International relations studies have been unable to determine whether realist or liberal theories betterfit state behavior in various situations, possibly because these studies have attributed motive and action to the states rather than to the decision-makers within them. This article develops a new, more direct approach to resolving this problem. Hypotheses were tested regarding conditions under which decision-makers are likely to articulate a problem representationc onsistent with liberal or realist elements of a worldview.T his was done by content analysis of statements about 36 foreign conflicts by the governments of three "bystander" nations-the United States, Canada, and India-over a 16-year period. The findings indicate that systemic and situational factors are far more important than domestic factors. States tend to represent wars in congruence with liberalism primarily when their security is already assured by another power or when the conflict does not involve allies, rivals, or fellow democracies. Thus, most of the expectations of realism are supported at the psychological level.
قطعه
عنوان
Political Psychology
شماره جلد
, Vol. 24, No. 3
تاريخ نشر
, September 2003
توصيف ظاهري
: P. 561-592
موضوع (اسم عام یاعبارت اسمی عام)
موضوع مستند نشده
problem representation
موضوع مستند نشده
decision-making
موضوع مستند نشده
foreign policy
موضوع مستند نشده
worldview
موضوع مستند نشده
content analysis
موضوع مستند نشده
foreign policy
موضوع مستند نشده
United States
موضوع مستند نشده
international relations theory
نام شخص به منزله سر شناسه - (مسئولیت معنوی درجه اول )