............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... SYMPOSIUM ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... U.S. Public Opinion on Torture, 2001–2009 Paul Gronke, Reed College Darius Rejali, Reed College with Dustin Drenguis, Reed College; James Hicks, Reed College; Peter Miller, University of California, Irvine; and Bryan Nakayama, Reed College ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... any journalists and politicians believe that AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION ON TORTURE during the Bush administration, a major- Muchofthedebateovertortureinthepastfewyearshasimplied, ity of Americans supported torture if they either implicitly or explicitly, that the American public sup- were assured that it would prevent a ter- portstorture.Insomecases,theseclaimshaveincludedthepro- rorist attack. As Mark Danner wrote in the viso “if torture works.” In general, these commentaries have MApril 2009 New York Review of Books, “Polls tend to show that failedtoincludeanyreferencestotheactualstateofpublicopin- a majority of Americans are willing to support torture only ion on this important issue. In response, we have assembled an when they are assured that it will ‘thwart a terrorist attack.’” archive of public opinion polls that queried the public about This view was repeated frequently in both left- and right- theuseoftorturebetween2001and2009.Weunearthed32polls leaning articles and blogs, as well as in European papers (Shar- administered by a variety of survey and media organizations. rock 2008; Judd 2008; Koppelman 2009;Liberation 2008).There These polls represent the opinions of approximately 30,000 was a consensus, in other words, that throughout the years of Americans over the past nine years.The archive includes a poll the Bush administration, public opinion surveys tended to with items tailored to examine the reasons why perceptions show a pro-torture American majority. about public opinion are so erroneous. We discuss the reasons Butthisviewwasamisperception.Usinganewsurveydata- for such misperceptions in the final section of this article. setontorturecollectedduringthe2008election,combinedwith Figure 1 plots the smoothed trend of public opinion regard- a comprehensive archive of public opinion on torture, we show ing torture.1 This is the first comprehensive record of public here that a majority of Americans were opposed to torture opinion surveys that ask respondents about the use of torture throughouttheBushpresidency.Thisstancewastrueevenwhen on suspected terrorists in order to gain information or save respondents were asked about an imminent terrorist attack, lives. The individual poll results are listed in table 1; poll ques- even when enhanced interrogation techniques were not called tions are listed in appendix A.2 As the data make clear, not torture, and even when Americans were assured that torture once during this nine-year period was there a majority in favor would work to get crucial information. Opposition to torture of the use of torture. Approximately 55% of the public expressed remained stable and consistent during the entire Bush presi- opposition to torture during this period, even during the three dency. Even soldiers serving in Iraq opposed the use of torture years preceding the revelations of and subsequent public debate intheseconditions.Asweshowinthefollowing,apublicmajor- over Abu Ghraib. ity in favor of torture did not appear until, interestingly, six Although the surveys sometimes ask different questions, months into the Obama administration. they have several points in common. Crucially, in these sur- Why have so many politicians and journalists so badly veys, the respondent is not asked whether they think torture misread the strong majorities opposed to torture? A recent is effective. The effectiveness of torture is presumed in the survey we commissioned helps shine a light on this question. question. Respondents are told that the person in custody may Psychologists describe a process of misperception—“false be a terrorist and may have information about future terrorist consensus”—whereby an individual mistakenly believes that attacks. The questions ask or imply that torture would gain his or her viewpoint represents the public majority. False con- accurate information and could save American lives. They sensus has a long legacy in social psychological research, but present various versions, in other words, of the famed “ticking our survey is unique in that it examines, for the first time, time bomb” situation, allegedly the most favorable scenario how false consensus may have shaped the public debate over to sanction torture. These are conditions in which it would torture. Our survey shows that this false consensus pervades seem almost patriotic to affirm torture (and dangerous to the opinions of those who support torture, leading them to oppose it). Even in these survey-based scenarios and during significantly overestimate the proportion of the public that this historical period, however, a majority of the American agrees with them. Those people opposed to torture, in con- people never favored the use of torture. trast, have remarkably accurate perceptions of the rest of the In all but two surveys, opposition to torture exceeds sup- public. port. The mean over the nine-year period is 55% in opposition doi:10.1017/S1049096510000697 PS • July 2010 437 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... S y m p o s i u m : Terrorism and Human Rights ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... the policymakers in Washing- Figure 1 ton, are in harm’s way. They Public Opposition to Torture, 2001–2009 often must take swift and some- times violent action to save the lives of their fellow soldiers. One might therefore think that this group would be espe- cially likely to endorse torture, but they do not—and wisely so, given that torture has a high cost for soldiers who are asked to perform it (Rejali 2007). Studies of Greek, French, and Brazilian torturers show that participating in torture may induce atrocity-related trauma, as well as leading to, among other outcomes, alcoholism, suicide, and inexplicable vio- lence toward others. The more directly involved a person is with the conduct of torture, the more likely they are to develop posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, or anxiety. These to and 40.8% in favor of the use of torture. The Time/SRBI poll soldiers also experience job burnout and family problems, and (see table 1) is unusual in that the opposition stands at 81%, but sometimes participate in asocial or criminal behavior. Even removing this poll from the analysis makes only a slight differ- those soldiers who merely witness torture but do not partici- ence in results: without Time/SRBI, the means sit at 54.16% pate in it can develop these problems. Torture causes all these opposed to torture and 41.68% in support of torture. effects by inducing toxic levels of guilt and shame. Alarming Opposition to torture has declined in the past few years. reports of atrocity-related trauma and suicide rates among November 2007 was the first time point at which there was an returning veterans have already emerged (Phillips 2010; Mont- equal number of respondents who supported and opposed tor- gomery and Phillips 2009; Benjamin and de Yoanna 2009). ture, but this survey seems to have been an anomaly. A major- Table 2 shows the opinions on torture of members of the ity supporting torture did not emerge until June 2009, six U.S. military currently serving in Iraq. Military personnel months after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, oppose torture in even higher numbers than do civilians. Above and simultaneous with the reappearance of former Vice Pres- all, people who are asked to torture by politicians feel a deep ident Dick Cheney on the public stage to defend the use of sense of betrayal by those who ask them to do terrible things coercive interrogation techniques. The appearance of a public that are beyond what can or should be demanded of a profes- majority who favors torture is a very recent phenomenon. We sional soldier. Military leaders are aware of the strong depro- believe that torture may have become a partisan symbol, dis- fessionalization effects of torture, and that soldiers who have tinguishing Republicans from Democrats, that demonstrates been involved in torture are harder to assign to other respon- hawkishness on national security in the same way that being sibilities. Other soldiers do not accept them back into their supportive of the death penalty indicates that a person is tough ranks because they are perceived as undisciplined and lacking on crime. A survey