Suchergebnisse

A growing literature in political science has pointed to the importance of heuristics in explaining citizens' political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. At the same time, the multidisciplinary research on heuristics in general has revealed that individuals seem to use heuristics sensibly—applying them (perhaps subconsciously) when they are likely to be helpful but not otherwise. We extend this multidisciplinary work to political behavior and present a general theory of contextual variation in political heuristic use applied to discover under what conditions (i.e., what political contexts) voters will use a partisanship heuristic to infer the legislative votes of their legislators in imperfectly disciplined voting contexts. More specifically, we predict that US constituents of loyal partisan senators will use the partisanship heuristic more often than constituents of less loyal senators. Our empirical analysis reveals strong support for our theory, contributing to our understanding of political heuristics in general and adding nuance to our understanding of the partisanship heuristic in particular.

The process of formation of electoral expectations in proportional representation systems is analysed in this article. Contrary to Duvergerian or electoral coordination theories, by using survey and in-depth elite interview data from Spain in the 1970s and 1980s, it is shown that strategic voting depends on heuristics (i.e. extrapolations from the previous election) rather than on rational expectations. The main implication is that strategic voting is possible in large districts.

Argues that war demands rules & it is possible to be ruthless & still observe them. Military history has proven that those who exercise restraint, proportionality, discrimination, & legitimacy have an advantage over those who don't. Augustine believed that the limiting principal in war is what makes peace possible & is the reason for ethical codes on the battlefield. It is maintained that it is possible to fight morally for a better kind of peace even if war remains entrenched in the international system for some time to come. Other matters discussed include how the post-modern condition is defined by risks, insecurities, & control problems; the impact of the heritage of classical Greece & Rome on today's situation; the fear that is programmed into the War on Terror; the reemergence of religion in the discourse of international politics which holds the promise of a more pluralistic dialogue but has also given rise to fundamentalist violence; & the importance of never justifying inhumane acts. J. Lindroth

Flawed arguments often recur in debates on U.S. security policy long after their weaknesses have been exposed. In this article I argue that certain political misconceptions and fallacies resist counterargument because they are reinforced by particular reasoning shortcuts known as "cognitive heuristics." Although heuristics save time and mental work, they can lead to error because they are based on violable assumptions. I discuss seven different cognitive heuristics and the particular security fallacies they perpetuate — from the domino theory to the idea that deterrence requires force matching. Finally, the scope and limitations of such psychological explanations will be discussed.