An Introduction to Political Psychology for International Relations Scholars

Abstract

As an increasingly popular interdisciplinary and multi-method approach to studying individual-level political phenomena, political psychology has made important strides in explaining the processes behind political attitudes and behaviour, decision making, and the interaction between the individual and the group. Hence, it is in a unique position to improve the explanatory power of international relations research that deals with the individual, such as in the study of leadership, foreign policy decision making, foreign policy analysis, and public opinion. After discussing the defining characteristics of political psychology, the research trends in the field, and its research methods, the article reviews the existing and potential contributions of political psychology to the study of international relations. Next, the article points to new areas for research in international relations that would particularly benefit from the theories and the methods already in use in political psychology

Keywords

• Political psychology, foreign policy analysis, theory, leadership, public opinion, decision-making.

References

1. Helen Haste, “Where Do We Go From Here in Political Psychology? An Introduction by Special Issue Editor”, Political Psychology, Vol. 33, No. 1 (February 2012), pp. 1-9.
2. David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Jervis, “The Psychologies Underlying Political Psychology”, in David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Jervis (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004, pp. 3-16.
3. Robert Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1976.
4. Rose McDermott, Political Psychology in International Relations, Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan Press, 2004, p. 3.
5. Hans Morgenthau, Politics among Nations, New York, Knopf, 1973.
6. Kenneth Waltz, A Theory of International Relations, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 1979.
7. McDermott, Political Psychology in International Relations, p. 6.
8. Phillip E. Tetlock, “Psychological Research on Foreign Policy: A Methodological Overview”, in Ladd Wheeler (ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology- Vol. 4, Beverly Hills, California, Sage Publications, 1983, pp. 45-79.

9. McDermott, Political Psychology in International Relations, pp. 1-20.
10. Harold Lasswell, Psychopathology and Politics, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1930; Alexander L. George and Juliette L. George, Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House: A Personality Study, New York, Dover Publications, 1964; Erik H. Erikson, Young Man Luther: A Study of Psychoanalysis and History, New York, W. W. Norton and Company, 1958; Theodor W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and Newitt Sanford, The Authoritarian Personality, New York, Harper and Row, 1950.
11. Paul F. Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet, People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign, New York, Columbia University Press, 1948.
12. Angus Campbell, Philip Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes, The American Voter, New York, Wiley, 1960.
13. Robert P. Abelson, Elliot Aronson, William J. McGuire, Theodore M. Newcomb, Milton J. Rosenberg, Percy H. Tannenbaum, Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook, Chicago, Rand McNally, 1968; Leon Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1957; Fritz Heider, The Psychology of Inter-Personal Relations, New York, Wiley, 1958. 14 Ibid., 3.
14. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases”, Science, Vol. 185, No. 4157 (September 1974), pp. 1124- 1131; Richard R. Lau and David P. Redlawsk, “Advanatges and Disadvantages of Using Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making”, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 45, No. 4 (October 2001), pp. 951-971.
15. Shanto Iyengar and Donald R. Kinder, News That Matters: Television and American Opinion, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1987.
16. Herbert Simon, Models of Bounded Rationality, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1982.
17. George E. Marcus, W. Russell Neuman, and Michael Mackuen, Affective Intelligence and Political Judgement, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 2000.
18. Haste, “Where do We Go from Here in Political Psychology?”, pp. 1-9.
19. David Sears, “College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influences of a Narrow Database on Psychology’s View of Human Nature”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No.3 (September 1986), pp. 515-530.
20. Ibid., pp. 11- 12.
21. Jon Krosnick, “Maximizing Q Quality in Consistency Measures of Political Attitudes and Behavior”, in John Paul Robinson and Phillip Shaver (eds.), Measures of Political Attitudes, San Diego, Academic Press. 1999.
22. Elif Erişen and Cengiz Erişen, “The Effect of Social Networks on the Quality of Political Thinking”, Political Psychology, Forthcoming (December 2012); Elif Erişen, Cengiz Erişen, and David Redlawsk, “Motivated Reasoning and Political Homophily in Social Networks”, Midwest Political Science Association 70th Annual Conference, Chicago, IL, 12-15 April 2012; Dan Cassino and Cengiz Erişen, “Priming Bush and Iraq in 2008: A Survey Experiment”, American Politics Research, Vol. 38, No. 2 (March 2010), pp. 372-394.
23. Robert Jervis, Richard Ned Lebow, and Janice Stein, Psychology and Deterrence, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985.
24. James M. Goldgeier and Philip E. Tetlock, “Psychology and International Relations Theory”, Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 4, No.1 (2001), pp. 67-92.
25. Robert Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1976. 27 Ibid., p. 83.
26. Cengiz Erişen, “Yanlış Algılama Perspektifinden Türk Dış Politikasının Değerlendirilmesi”, in Ertan Efegil and Rıdvan Kalaycı (eds.) Dış Politika Teorileri Bağlamında Türk Dış Politikasının Analizi, Ankara, Nobel Yayınevi, 2012, pp. 529-551.
27. Irving Janis, Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1982.
28. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk”, Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 2 (March 1979), pp. 263-291.
29. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice”, Science, No. 211, Vol. 4481 (January 1981), pp. 453-458.
30. Rose McDermott, Risk Taking in International Politics: Risk-Taking in American Foreign Policy, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1998.
31. Nathan Leites, “A Study of Bolshevism”, Journal of Politics, Vol. 17, No. 2 (May 1955), pp.326-329.
32. Alexander George, “The ‘Operational Code’: A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision Making”, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 2 (June 1969), pp. 190-222; Ole Holsti, “The ‘Operational Code’ Approach to the Study of Political Leaders: John Foster Dulles’ Philosophical and Instrumental Beliefs”, Canadian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 3, No. 1 (March 1970), pp. 123-57.
33. Richard K. Herrmann, Perceptions and Behavior in Soviet Foreign Policy, Pittsburg, University of Pittsburg Press, 1985.
34. Margaret Hermann, “Explaining Foreign Policy Behavior Using the Personal Characteristics of Political Leaders”, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 1 (March 1980), pp. 7- 46.
35. Herbert C. Kelman and Ronald J. Fisher, “Conflict Analysis and Resolution”, in Sears, Huddy, and Jervis, Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, pp. 315-353.
36. Leonie Huddy, Stanley Feldman, and Erin Cassese, “On the Distinct Political Effects of Anxiety and Anger”, in W. Russell Neuman, George E. Marcus, Ann Crigler, and Michael MacKuen (eds.), The Affect Effect: Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2007, pp. 202-230.
37. Rose McDermott, Presidential Leadership- Illness and Decision Making, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2007.