Kaitlin Peach’s research while affiliated with University of Oklahoma and other places

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, President Vladimir Putin's nuclear threats have reshaped the global nuclear landscape, potentially altering public attitudes toward nuclear deterrence and weapons use. This article examines American preferences for United States responses—nuclear, conventional, or nonmilitary—to three hypothetical scenarios involving Russia's potential use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Drawing on data from the 2022 National Security Survey by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis, we find that the American public generally favors conventional military responses over nuclear options, even in the face of increased nuclear threats. Qualitative analysis reveals that respondents primarily apply a “logic of consequences,” prioritizing strategic military utility over ethical or normative concerns when considering responses. These findings have significant implications for US nuclear policy and the theoretical discourse on nuclear nonuse.

Using data from a nationally representative survey of 2,036 U.S. adults, we analyze partisan perceptions of the risk disinformation poses U.S. government and society, as well as the actors viewed as responsible for and harmed by disinformation. Our findings indicate relatively high concern about disinformation across a variety of societal issues, with broad bipartisan agreement that disinformation poses significant risks and causes harms to several groups. However, agreement ends there. Republicans and Democrats fundamentally disagree on who is responsible. We discuss the implications of this disagreement for understanding disinformation as a policy problem and the implications for policy solutions.

Purpose Across the USA, local municipalities and providers struggle to reliably supply water and electricity when faced with severe weather events induced by climate change. Previous research suggests those at higher risk for experiencing the detrimental effects of climate change have higher climate-related concerns. Additionally, research demonstrates variation in trust in institutions and perceptions of environmental justice along racial lines, which can influence concern for access to resources. Informed by this research, the authors ask two questions: how do Oklahomans’ trust in institutions, environmental justice perceptions and global climate change risk perceptions differ based on race, and how do these factors influence concern for water and electrical infrastructure? The purpose of this study is to better understand Oklahomans’ trust in information from institutions, environmental justice perceptions, global climate change risk perceptions and concern for water and electrical infrastructure. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a series of nested regression models to analyze the survey responses of 2,687 Oklahoman adults. The data were pulled from Wave 3 of the Oklahoma Meso-scale Integrated Socio-geographic Network survey, which is part of the National Science Foundation EPSCoR S3OK project. Findings The findings demonstrate the complex interplay of riskscapes – or risk landscapes – that encompass institutional trust, perceptions of environmental justice, climate change and infrastructure in Oklahoma. The authors find evidence that education and income are better predictors of institutional trust and environmental justice than race among our respondents. Political ideology emerges as a significant predictor across all hypotheses. Originality/value This study contributes to the understanding of complex dynamics involving race, perceptions of environmental justice, trust in information from institutions, risk perceptions of climate change and concerns for water and electrical infrastructure in Oklahoma.

Utilizing a random sample of Oklahoma, USA residents, this paper examines the factors that are 1) associated with concern for the current state of the electrical grid in Oklahoma, and 2) associated with willingness-to-pay (WTP) for electrical grid improvements in the state. We develop a conceptual model using a risk perception framework and based on previous literature to hypothesize which variables should be related to our dependent variables (concern for the electrical grid, and WTP for improvements to the grid). We then test our conceptual model using a structural equation model (SEM). The results suggest that respondents who hold higher perceptions of weather-related risks and perceive more risks from electrical outages had greater concern for electricity infrastructure. Additionally, respondents who expressed less trust in those charged with electrical grid maintenance reported more concern for electricity infrastructure. The results for our second research question suggest that lower cost, respondents who were more politically liberal, non-white, trust grid maintenance, perceived risks of electrical outages and have concerns for the electrical grid infrastructure were all related to WTP for electrical grid improvements. We conclude the paper with implications of our findings and some brief recommendations for electrical grid concern and WTP for modernization.