Replication Data for: Does repression undermine opposition demands? The case of the Hong Kong National Security Law

Does political repression extinguish public support for opposition demands? Protest emerges as a consequence of grievances and political preferences expressed as demands. Whereas the literature on the repression–dissent nexus has primarily focused on whether repression effectively deters dissenting behaviors, a limitation is that researchers do not often distinguish between behaviors and preferences. One possible implication is that although the observable protest behaviors can be reduced by repression, underlying opposition demands may remain intact or even be strengthened. Hence, the question of why repression should alter public preferences remains theoretically under-investigated, because there is limited micro-level evidence that captures changes in opposition preferences induced by a repressive episode. We fielded comparable conjoint experiments before and after the enactment of the Hong Kong National Security Law in June 2020. Support for the demands was largely stable despite the sweeping powers of the law to curb protests, although some moderation of demands was observed. We outline avenues for future research on mechanisms and implications entailed by the effects of repression on preferences.政治镇压是否会消解公众对反对派诉求的支持？抗议乃是不满情绪与以诉求形式呈现的政治偏好的产物。当前有关镇压-异见关联（repression-dissent nexus）的研究文献，主要聚焦于镇压能否有效遏制异议行为，但现有研究存在一处核心局限：研究者往往未对异议行为与政治偏好加以明确区分。由此可推导出一项重要推论：尽管可见的抗议行为可通过镇压得以削减，但潜藏的反对派诉求仍可能维持原状，甚至反而得到强化。因此，"镇压为何会改变公众政治偏好"这一问题在理论层面仍未得到充分探讨，原因在于目前鲜有微观层面的实证证据，能够捕捉镇压事件所引发的反对派偏好变化。我们于2020年6月《香港国家安全法》（Hong Kong National Security Law）颁布前后，开展了可比对的联合实验（conjoint experiments）。研究结果显示，尽管该法拥有遏制抗议的广泛权限，但公众对反对派诉求的支持率整体保持稳定，不过也观察到部分诉求存在一定程度的缓和。本文最后还梳理了未来研究的方向，即围绕镇压对偏好的影响所蕴含的作用机制与潜在意蕴展开深入探讨。