The government sociological service VTsIOM regularly reports on the growing support for the war in Ukraine. According to the latest statistics from the agency, approval of the “special operation” reached 76%. This figure is convenient for propaganda, but it is not only broadcasted on television: it is also cited by public opinion leaders, some opposition figures, and even international organizations.
Can we consider this figure realistic? What do Russians really think, and how can we know this? Why do we have the impression that everyone is in favor of the war? Let’s break it down.
1. Fear.
In the first week after the war began, only 33% of those contacted by sociologists were willing to talk about it. After the “fake news” law was passed, the number of people willing to discuss the “special operation” dropped to 25%, according to data from the “Chronicle” sociologists.
The simplest explanation for this phenomenon is fear. People lie or avoid expressing their opinions due to fear, which results in the sample consisting only of radical supporters of the war and fearless opponents. It is obvious that both of these groups represent a minority of citizens.
This is not surprising: if a particular point of view is literally criminalized, the motivation to lie or refuse to speak will be very high. This distorts the results of surveys — and even without falsifications, the notorious 76% can be reached.
2. Methodology and independent data.
Interestingly, independent research, where the methodology is adjusted so that the direct question about support for the war is not asked, shows different results from those presented by propaganda.
For example, in the third part of the “Chronicle” study, respondents were asked how and when they would like the “special operation” to end. 32% responded that they wanted to end the war as soon as possible and without any conditions. Only 24% supported continuing the “special operation” until a victory.
This is a very important result: the changed methodology allows for results that are closer to reality because it reduces the fear of respondents. As we can see, with this approach, we are no longer talking about 76%.
3. Representativeness.
It is important to understand that your personal experience may differ from the actual picture of public opinion. This is normal, but many people overlook the key point: personal experience is not representative. We do not analyze data (conversations with friends, relatives, social media news, etc.) in the same way researchers do.
Not only do we not use the principles of representative sampling, standardized surveys, and statistical tools in our analysis, but we also tend to look for confirmation of our beliefs rather than truth.
This cognitive bias is called confirmation bias. We are all susceptible to it, and in everyday life, we tend to give more weight to information that aligns with our viewpoint.
Simply put: if you believe that the majority supports the war, you will unconsciously look for evidence that confirms this belief and distort all the information to support it.
4. Counterintuitiveness.
Our brains are wired to focus on negative events. Simply put, we are more likely to notice what happened, rather than what didn’t happen, and we tend to prefer “bad” events.
This is called the negativity bias. It is related to the fact that evolutionarily, we are geared to avoid dangers and need to be especially attentive to them. Let’s break this down with an example.
Imagine that your grandmother suddenly expresses support for the “special operation.” For you, this would be a big and important event, right? You might write about it on social media, complain to friends, etc.
But if your grandmother simply remains silent? There’s nothing to report. In the media, we don’t hear about how many murders did not happen — even thinking about it in such terms seems strange. But news about violence immediately makes headlines.
This is how our distorted perception of reality is formed, where negative events are highlighted more often and more brightly than positive ones or “non-events.” So, intuitively, it seems to us that everyone is for the war because we hear so much about its support.
5. Informed and conscious choice.
An important thing to keep in mind when discussing public opinion is whether people’s views are informed and whether they have enough information and freedom to make a conscious choice about their position.
When we say that “everyone supports the war,” we are assuming that people consciously “chose” this position. However, the mechanical reproduction of propaganda discourse in an information dictatorship, where there are no alternative sources of information and no pluralism of opinion, is not the same as making a conscious choice.
This is, in some ways, a philosophical question: can we consider beliefs formed under censorship conditions to be genuine choices? Do people who simply do not have access to information and different opinions have agency in choosing their viewpoint?
Summary
Based on independent research data, we see no consensus regarding the war in Ukraine. What we are seeing is fear and the desire to return to the way things were — in other words, to end the war as soon as possible.
At the same time, these results may seem incorrect to us because they often do not align with our own experiences. We hear so much about support for the war, and we are intuitively more likely to notice it because of how our minds work.
