A Coauthorship Analysis of Internationalization in Political Psychology Through the Lens of ISPP Dissemination Activities

Abstract

Internationalization is a key aim of the International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP). This article uses bibliometric techniques to explore international collaborations in the Society's core activities, namely the journal Political Psychology and annual meetings. We explore how authors from different regions of the world are interconnected through coauthorship, using country information extracted from authors' affiliation and coded as Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) or non‐WEIRD. Study 1 analyzes coauthorship in the Society's journal Political Psychology from 1985–2014 (30 years), with 1151 authors from 42 countries and 1337 coauthorship ties between them. Study 2 mapped the coauthorship relationships for annual meetings for which documentation was available, eventually collecting data from 2006 to 2014 (9 years). In total, 4260 authors from 74 countries were represented, with 6884 collaborative ties. Annual meetings reflected more international collaboration than the journal on several dimensions, including a large internationally connected giant component of collaborating authors evident in annual meetings, but not the journals. In annual meetings, there were more collaborations between WEIRD and non‐WEIRD authors. However, even at annual meetings, deep internationalization involving non‐WEIRD authors was rare, and the activities of the Society primarily represent academics from WEIRD countries, particularly the United States.

Exploring the Context‐Sensitivity of Collective Action Motivations and the Mobilizing Role of Social Media: A Comparative Interview Study With Activists in Germany and Turkey

“…As shown above, however, we contend that there are substantial differences in the WEIRDness of Germany versus Turkey. Quayle et al (2020), for example, argue that despite being WEIRD, Turkey is a Muslim society, yet secular, therefore "awkward," representing "an edge-case that [does] not fit neatly into this dichotomy" (p. 9). We argue that Turkey is a non-Western, mostly Muslim, and autocratic context and therefore largely different from North American or Western European countries upon which collective-action literature has predominantly focused.…”

Political psychology of Southeast Asia

“…Nevertheless, Southeast Asian psychologists still need to conduct more research and disseminate their findings. One reason is that, as Quayle et al (2020) found, among 1151 authors who published their work in the journal Political Psychology between 1985 and 2014, authors from non-WEIRD countries were extremely rare. Moreover, to reduce the sampling bias, applying WEIRD research findings in non-WEIRD contexts becomes a growing need in psychological research (Brady et al, 2018;Newson et al, 2021).…”

Collective Action in Turkey: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go Next?

“…Numerous studies conducted on collective action have included participants from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies, such as the U.S., Holland, U.K., and Germany (Henrich et al, 2010). While Turkey has been classified as WEIRD or non-WEIRD in a variety of studies, recent research by Quayle et al (2020) suggests that Turkey should be considered under the "WEIRD" nation category. Even though Quayle et al (2020) claim that Turkey should be considered under the WEIRD category, we argue that Turkey is a partly non-western, mostly Muslim, and quasi-authoritarian context, and therefore it is sufficiently different from North American or Western European countries.…”

“…While Turkey has been classified as WEIRD or non-WEIRD in a variety of studies, recent research by Quayle et al (2020) suggests that Turkey should be considered under the "WEIRD" nation category. Even though Quayle et al (2020) claim that Turkey should be considered under the WEIRD category, we argue that Turkey is a partly non-western, mostly Muslim, and quasi-authoritarian context, and therefore it is sufficiently different from North American or Western European countries. Given that Turkey is no longer considered a full-fledged democracy (see, e.g., , we contend Turkey should be categorized under the "non-WEIRD" category and operationalize it as such throughout this book chapter.…”