How Citizens Update their Preferences on Foreign Policy: Experimental Evidence on Western Sanctions

This study examines how citizens update their foreign policy preferences, focusing on the role of policy effectiveness in shaping support for economic sanctions. Economic sanctions often require sustained public support, which depends on perceptions of effectiveness. Using a two-stage experimental design, we investigate how individuals’ preferences evolve when presented with information about effectiveness. The study covers three major sanctioning countries—the UK, Germany, and the US—and four hypothetical scenarios. Our results suggest that citizens indeed update their preferences: effectiveness causes a moderate increase in support, while ineffectiveness causes a significant drop, showing clear negativity bias. Using panel data from the US sample collected before and after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we find that this sensitivity to effectiveness persisted during a major foreign policy crisis. This demonstrates that citizens update their policy preferences based on instrumental reasoning, showing great consistency across countries, scenarios, and even in times of crisis.