The Behavioral Sciences in the Study of Conflict
No account of theoretical attempts to explain the phenomena of international politics can be thought even partially adequate unless it takes into account the behavioral approach to the subject. There are, of course, enormous differences of opinion about exactly what the term “behavioral” means with the result that supporters and opponents of the movement all too often are engaged in a dispute about the meaning of words with the end product consisting largely of a sophisticated muddle in which key issues are blurred or even lost altogether. Excessive claims are made—“all segments of political science can be treated behaviorally”1—which in turn call forth sharp rebuttals and denials.2 It is all great fun for the participants but when the smoke of battle has cleared away, exactly what has been learned?
KeywordsBehavioral Science Crisis Management World Politics International Politics Probability Preference
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Susan D. Jones and J. David Singer, Beyond Conjecture in International Politics (Itasca, Illinois, 1972).Google Scholar
- 7.This point is made with clarity and force by Herbert Kelman (ed.), International Behavior, a Social-Psychological Analysis (New York, 1965), P.31.Google Scholar
- 17.A classic book which contains all these methodological examples is Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among.Nations, 5th ed. (New York, 1973).Google Scholar
- 29.J. Cohen and M. Hansel, Risk and Gambling (New York, 1956). The authors suggest that the estimate of risk is directly proportionate to the level of fear.Google Scholar
- 30.Carey B. Joynt, “The Anatomy of Crisis,” The Year Book of World Affairs 1974 (London, 1974), pp. 15–22.Google Scholar
- 31.Coral Bell, The Convention of Crisis (London, 1971), p. 17.Google Scholar
- 37.Lee M. F. Ashley Montagu (ed.), Man and Aggression (London, 1968).Google Scholar
- B. Brown and J. Rubin, The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation (New York, 1973)Google Scholar
- Roger Fisher (ed.), International Conflict and Behavioral Science (New York, 1964), pp. 91–109.Google Scholar