Insecurity and policy preferences: how economic and physical threats shape attitudes toward social welfare and criminal justice

Despite frequent portrayals of the current political situation as an “age of insecurity”, we still know very little about the effects of insecurity on policy attitudes. In this paper, we explore the effect of economic and physical insecurity on two key policy domains: social welfare and criminal justice. While the majority of scholars in political science expect instrumental, domain-specific effects of insecurity, several psychological and sociological theories posit a more generalized, cross-domain politics of fear, with a bias toward punitive responses. We empirically test these logics with a preregistered survey experiment fielded in Denmark and Germany (N = 2,010), which includes a novel manipulation of economic and physical insecurity. Our findings are clearly in line with the instrumental and protective logic and do not support the scenario of all-encompassing and punitive “politics of fear”.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties
Published
2026-09-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2026.2724988
Primary Topic
Crime Patterns and Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Insecurity and policy preferences: how economic and physical threats shape attitudes toward social welfare and criminal justice

Peter Starke, Kaitlin Alper
Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties
Crime Patterns and Interventions
article

Insecurity and policy preferences: how economic and physical threats shape attitudes toward social welfare and criminal justice

Peter Starke, Kaitlin Alper
article en

Abstract

Despite frequent portrayals of the current political situation as an “age of insecurity”, we still know very little about the effects of insecurity on policy attitudes. In this paper, we explore the effect of economic and physical insecurity on two key policy domains: social welfare and criminal justice. While the majority of scholars in political science expect instrumental, domain-specific effects of insecurity, several psychological and sociological theories posit a more generalized, cross-domain politics of fear, with a bias toward punitive responses. We empirically test these logics with a preregistered survey experiment fielded in Denmark and Germany (N = 2,010), which includes a novel manipulation of economic and physical insecurity. Our findings are clearly in line with the instrumental and protective logic and do not support the scenario of all-encompassing and punitive “politics of fear”.

Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties
University of Southern Denmark (DK)
Velux Fonden
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Crime Patterns and Interventions
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.

Insecurity and policy preferences: how economic and physical threats shape attitudes toward social welfare and criminal justice — Peter Starke, Kaitlin Alper · Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS