. Across multiple studies, we compare our measure to two common alternatives. While we find similarities, our measure uncovers substantially more support for aggression and violence, particularly among weak partisans, holding implications for the levels and correlates of support for aggression. Further, by design, our measure provides information about the type of aggression that is endorsed and the most common targets. We conclude with recommendations for researchers studying support for political aggression.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Opinion Quarterly
Published
2025-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaf060
Primary Topic
Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reassessing Support for Political Aggression and Violence in the United States

L. Gómez López, Scott Clifford, Lucas J. Lothamer
Public Opinion Quarterly
Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
article

Reassessing Support for Political Aggression and Violence in the United States

L. Gómez López, Scott Clifford, Lucas J. Lothamer
article en

Abstract

Abstract Recent events have driven a surge in scholarly attention to public support for political violence in the United States. Yet, research paints a conflicting picture about the levels and correlates of support for violence. We argue that these disagreements are partly due to researchers’ measurement choices. After reviewing common practices and identifying measurement challenges, we introduce a measure designed to overcome these problems that allows respondents to choose their target of aggression. Across multiple studies, we compare our measure to two common alternatives. While we find similarities, our measure uncovers substantially more support for aggression and violence, particularly among weak partisans, holding implications for the levels and correlates of support for aggression. Further, by design, our measure provides information about the type of aggression that is endorsed and the most common targets. We conclude with recommendations for researchers studying support for political aggression.

Public Opinion Quarterly
The University of Texas at Tyler (US), University of Houston (US), Texas A&M University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.