Replication Data for: The Politics of Alliance Cohesion: Experimental Evidence on American Attitudes toward Corrective Measures in Security Partnerships

This paper examines American public attitudes toward corrective measures against uncooperative security allies through a pre-registered survey experiment on a nationally representative sample of 1,502 citizens. The findings demonstrate strong public support for corrective measures, particularly coercive strategies such as economic sanctions and military aid reduction, against allies whose policies conflict with the dominant power’s interests. While alliance discord also triggers demands for reduced American contributions to the alliance, public response varies substantially based on the nature of the misalignment and the characteristics of the uncooperative ally. Notably, the ally regime type significantly moderates support for corrective measures, with Americans demonstrating marked reluctance to endorse punitive actions against democratic allies. However, neither the ally’s military capabilities nor the presence of formal treaty arrangements significantly moderates public preferences. These findings contribute to our understanding of alliance management and the domestic foundations of international cooperation while offering insights into the pressures leaders face when addressing alliance non-compliance.

本文通过针对1502名美国公民的全国代表性样本开展的预注册调查实验，考察了美国民众对不合作安全盟友采取矫正性措施的态度。研究结果显示，当盟友的政策与霸权国利益相悖时，美国民众普遍支持对其采取矫正性措施，尤其是经济制裁、削减军事援助这类强制性策略。尽管同盟不和也会引发美国减少对同盟贡献的诉求，但民众的反应会因政策分歧的性质以及不合作盟友的特征而存在显著差异。值得注意的是，盟友的政权类型会显著调节民众对矫正性措施的支持度，美国民众明显不愿支持对民主盟友采取惩罚性行动。然而，盟友的军事能力以及正式条约安排的存在，均未对民众的政策偏好产生显著调节作用。本研究结果有助于深化我们对同盟管理以及国际合作国内基础的理解，同时也为领导者应对盟友不履约行为时所面临的压力提供了新的认知视角。