Honors Theses

Date of Award

2024

Document Type

Honors Thesis

Degree Type

Bachelors of Arts

Degree Name

Political Science

Department

College of Psychology

Honors College

Farquhar Honors College Thesis

Honors College Dean

Andrea Nevins

Home College Dean

Karen Grosby

Faculty Advisor

Justin Landy

Abstract

Should all acts of aggression carried out in war be categorized as War Crimes? The Geneva Conventions and the International Criminal Court set specific parameters as to what does and does not constitute a war crime. Research in the domain of moral psychology shows that individuals are guided by the justness of cause when making moral judgements about combatant behavior. However, no prior research has examined whether justness of cause influences whether atrocities are categorized as war crimes or not. Across two studies, we investigated the role aggressor status plays in lay people’s categorization of war crimes. We predict that in political conflicts, the more one supports one side, the less their acts will be categorized as war crimes, and the less moral condemnation, overall, they will receive. Moreover, in a fictional scenario, the actions of the victim nation will be categorized as war crimes less than the aggressor nation, with the victim nation receiving less moral condemnation. Across both studies, we find support for our predictions. In political conflicts, there was a significant interaction between initial support and attacker. In a fictional scenario, the aggressor nation was condemned more than the victim nation. This research contributes to our understanding of support for war, which in turn dictates policy makers’ choices in declaring war. This research also helps us to better understand lay opinion of war crimes, contributing to moral psychology in the domain of warfare.

Download
Share Feedback

Share

COinS