Convention All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p153288_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Greene, Steven., Cobb, Michael. and Boettcher, William. "WMD's and Perceptions of Threat: An Experimental Analysis of Citizen Response to Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological WMD's" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, PA, Aug 31, 2006 <Not Available>. 2011-03-13 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p153288_index.html>

Greene, S. , Cobb, M. D. and Boettcher, W. , 2006-08-31 "WMD's and Perceptions of Threat: An Experimental Analysis of Citizen Response to Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological WMD's" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, PA Online <PDF>. 2011-03-13 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p153288_index.html

Publication Type: Proceeding Abstract: During the pre-war debate about attacking Iraq, the Bush administration advanced dubious claims about Iraq’s nuclear ambitions and capabilities. We suspect that the nuclear threat was exaggerated and added to other WMD claims because it was more effective at eliciting negative emotions about Iraq and creating a greater demand for military action against Iraq. In order to test this hypothesis, we created fake newspaper stories varying the type of threat—nuclear or chemical/biological—posed by a fictitious country or Iran, and embedded these stories in a survey. We compared reactions to WMD threats about countries other than Iraq because studying opinion about pre-war Iraq at this late date would be hopelessly confounded by prior attitudes. Surprisingly, our results do not support the argument that nuclear threats provoke different responses than other types of WMD, but our data raise a red flag about the external validity of studies using hypothetical scenarios involving fictitious countries. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for understanding public support for invading Iraq, likely public reactions to demands for war with Iran, and the validity of data generated using scenarios involving fictitious counties.

Emotions, Women and Politics and Their Influences on Iran and Iraq-USA Foreign Policy

Burden-sharing and Threat Perception: Advantages and Limitations of the Use of the Alliance Security Dilemma Model for Decision-making in Alliance Politics: The Case of Spain as a Non Nuclear Weapons