Fear of War: Mapping out associated individual and social factors in flashpoint zones

Background: Contemporary geopolitical instability intensifies anticipatory Fear of War (FoW) not only among populations directly affected by armed conflict but also in countries exposed, either directly or potentially. Comparative evidence on psychosocial mechanisms underlying FoW across distinct threat contexts remains limited.Objectives: This paper examines (1) cross-national differences in FoW and key psychosocial and security-context indicators, (2) the extent to which predictors operate universally versus context-specifically, and (3) a theoretically grounded multilevel mechanism linking personal resources, social connectedness, and perceived security context to FoW.Method: Adults (M age = 27.13, SD = 10.54) from Poland, South Korea, Taiwan, and Israel completed measures of FoW, personal resources (e.g., resilience, self-efficacy, optimism), social connectedness (e.g., cohesion, belonging, loneliness), and perceived security context (e.g., political tensions, military trust, alliance-related security). Cross-national differences were tested using ANOVA/Welch's t-test with post hoc comparisons. Country-specific mechanisms were examined via hierarchical multiple regressions. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was conducted for Poland, South Korea, and Taiwan to test mediated pathways; Israel was analyzed separately due to its ongoing armed-conflict context.Results: Cross-national comparisons revealed substantial differences in FoW and related psychosocial profiles. Across countries, perceived political tensions and dispositional optimism emerged as the most consistent predictors. Regression models indicated context-dependent roles of personal resources (buffering in indirect-threat contexts; vigilance-linked in the chronic-conflict context). SEM supported a mechanism in which FoW was primarily driven by cognitive (political tension appraisal) and existential (death anxiety) processes. At the same time, personal and social resources exerted indirect effects via existential buffering and defense-related orientations.Conclusions: FoW appears to be shaped by a combination of partly universal threat-appraisal mechanisms and context-specific psychosocial configurations. Interventions should integrate risk communication with efficacy-building and psychosocial support tailored to national threat contexts.