Emotional Substrates of Counterhegemonic Policy: Evidence from the US and Japan

• In Event: Psychology and Diplomacy in International Relations

Abstract

Does the fear of domination lead decision-makers and publics to endorse hawkish policies against militarily rising powers in an anarchic environment? Revisiting the IR literature's traditional assumption that the “fear” of adverse power shifts supplies the behavioral microfoundation of interstate competition and conflict, this paper tests the role of specific negative emotions—anger and fear—as distinct affective bases for counterhegemonic foreign policies. Evidence from a nationally representative Japanese public opinion survey and a series of survey experiments conducted in both Japanese and U.S. settings shows that primarily fearful individuals will prefer to adopt passive or accommodative policies toward emergent threats of hegemony, while competitive or aggressive policies are favored when anger predominates. This paper is the first in the field of International Relations to theorize and test the role of specific emotions in conditioning foreign policy preferences vis-à-vis rising hegemonic threats. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for the promises and challenges of applying emotion-based behavioral theories to the study of international politics.

Authors

• D.G. Kim, University of California, San Diego

• Joshua Byun, The University of Chicago

• Nicholas Campbell-Seremetis, University of Chicago