POLITICAL SCIENCE 360
PSYCHOLOGY AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Instructor: Dr.
Coor Hall
6707
Phone: 480
727-7717
Email: Akan.Malici@asu.edu
Office Hours: TTH: 2:00-3:00pm and by appointment.
The
underlying philosophy of this course is to take education seriously. The etymology of the term “education” is
latin (ex-ducere) and translates into “leading someone out of him or
herself.”
If we all participate in education – as teachers or as students – if we all are ready to go out of ourselves – sometimes – then we might at times meet somewhere out there. When we meet, we can start to talk and begin to contribute to the emergence of a “better science.” Also the etymology of the term science is latin and translated into “knowledge.” Such a step is necessary for if we remain within ourselves we are doomed to see the world from within our (self-imposed) boundaries which will prove itself insufficient.
The
purpose of this course is examine how political scientists and psychologists
have led themselves out of their disciplinary boundaries and contributed
together to what some say is a “better science” as they combine their knowledge
into the evolving discipline of Political Psychology. It may come as a surprise
to learn that political scientists, for the most part, have ignored scientific
considerations of the human psyche. However, if we would ask whether psychology
adds to our understanding of war and peace among nations, many psychologists
would answer, of course, with an unequivocal “yes.” What could be more obvious?
Psychology explores the causes of the thoughts, feelings, and actions of human
beings. International relations are ultimately the products of the thoughts,
feelings, and actions of human beings who decide to arm or disarm nations and to
engage in war and peace processes. This recognition led to the emergence of
Political Psychology as a new discipline.
Political Psychology is thus
an interdisciplinary field that attempts to explain political behavior via
psychological principles. It however also includes insights from sociology,
biology, and anthropology to name a few. Political Psychology is an important
domain of academic research; students (tend to) find it fascinating and very
often troubling as they are exposed to some of the most shocking examples of
political conduct; and policymakers would undoubtedly benefit greatly from a
better understanding of political psychology. Understanding the psychological
causes of political behavior is crucial if we are to affect patterns of behavior
that are harmful to humanity and patterns of behavior that are beneficial to
humanity.
You are expected to read all the assigned readings BEFORE the class meeting and you are to be able to discuss them (the reading materials will be provided by the instructor). You are also expected to write ten one-page essays on the assigned reading materials. The essays must be in twelve-point font, with one-inch margins, and single-spaced. The due dates for the essays are noted in the Course Outline below. Your task in writing these papers is to address the following questions:
What puzzles you about the
reading assignment(s)? Identify confusions, murky
points, or other problems that you had in completing the assigned
readings.
What did you learn from the
reading assignments? Identify important
conceptual insights, empirical findings, or clarifications about methodological
or substantive issues, which you encountered while completing the assigned
reading(s). Also identify how key concepts or insights in the reading(s) might
apply to politics beyond the areas the author(s)
identifies.
What future research
questions did the reading assignments stimulate? Identify ideas for
extending, refining, or changing the direction of future research, which
occurred to you while completing the assigned readings.
For a satisfactory paper you will have to demonstrate effectively that you seriously engaged with the assigned reading material(s). You are to identify key arguments and key concepts. While each essay ought to have a clear focus on the particular reading(s) assigned for that particular due date, you are also to relate concepts and arguments that appear here to concepts in previous reading(s). Hence, you are expected to demonstrate that you can integrate newly acquired knowledge and information into previous knowledge and form a coherent body of knowledge.
For a satisfactory paper you will also have to demonstrate good writing abilities. A clear writing style is an absolute prerequisite for you to be able to communicate your substantive points and arguments effectively. It is also very important that you proofread your paper for grammar and style. Once you finished it, let it sit for a few hours and then revisit it. This way you are more likely to detect errors and correct them in time before the due date. Finally, it should go without saying that you ought to give a (creative) title to your paper.
Academic
Honesty:
Plagiarism and any form of
cheating on an assignment will result in an automatic loss of all points for
that assignment and possibly an F for the entire course or expulsion. Refer to
the relevant ASU policy, particularly the Student Academic Integrity policy, at
the following website: http://www.asu.edu/studentlife/judicial/integrity.html
Grading:
The
final grade is a composition of the ten short papers and your attendance record.
Each paper accounts for 10 points towards the final grade.
Grading Scheme:
100 – 90 percentile = A
89 – 80 percentile = B
79 – 70 percentile = C
69 – 60 percentile = D
59 and less =
E
Although attendance is not featured in the grading scheme above, it does count towards your final grade. Attendance is obligatory and will be monitored. An unexcused absence will result in an automatic loss of three (3) points of your final grade. Excused absences are those that are accompanied by a written explanation, together with legitimate supporting documentation. For example, if you miss a class due to extra curricular activities, please provide a letter from the faculty member organizing the event; if for medical reasons, a letter from your doctor and so on.
Incompletes and Make-up
Assignments:
An
incomplete will only be given in exceptional cases (i.e., illness or other
circumstances beyond the student’s control). Students will only be given an
incomplete if they have been doing passing work during the course of the
semester. Make-up assignments will be given only in exceptional circumstances
and only when the student can provide documentation of an illness or some other
cause for failing to take the test or finish the assignment at the scheduled
time.
Withdrawals:
If
you decide that you need to withdraw from this course, it is your responsibility
to do the paperwork required to ensure that you are withdrawn within the
relevant dates allowed. The relevant dates are noted
below.
Classroom
Courtesy:
Members of the class will be expected to exhibit appropriate behavior to the instructor and each other. Most importantly, students are required to give to others the respect and consideration they would wish for themselves. At its best, a classroom operates as a marketplace of ideas, where open discussion permits students to digest and evaluate information. Students must realize that while it is permissible to question a competing point of view, it is never appropriate to allow the conversation to degenerate into personal attacks. It is also expected that students will exhibit good manners, listen when others are talking, and generally behave in a professional manner. Students who behave inappropriately may be asked to leave the classroom and will have percentage-points deducted from their final grades.
Tuesday 18
January:
Introduction
Thursday 20
January:
Kenneth Waltz (1979) Theory of International Politics, ch. 1 (read pp.
1-13).
Tuesday 25
January:
Kenneth Waltz (1959) Man, the State and War,
excerpt.
Thursday 27
January:
Ole Holsti (1976) Foreign Policy Formation Viewed Cognitively. In Structure
of Decision. The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites, edited by Robert
Axelrod.
Tuesday 1
February:
Film on
Thursday 3
February:
Alex Mintz (1997) Foreign Policy Decisionmaking: Bridging the Gap Between the
Cognitive Psychology and the Rational Actor “Schools.” In Decisionmaking on
War and Peace. The Cognitive-Rational Debate, edited by Nehmia Geva and Alex
Mintz.
Tuesday 8
February:
Herbert Simon (1995) Rationality in Political Behavior. Political Psychology 16:
45-61; Herbert Simon (1985) Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue with
Political Science. American Political Science Review 79: 293-304 (skip
pages 298-301). [Third Paper Due]
Thursday 10
February:
Ziva Kunda (1999) Social Cognition. Making Sense of People.
Tuesday 15
February:
Philip Tetlock (1998) “Social Psychology and World Politics.” In The Handbook of Social Psychology,
Volume II, 4th ed., edited by D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, and G. Lindzey,
pp. 868-982 (read pp. 874-882).
Thursday 17
February:
John Darley and Russell Fazio (1980) Expectancy Processes Arising in the Social
Interaction Sequence. American Psychologist (October): 867-880.
Tuesday 22
February:
Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman (1974) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics
and Biases. Science 185: 1124-1131;
Thursday 24
February:
Robert Jervis (1968) Hypotheses on Misperception. World Politics 20:
454-479. [Fifth Paper Due]
Tuesday 1
March: Bill
Peterson, David Winter and Richard Doty (1994) Laboratory Test of a
Motivational-Perceptual Model Conflict Escalation. Journal of Conflict
Resolution 38: 719-748.
Thursday 3
March: Philip Tetlock (1991) “Learning in
Tuesday 8
March:
Janice Stein (1994) Political Learning by Going: Gorbachev as Uncommitted
Thinker and Motivated Learner. International Organization 48: 115-183.
Leon Festinger (1962) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, ch. 1.
[Sixth Paper Due]
Thursday 10
March:
Operational Code Analysis; Stephen Walker (2000) Forecasting the Political
Behavior of Leaders with the Verbs in Context System. Report for Social Science
Automation, Inc., Hilliard,
Tuesday 22 March:
Thursday 24
March: Jack
Levy (1992) An Introduction to Prospect Theory. Political Psychology 13:
171-186; Jack Levy (1997) Prospect Theory and the Cognitive-Rational Debate. In
Decisionmaking on War and Peace. In The Cognitive-Rational Debate, edited
by Nehmia Geva and Alex Mintz.
Tuesday 29
March:
Samuel Huntington (1993) The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs 72
(Summer).
Thursday 31
March: Film
on the “Clash of Civilizations.”
Tuesday 5
April: Film
on “Orientalism.”
Thursday 7
April: Paul
Kowert (1998-1999) National Identity: Inside and Out. Security Studies 8:
1-34. [Eighth Paper Due]
Tuesday 12 April:
Roberta
Sigel (2001) An Introduction to the Symposium on Social Identity. Political
Psychology 22: 111-114; Marilyn Brewer (2001) The Many Faces of Social
Identity: Implications for Political Psychology. Political Psychology 22:
115-125.
Thursday 14
April:
Marilyn Brewer (2001) Ingroup Identification and Intergroup Conflict. In
Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Reduction, edited by
R. Ashmore, L. Justin, and D. Wilder, pp. 17-41.
Tuesday 19 April:
Mark
Schafer (1999) Cooperative and Conflictual Policy Preferences: The Effect
of Identity, Security, and Image of the Other. Political Psychology 20:
829-844. [Ninth Paper Due]
Thursday 21 April:
David
Winter (2002) An Intellectual Agenda for Political Psychology. In Political
Psychology, edited by Kristen Renwick Monroe, pp. 385-398.
Tuesday 26
April:
Careers and the Study of Political Science (Instructor will inform students on
careers in the fields of political science, politics, and related
fields).
Thursday 28
April:
tba.
Tuesday 3 May: Last Day of Classes [10th Paper Due]