Supporting Violence in a Violent Land: Condonation of Political Violence in South Africa

Research on public support for political violence has focused on three types of support: violence in the abstract, in the context of specific, contextualized events, and behavioral support. Most research uses abstract measures to indicate support, more limited research focuses on attitudes toward actual violent events, and little research addresses behavioral support. In this analysis, we examine the interrelationships of these three types of measures, based on a 2024 survey in a South African province with a long and recent history of widespread political violence. We draw three specific conclusions from our analyses: abstract attitudes are not entirely irrelevant, but some indicators are more useful than others. Abstract attitudes have some value for predicting how people judge realistic acts of political violence, just as these attitudes are to some degree connected to actual violent behavior. Our most important overall conclusion is that much more attention must be paid to measurement issues if scholars want valid and reliable evidence of popular support for political violence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Research Quarterly
Published
2026-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129261494067
Primary Topic
Political Conflict and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Supporting Violence in a Violent Land: Condonation of Political Violence in South Africa

James L. Gibson, Amanda Gouws
Political Research Quarterly
Political Conflict and Governance
article

Supporting Violence in a Violent Land: Condonation of Political Violence in South Africa

James L. Gibson, Amanda Gouws
article en

Abstract

Research on public support for political violence has focused on three types of support: violence in the abstract, in the context of specific, contextualized events, and behavioral support. Most research uses abstract measures to indicate support, more limited research focuses on attitudes toward actual violent events, and little research addresses behavioral support. In this analysis, we examine the interrelationships of these three types of measures, based on a 2024 survey in a South African province with a long and recent history of widespread political violence. We draw three specific conclusions from our analyses: abstract attitudes are not entirely irrelevant, but some indicators are more useful than others. Abstract attitudes have some value for predicting how people judge realistic acts of political violence, just as these attitudes are to some degree connected to actual violent behavior. Our most important overall conclusion is that much more attention must be paid to measurement issues if scholars want valid and reliable evidence of popular support for political violence.

Political Research Quarterly
Florida State University (US), Stellenbosch University (ZA)
Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Political Conflict and Governance
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.