Attitudes Toward Nuclear Disarmament: International Comparisons of University Students and Activists

Larsen, Knud S.; Ommundsen, Reidar; Csepeli, György; Elder, Robert W.; Dann, Hanns-Dietrich; Long, Ed; Giles, H.Mcc.

doi:10.1177/002234338802500306

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the findings of these studies are taken together with the description of the individual activist's distinctive characteristics, there emerges an overall picture that ties in with ways of coping with stressful situations (McKenzie-Mohr, 1992;Boenke et al, 1993). More specifically, peace activists are more active politically than other members of the public (Fiske, Pratto & Pavelchak, 1983) and have a lower score on the authoritarianism scale (Larsen et al, 1988). Other correlates of peace activism reported by various studies include a greater sense of effectiveness regarding the possibility of reducing the nuclear threat and a shared belief in being able to prevent the outbreak of atomic war, but also a greater degree of anxiety and concern about these matters (Schatz & Fiske, 1992).…”

Section: Social Representations: Possible Contribution To Peace Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Peace, War and Conflict: Social Representations Shared by Peace Activists and Non-Activists

Sarrica¹,

Contarello

2004

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article suggests the use of social representations theory to provide a positive approach to peace research and a theoretical framework for understanding peace movements. Studying peace, war and conflict in this perspective enables exploration of these concepts as objects socially constructed, elaborated and shared by different groups. Four groups of activists are compared with people not belonging to any association, in order to investigate the existence of particular social representations of peace, war and conflict. As in previous cross-cultural research, an independent social representation of peace emerges only among activists. The social representation of war is also different in the two groups: nonactivists see it as frightening, whereas activists see ways of tackling it. The greatest difference between the two groups is in the social representation of conflict. Conflict is assimilated to war for non-activists, whereas activists represent it as more manageable and normal. The results support the idea of understanding peace activism as a particular form of coping -community coping -based on the group as a whole, rather than on individual capacity to manage problems. At a theoretical level, the article discusses the importance of linking social representations to practice and group identification. At a practical level, it suggests that support for pacifism will be only transient and superficial until these underlying differences in representations can be changed.* We wish to thank the editor and three anonymous referees from JPR for their constructive comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. We also wish to thank the individuals and the associations who cooperated in the study. A replication dataset can be found at

show abstract

Section: Social Representations: Possible Contribution To Peace Psychologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Peace, War and Conflict: Social Representations Shared by Peace Activists and Non-Activists

Sarrica¹,

Contarello

2004

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Empirical evidence, in fact, suggests rather strong links between mass foreign policy attitudes and perceptions of other nations, both in the United States (e.g., Feshbach and White 1986;Gamson and Modigliani 1969;Hurwitz and Peffley 1990) and abroad (e.g., Larsen et al 1988). Empirical evidence, in fact, suggests rather strong links between mass foreign policy attitudes and perceptions of other nations, both in the United States (e.g., Feshbach and White 1986;Gamson and Modigliani 1969;Hurwitz and Peffley 1990) and abroad (e.g., Larsen et al 1988).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

International Events and Foreign Policy Beliefs: Public Response to Changing Soviet-U.S. Relations

Peffley¹,

Hurwitz²

1992

American Journal of Political Science

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. How do citizens respond to dramatic foreign policy events, such as the recent changes in Soviet-U.S. relations, when a traditional foe exhibits strong signs of conciliatory behavior? Using panel data collected before and after the nuclear arms summits of 1987 and 1988, we explore both the consequences and antecedents of changing images of the Soviet Union. Having shown in a prior crosssectional study that Soviet images constrain policy attitudes in a static sense, the current panel study finds evidence of what Converse (1964) labeled dynamic constraint, in that softening perceptions of the Soviet Union appeared to precipitate more "dovish" policy attitudes. Our study also extends earlier work on enemy images in finding that some people are more resistant to change than others, notably political experts with extremely negative (i.e., "bad faith") initial images. The general importance of studying enemy images in the post-Cold War era is discussed.

show abstract

“…Opinions on the production and use of nuclear weapons, the progress of the arms race, and the chances of surviving a nuclear war have been frequent topics of surveys on attitudes toward nuclear weapons (Kramer et al, 1983). Research findings have generally indicated that disarmament activism is associated with antinuclear attitudes (Fiske et al, 1983; Fox & Schofield, 1989; Hamilton, Knox, Keilin, & Chavez, 1987; Larsen et al, 1988; Waldron, el al., 1988). In these studies, however, explicit definitions of attitudes are usually not provided.…”

Section: Antinuclear Attitudes and Activismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nuclear weapons concerns, agency beliefs, and social responsibility values in disarmament activism.

Horváth¹

1996

Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the roles of attitudes and beliefs in determining disarmament activism. It investigated the contributions of nuclear weapons concerns, perceptions of control, and social responsibility values to the determination of antinuclear activism beyond the effects of attitudes and attitude strength. It was found that concerns about the danger of nuclear weapons, perceptions of personal control, and social responsibility values accounted for a larger proportion of the variance of antinuclear activism than antinuclear attitudes and attitude strength combined. The findings were discussed in terms of the nature of attitudes and beliefs and the relevance of these factors to involvement in peace and other social issues in a global community.This study investigates the contributions of concerns with nuclear weapons, personal control beliefs, and social responsibility values to the determination of antinuclear activism beyond the effects of attitudes and attitude strength. It is proposed that global problems, such as the threat of nuclear war, are more likely to evoke a coping response in the individual to reduce the threat if they arouse both personal concerns as well as appeal to social values. In an increasingly interconnected world, motivation for disarmament activism can be expected to continue to be based on both personal concerns and social values. The principles examined in this study are likely to operate for other large social issues as well, such as the desire for global peace and the prevention of environmental destruction and world hunger. These problems are often daunting for the individual to tackle, yet some do despite the magnitude of the challenge. It is important to find out why they do so.

show abstract

Attitudes Toward Nuclear Disarmament: International Comparisons of University Students and Activists

Cited by 7 publications

References 11 publications

Peace, War and Conflict: Social Representations Shared by Peace Activists and Non-Activists

Peace, War and Conflict: Social Representations Shared by Peace Activists and Non-Activists

International Events and Foreign Policy Beliefs: Public Response to Changing Soviet-U.S. Relations

Nuclear weapons concerns, agency beliefs, and social responsibility values in disarmament activism.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About