Replication Data for: Persuasive and Unpersuasive Critiques of Torture
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Torture critics have offered two types of arguments in the hope of swaying public opinion against torture:  A pragmatic (consequentialist) argument that “torture doesn’t work” and a moral (deontological) argument about the immorality and cruelty of torture.  This paper presents findings from two survey experiments about public support for torture among U.S. adults.  The great majority of the respondents in these surveys did not endorse pragmatic arguments.  They believed that torture was a quick and effective means of extracting information from detainees who had information about terror attacks.  Respondents were unpersuaded by the suggestion that evidence extracted by means of torture might be fragmentary, outdated, or merely corroborative.  However, when respondents were informed about the protracted nature of torture, which often re' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["Intelligence","Terrorism","Torture"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Torture critics have offered two types of arguments in the hope of swaying public opinion against torture:  A pragmatic (consequentialist) argument that “torture doesn’t work” and a moral (deontological) argument about the immorality and cruelty of torture.  This paper presents findings from two survey experiments about public support for torture among U.S. adults.  The great majority of the respondents in these surveys did not endorse pragmatic arguments.  They believed that torture was a quick and effective means of extracting information from detainees who had information about terror attacks.  Respondents were unpersuaded by the suggestion that evidence extracted by means of torture might be fragmentary, outdated, or merely corroborative.  However, when respondents were informed about the protracted nature of torture, which often re' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
Torture critics have offered two types of arguments in the hope of swaying public opinion against torture:  A pragmatic (consequentialist) argument that “torture doesn’t work” and a moral (deontological) argument about the immorality and cruelty of torture.  This paper presents findings from two survey experiments about public support for torture among U.S. adults.  The great majority of the respondents in these surveys did not endorse pragmatic arguments.  They believed that torture was a quick and effective means of extracting information from detainees who had information about terror attacks.  Respondents were unpersuaded by the suggestion that evidence extracted by means of torture might be fragmentary, outdated, or merely corroborative.  However, when respondents were informed about the protracted nature of torture, which often re
Intelligence; Terrorism; Torture