Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:37:08.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

All Politics is Psychological: A Review of Political Psychology Syllabi

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2004

Deborah J. Schildkraut
Deborah J. Schildkraut
Affiliation:
Deborah J. Schildkraut is an assistant professor of political science at Tufts University ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Browsing the book exhibit room at any major political science conference these days, one notices what seems to be a bonanza of new edited volumes that examine political psychology as a discipline within political science or provide a variety of research essays aimed at introducing the reader to the subfield. Although psychology has always been an important component of political analysis, the prevalence of these books suggests a growing, or renewed, interest among political scientists in using insights from social and cognitive psychology to understand political phenomena—an interest that spurs these scholarly attempts to demarcate the conceptual and methodological structure of political psychology as a subfield. As Wendy Rahn, John Sullivan, and Thomas Rudolph have noted, this interest has emerged over the years partly in response to the rise of rational choice theory in political science. Regardless of the specific topic at hand, political psychology research often challenges the assumptions of rational choice models and adds nuance to the insights of rational choice theory. It offers rigorous empirical demonstrations of how systematic and predictable psychological processes affect whether traditional assumptions of rationality do or do not hold and, conversely, how the structure of political institutions affects psychological processes. These empirical critiques and modifications of rational choice theory make political psychology a compelling line of inquiry to scholars from a variety of methodological and substantive backgrounds.Deborah J. Schildkraut thanks Jennifer Hochschild, the staff at Perspectives on Politics, and three anonymous reviewers for their generous assistance.

Type
REVIEW ESSAY
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , December 2004 , pp. 807 - 819
Copyright
© 2004 American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Altemeyer, Bob. 1988. Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Altemeyer, Bob 1996. The authoritarian specter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Shanto Iyengar, Adam Simon, and Nicholas Valentino. 1994. Does attack advertising demobilize the electorate? American Political Science Review 88 (4): 829–38.Google Scholar
Barber, James. 1972. The presidential character: Predicting performance in the White House. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bobo, Lawrence. 1988. Group conflict, prejudice, and the paradox of contemporary racial attitudes. In Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy, ed. Phyllis Katz and Dalmar Taylor, 85–114. New York: Plenum.
Brewer, Marilynn. 1991. On the social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17 (5): 475–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip. 1964. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In Ideology and Discontent, ed. David Apter, 206–61. New York: Free Press.
Campbell, Angus, Philip Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes. 1976. The American voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dekker, Henk, Darina Malova, and Sander Hoogendoorn. 2003. Nationalism and its explanations. Political Psychology 24 (2): 345–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, Morton, and Catarina Kinnvall. 2002. What is political psychology? In Monroe 2002, 15–42.
Fischle, Mark. 2000. Mass response to the Lewinsky scandal: Motivated reasoning or Bayesian updating? Political Psychology 21 (1): 135–59.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan, and Shelley Taylor. 1991. Social cognition. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Forbes, H. D. 1997. Ethnic conflict: Commerce, culture, and the contact hypothesis. New Haven: Yale University Press.
George, Alexander, and Juliette George. 1956. Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House: A personality study. New York: J. Day.
Gibson, James, and Amanda Gouws. 2001. Making tolerance judgments: The effects of context, local and national. Journal of Politics 63 (4): 1067–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 1999. Why Americans hate welfare: Race, media, and the politics of antipoverty policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Greenstein, Fred. 1987. Personality and politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Greenstein, Fred 1992. Can personality and politics be studied systematically? Political Psychology 13 (1): 105–28.Google Scholar
Hermann, Margaret. 2002. Political psychology as a perspective in the study of politics. In Monroe 2002, 43–60.
Huddy, Leonie. 2001. From social to political identity: Implications for political psychology. Political Psychology 22 (1): 127–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Donald Kinder. 1987. News that matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Iyengar, Shanto, and William McGuire, eds. 1993. Explorations in political psychology. Durham: Duke University Press.
Janis, Irving. 1972. Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Kelman, Herbert, and V. Lee Hamilton. 1989. Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Kinder, Donald, and Thomas Palfrey. 1992. On behalf of an experimental political science. In Experimental foundations of political science, ed. Donald Kinder and Thomas Palfrey, 1–33. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kinder, Donald, and Lynn Sanders. 1996. Divided by color. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kressel, Neil. 1993. Political psychology: Classic and contemporary readings. New York: Paragon House.
Kressel, Neil 2002. Mass hate: The global rise of genocide and terror. New York: Westview Press.
Krosnick, Jon. 2002. Is political psychology sufficiently psychological? In Kuklinski 2002, 187–216.
Krosnick, Jon, and Kathleen McGraw. 2002. Psychological political science versus political psychology true to its name: A plea for balance. In Monroe 2002, 79–94.
Kuklinski, James, ed. 2001. Citizens and politics: Perspectives from political psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kuklinski, James, ed. 2002. Thinking about political psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lane, Robert. 1959. Political life: Why people get involved in politics. New York: Free Press.
Lane, Robert 1962. Political ideology: Why the American common man believes what he does. New York: Free Press.
Lane, Robert 1972. Political man. New York: Free Press.
Lane, Robert 2003. Rescuing political science from itself. In Sears, Huddy, and Jervis 2003, 755–93.
Lodge, Milton, and Ruth Hamill. 1986. A partisan schema for political information processing. American Political Science Review 80 (2): 505–20.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, Marco Steenbergen, and Shawn Brau. 1995. The responsive voter: Campaign information and the dynamics of candidate evaluation. American Political Science Review 89 (2): 309–26.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Charles Taber. 2000. Three steps toward a theory of motivated political reasoning. In Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality, ed. Arthur Lupia, Matthew McCubbins, and Samuel Popkin, 183–213. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lupia, Arthur, Matthew McCubbins, and Samuel Popkin. 2000. Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Marcus, George. 2003. Review of Thinking about political psychology, ed. James Kuklinski. Perspectives on Politics 1 (2): 411–12.Google Scholar
Marcus, George, and Michael MacKuen. 1993. Anxiety, enthusiasm, and the vote: The emotional underpinnings of learning and involvement during presidential campaigns. American Political Science Review 87 (3): 672–85.Google Scholar
Marcus, George, Russell Neuman, and Michael MacKuen. 2000. Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Marcus, George, John Sullivan, Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, and Sandra Wood. 1995. With malice toward some: How people make civil liberties judgments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mendelberg, Tali. 2001. The race card. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Milgram, Stanley. 1963. Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67 (4): 371–78.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick 1996. The heart of altruism: Perceptions of a common humanity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Monroe, Kristen Renwick, ed. 2002. Political psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mutz, Diana. 1992. Mass media and the depoliticization of personal experience. American Journal of Political Science 36 (2): 483–508.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana 1998. Impersonal influence: How perceptions of mass collectives affect political attitudes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Quattrone, George, and Amos Tversky. 1988. Contrasting rational and psychological analyses of political choice. American Political Science Review 82 (3): 719–36.Google Scholar
Rahn, Wendy, John Sullivan, and Thomas Rudolph. 2002. Political psychology and political science. In Kuklinski 2002, 155–86.
Renshon, Stanley, ed. 1995. The Clinton presidency: Campaigning, governing, and the psychology of leadership. Boulder: Westview Press.
Renshon, Stanley, and John Duckitt, eds. 2000. Political psychology: Cultural and cross-cultural foundations. New York: New York University Press.
Rothbart, Myron, and Oliver John. 1993. Intergroup relations and stereotype change: A social-cognitive analysis and some longitudinal findings. In Prejudice, politics, and the American dilemma, ed. Paul Sniderman, Philip Tetlock, and Edward Carmines, 32–59. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Sears, David. 1988. Symbolic racism. In Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy, ed. Phyllis Katz and Dalmas Taylor, 53–84. New York: Plenum.
Sears, David, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Jervis, eds. 2003. Oxford handbook of political psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sears, David, John Hetts, Jim Sidanius, and Lawrence Bobo. 2000. Race in American politics: Framing the debates. In Racialized politics: The debate about racism in America, ed. David Sears, Jim Sidanius, and Lawrence Bobo, 1–43. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shamir, Michal, and John Sullivan. 1983. The political context of tolerance: The United States and Israel. American Political Science Review 77 (4): 911–28.Google Scholar
Sidanius, Jim. 1993. The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. In Explorations in political psychology, ed. Shanto Iyengar and William McGuire, 183–219. Durham: Duke University Press.
Sidanius, Jim, and Felicia Pratto. 1999. Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, Herbert. 1985. Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science. American Political Science Review 79 (2): 293–304.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul, and Thomas Piazza. 1993. The scar of race. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Sniderman, Paul, Thomas Piazza, Philip Tetlock, and Ann Kendrick. 1991. The new racism. American Journal of Political Science 35 (2): 423–47.Google Scholar
Staub, Ervin. 1989. The roots of evil: The origins of genocide and other group violence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sullivan, John, Wendy Rahn, and Thomas Rudolph. 2002. The contours of political psychology: Situating research on political information processing. In Kuklinski 2002, 23–47.
Sullivan, John, George Marcus, Stanley Feldman, and James Piereson. 1981. The sources of political tolerance. American Political Science Review 75 (1): 92–106.Google Scholar
Taber, Charles. 2003. Information processing and public opinion. In Sears, Huddy, and Jervis 2003, 433–76.
Taber, Charles, Milton Lodge, and Jill Glathar. 2001. The motivated construction of political judgments. In Citizens and politics: Perspectives from political psychology, ed. James Kuklinski, 198–226. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, Henri, and John Turner. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Psychology of intergroup relations, ed. Stephen Worchel and William Austin, 7–24. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211 (4481): 453–58.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185 (4157): 1124–31.Google Scholar
Winter, David. 1987. Leader appeal, leader performance, and the motive profiles of leaders and followers: A study of American presidents and elections. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (1): 196–202.Google Scholar
Wyer, Robert, and Victor Ottati. 1993. Political information processing. In Explorations in political psychology, ed. Shanto Iyengar and William McGuire, 264–95. Durham: Duke University Press.