Juris Pupcenoks
I am an assistant professor of political science and international relations at Marist College, NY. My research focuses on understanding how different groups (be it diasporas, Americans or Europeans) mobilize politically and react to conflicts abroad. My specific research interests include diasporic and ethnic politics, humanitarian intervention, international security, causes of political violence, Muslims and minorities in the West, and transatlantic relations. I have conducted field research in United Kingdom, Italy, and the United States, and my research has been published in peer-reviewed journals including International Interactions, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, Middle East Journal, and Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. My monograph, Western Muslims and Conflicts Abroad was published by Routledge in 2016, and my work has been translated in Turkish. I previously held positions at the University of Delaware, and Washington College (Maryland).
Address: 3399 North Road, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Address: 3399 North Road, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
less
Interests
Uploads
Papers by Juris Pupcenoks
on average Americans’ attitude towards interventions in humanitarian
crises abroad. Two survey experiments were conducted, where
participants were randomly assigned to read a mock news story about a
foreign humanitarian crisis written using one of the three framing
techniques. Results of both studies indicated that the framing effect on
respondents’ support for intervention interacted with ones’ political
ideology and prompted distinctive reactions among different populations.
Most intriguingly, the results of Study 2, which employed a non-student
sample and a secondary frame, suggested that the specific order of
message framings also influences public opinions toward humanitarian
intervention. Implications for news organizations and policymakers are
discussed.
Americans view migrants before and after the heated 2016 primary season leading to
the nomination of Donald Trump as the Republican Party’s presidential candidate. We
hypothesize that prior unfavorable predispositions towards migrants, preference for
high skilled migrants, personality traits, and material variables strongly influence views
on migrants. We examine the effect of these variables with two controlled experiments
set a year apart, before and after the 2016 primary election. The experiments
manipulate the ethnicity (Asian, Hispanic, Arab) and skill level (high skilled or low
skilled) of migrant groups. In both experiments, we find that respondents have an
overall positive view of migrants regardless of ethnicity. However, those respondents
who hold anti-immigrant stereotypes, have authoritarian personalities, and whose
economic standing is worsening see immigrants as threatening. We also find that
negative emotion plays a mediating role in this process.
on average Americans’ attitude towards interventions in humanitarian
crises abroad. Two survey experiments were conducted, where
participants were randomly assigned to read a mock news story about a
foreign humanitarian crisis written using one of the three framing
techniques. Results of both studies indicated that the framing effect on
respondents’ support for intervention interacted with ones’ political
ideology and prompted distinctive reactions among different populations.
Most intriguingly, the results of Study 2, which employed a non-student
sample and a secondary frame, suggested that the specific order of
message framings also influences public opinions toward humanitarian
intervention. Implications for news organizations and policymakers are
discussed.
Americans view migrants before and after the heated 2016 primary season leading to
the nomination of Donald Trump as the Republican Party’s presidential candidate. We
hypothesize that prior unfavorable predispositions towards migrants, preference for
high skilled migrants, personality traits, and material variables strongly influence views
on migrants. We examine the effect of these variables with two controlled experiments
set a year apart, before and after the 2016 primary election. The experiments
manipulate the ethnicity (Asian, Hispanic, Arab) and skill level (high skilled or low
skilled) of migrant groups. In both experiments, we find that respondents have an
overall positive view of migrants regardless of ethnicity. However, those respondents
who hold anti-immigrant stereotypes, have authoritarian personalities, and whose
economic standing is worsening see immigrants as threatening. We also find that
negative emotion plays a mediating role in this process.