Foreign Policy Attitudes as Networks

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Kertzer ◽  
Kathleen E. Powers
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Hierarchical Organization ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Political Sophistication ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Specific Policy ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Foreign Policy Attitudes

Since at least 1964, public opinion scholars have searched for signs of “constraint” in the American public’s foreign policy attitudes. This chapter reviews these attempts and suggests that the ensuing work has ultimately fallen into two research traditions that have largely been conducted in isolation of one another: horizontal models that portray attitudes as being sorted along multiple dimensions on the same plane and vertical models that imply a hierarchical organization in which abstract values determine specific policy positions. It then offers a new—networked—paradigm for political attitudes in foreign affairs, leveraging tools from network analysis to show that both camps make unrealistically strict assumptions about the directionality and uniformity of attitude structure. The chapter shows that specific policy attitudes play more central roles than existing theories give them credit for and that the topology of attitude networks varies substantially with individual characteristics like political sophistication.

How are Foreign Policy Attitudes Structured? A Hierarchical Model

1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 1099-1120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Hurwitz ◽  
Mark Peffley
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Hierarchical Model ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Belief Structure ◽  
Specific Policy ◽  
Mass Public ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Lisrel Model ◽  
Foreign Policy Attitudes

It has long been assumed that foreign-policy attitudes of the mass public are random, disorganized, and unconstrained if they exist at all. Further, foreign-policy thinking has not been found to be structured along standard ideological (liberal-conservative) lines, partisan lines, or class lines. We attempt to move the discussion from a question of whether foreign-policy attitudes are structured to a question of how they are structured. We propose and estimate (using a LISREL model) a hierarchically organized foreign-policy belief structure in which specific policy preferences are derived from postures (broad, abstract beliefs regarding appropriate general governmental strategies). These postures, in turn, are assumed to be constrained by a set of core values about the international community.

How government-controlled media shifts policy attitudes through framing

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Jennifer Pan ◽  
Zijie Shao ◽  
Yiqing Xu
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Authoritarian Regimes ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Composite Measures ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Tv News

Abstract Research shows that government-controlled media is an effective tool for authoritarian regimes to shape public opinion. Does government-controlled media remain effective when it is required to support changes in positions that autocrats take on issues? Existing theories do not provide a clear answer to this question, but we often observe authoritarian governments using government media to frame policies in new ways when significant changes in policy positions are required. By conducting an experiment that exposes respondents to government-controlled media—in the form of TV news segments—on issues where the regime substantially changed its policy positions, we find that by framing the same issue differently, government-controlled media moves respondents to adopt policy positions closer to the ones espoused by the regime regardless of individual predisposition. This result holds for domestic and foreign policy issues, for direct and composite measures of attitudes, and persists up to 48 hours after exposure.

In the Shadow of Conflict: How Emotions, Threat Perceptions and Victimization Influence Foreign Policy Attitudes

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
A. Kupatadze ◽  
T. Zeitzoff
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Exposure To Violence ◽  
Internally Displaced ◽  
Threat Perceptions ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Direct Exposure ◽  
Stratified Sample ◽  
Differential Exposure ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Foreign Policy Attitudes

AbstractWe investigate how emotions, threat perceptions and past violence influence foreign policy attitudes via a survey experiment in Georgia. Using a stratified sample across areas with differential exposure to the conflict and the presence of internally displaced persons, we randomly assign respondents to receive emotional primes about Russian aggression in the region. We find that exposure to violence, as well as simply being primed about past Russian aggression, both increase the perceived threat from Russia, and to a lesser extent anger towards Russia. Individuals who receive the primes are more supportive of a hardline foreign policy. In contrast, we find that exposure to violence does not have a direct effect on foreign policy attitudes, but increases hardline attitudes indirectly, through increased anger and threat. Taken together our results provide evidence that reminders of past violence have different effects than direct exposure to violence on foreign policy attitudes.

The Structure of Western European Attitudes Towards Atlantic Co-operation: Implications for the Western Alliance

1987 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 457-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew H. Ziegler
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The West ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Single Item ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Defence Spending ◽  
Western European ◽  
Cross National ◽  
Foreign Policy Attitudes

Previous studies of Western European foreign policy attitudes rely almost exclusively on single-item measures, such as support for defence spending, support for the new missiles in Europe, opinions on NATO, and so on. This article, using a multi-country data set, aggregates several survey items and explores the manner in which Europeans structure their attitudes towards one aspect of foreign policy: Atlantic co-operation. A factor analysis uncovers two underlying conceptual dimensions: military and non-military co-operation. These dimensions provide the axes to construct a four-fold typology of viewpoints, consisting of Atlanticists, Military Allies, Dovish Partners and Isolationists. Respondents are classified within this typology, and the European-wide and cross-national distributions of opinion are presented. The highest support for Atlantic co-operation is found among the West Germans, and the lowest is found among the French.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document