Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

Files

File List


Wollrich Dissertation Moral Norms.pdf (1.61 MB)

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Moral Norms and National Security: A Dual-Process Decision-Making Theory

Wollrich, Daniel Frank
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4993-6996
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1620057103456158

Abstract Details

2021, Doctor of Philosophy, Ohio State University, Political Science.
Serving to preserve sovereignty, guarantee survival, and facilitate freedom of action, national security is arguably the lead objective of the state. In contrast, moral norms are commonly held international rules built on morality that, among other effects, can inhibit states in their pursuit of that primary goal. The question posed here, then, is why states would willingly make national-security sacrifices for moral-normative reasons. And yet they do. In numerous wars, militaries have chosen to forego attacks on tactically and operationally valuable targets to protect civilian lives. Additionally, in militarized conflicts from World War I to the Gulf War and beyond, political and military leaders have selected their weapons not only by military value but also by categorization, what some scholars call “taboos.” These moral norms of civilian immunity and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) taboos appear to play a substantial role in state conduct, as shown by the wide-ranging statements of policymakers and commanders and real-world practical constraint. However, experimental research indicates a striking willingness among the public to both violate civilian immunity and use weapons of mass destruction if they appear militarily effective. In prior studies where participants make ex ante and post hoc evaluations of norm-violating attacks on terrorist and conventional adversaries, large numbers of participants—in some cases, well over half—endorse civilian-killing nuclear strikes. This discrepancy in findings derives in part from incomplete specification of how moral norms exist and function at the decision-making level, where adherence to, or violation of, the moral norm is determined. This dissertation uses a dual-process theory of affect and cognition to describe decision-makers’ moral-normative and national-security attitudes and their effects on wartime decision-making. Moral norms appear as affect-dominant attitudes, supported overwhelmingly by feelings and moral intuition, with weakly developed cognitive components. That is, most people feel that killing innocent civilians and using weapons of mass destruction are wrong, yet their knowledge is limited on the philosophical and legal underpinnings of civilian immunity and the physical, theoretical, and social characteristics of weapons of mass destruction. In contrast, people’s national-security attitudes are constructed of substantial affective and cognitive components. Driven by intuitive survival instincts that are matched by practical understandings of national security’s value, national-security attitudes are stronger than moral-normative attitudes and prevail more often in decision-making. Yet, precisely through this dual-process construction, means for increasing the selection of moral-normative options become available. The research findings herein support these essential ideas. Presenting qualitative and experimental evidence for both civilian-immunity and WMD norms, I show that affect’s role is strong, both ontologically within the attitudes and influentially in the decision. Further, this affective-cognitive specification enables analysis of several hypotheses for why a decision-maker may be more or less likely to violate a moral norm for national-security reasons. Both personality and environmental dual-process variables shape the decision’s outcome. These findings contribute to a growing multi-method body of research on moral norms, suggesting valuable means by which senior foreign-policymakers can finely balance national-security decision-making with moral-normative interests.
Richard Herrmann (Advisor)
Christopher Gelpi (Committee Member)
Alexander Wendt (Committee Member)
277 p.
International Relations; Military Studies; Political Science
national security; decision-making; morality; norms; political psychology; dual-process theory; weapons of mass destruction; nuclear weapons; chemical weapons; civilian immunity; affect

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Wollrich, D. F. (2021). Moral Norms and National Security: A Dual-Process Decision-Making Theory [Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1620057103456158

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Wollrich, Daniel. Moral Norms and National Security: A Dual-Process Decision-Making Theory. 2021. Ohio State University, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1620057103456158.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Wollrich, Daniel. "Moral Norms and National Security: A Dual-Process Decision-Making Theory." Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 2021. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1620057103456158

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

osu1620057103456158
299
© 2021, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by The Ohio State University and OhioLINK.