Replication Data for: Democratic Reputations in Crises and War

Many IR theories argue that leaders and publics use regime type to draw inferences about behavior in conflict, with implications for how democracies act as well as how they are treated by other states. We show that these beliefs can be studied as reputations, and build a framework around reputations that adhere to regime types and whose content implicates not just resolve, but a host of other important attributes and expected behaviors. We put democratic reputations under the microscope, fielding survey experiments on members of the Israeli Knesset as well as six national samples in four democracies. We find strong evidence of democratic reputations’ existence and pervasiveness as well as insight into their content. Specifically, we find that the reputations are asymmetric: democracy is seen as considerably and consistently more favorable in war than in crises, suggesting that these regimes may have more difficulty signaling resolve than our theories suggest.

众多国际关系（International Relations, IR）理论指出，领导者与公众会依据政权类型推断冲突中的行为模式，这既影响民主国家的行动逻辑，也关乎其他国家对其的对待方式。本研究表明，这类认知可作为声誉展开研究，并构建了一套围绕附着于政权类型的声誉的分析框架，该框架的内涵不仅涉及国家的应战决心，还涵盖诸多其他关键属性与预期行为模式。我们聚焦民主国家声誉展开细致研究，针对以色列议会议员以及四个民主国家的六组全国样本开展了调查实验。研究结果为民主国家声誉的存在与普遍性提供了坚实的实证支撑，同时也揭示了这类声誉的内涵特征。具体而言，研究发现这类声誉具有非对称性：相较于危机情境，公众普遍认为民主国家在战争中的表现更为积极友好，这表明民主政权传递应战决心的难度可能远超既有理论的预判。