| ID | 167665 |
| Title Proper | How Cognitive Frameworks Shape the American Approach to International Relations and Security Studies |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Christine Cheng, Alison Brettle ; Cheng, Christine ; Brettle, Alison |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Why do American perspectives of international relations (IR) continue to hold sway over an increasingly diverse discipline? What actually constitutes “Americanness” in IR? Who is considered “American” in IR? These are the central questions we explore in this essay. Drawing on cognitive and behavioral insights from social psychology, we argue that there is a distinct “American approach” to international relations and security studies and that this approach is a product of Western cognitive frames. We identify three factors that represent the American approach's hyper-Westernized framing: individualism, equality, and a preference for causal rather than contextual analysis, and a preference for egalitarianism. We argue that these are reinforced by two social identity processes—academic identity and national identity. The consequences of “being American” in IR and security studies suggest not only problems of attention and accuracy, but an inherent failure to appreciate that Western—and particularly, American—ways of seeing and valuing the world are not universal. |
| `In' analytical Note | Journal of Global security Studies Vol. 4, No.3; Jul 2019: p. 321–344 |
| Journal Source | Journal of Global security Studies Vol: 4 No 3 |
| Key Words | Social psychology ; Individualism ; Contextualism ; Cognitive Frames ; Academic Identity |