In this course, we will examine the intersections of politics, personality and social psychology, exploring the usefulness of psychological theories for conducting political analysis. We will investigate the role of the individual, of group processes, of political and social cognition, and of the political context in political decision-making by both leaders and the general public. We will address the following questions so as you do the assigned reading, keep them in the front of your mind:

*Personality and Political Leadership: Do the personalities of political leaders affect the type and quality of their decision-making? Are certain kinds of leaders more dangerous than others, what is the nature of this danger, and under what circumstances does this danger emerge? Does the electoral process systematically select certain types of people for leadership positions? If so, with what consequences?

*Group Processes and Elite Decision-making: What group processes interfere with good decision-making, and how can leaders adapt decision-making processes to minimize these effects? What is the role of a leader's personality in shaping and guiding group decision-making?

*Political Cognition and Elite Decision-Making: What role do individual differences in social and political perception play in elite decision-making? How do decision-makers employ historical analogies and broader metaphors when they decide the fate of nations? What is the importance of principles of information processing and cognition?

*Leadership Applications: How does one take a specific example of decision-making and apply concepts from individual and group psychology to that particular set of decisions? We will focus on the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Iranian Hostage Crisis, the Iran-Contra Affair, and the Gulf War.

*What is the role of authoritarianism and obedience in politics today? Is authoritarianism a personality predisposition? Is it a situationally induced set of attitudes and behaviors? How do authoritarians differ politically from non-authoritarians? What is the role of threat and anxiety in activating and shaping authoritarian attitudes and behavior?

*Are ordinary people quite capable of carrying out acts of terrible political aggression, or are certain types of people particularly predisposed to perpetrate atrocities?

*Self Interest and Altruism in Political Life: Is our country currently in a political era which overemphasizes individualism and selfish interests at the expense of a broader commitment to the common good and common interests? Do most citizens' political attitudes and actions reflect a narrow self -interest motivation? On the other hand, what is altruism? What are the causes and consequences of altruism, and what are its implications for politics? What are the factors that predispose individuals toward altruism? Are ordinary citizens capable of political altruism, or are only extraordinary people likely to engage in this type of extraordinary activity?

We will address these general questions in the context of specific political decisions and issues by examining several case studies, such as the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Iranian Hostage Crisis, the Gulf War, the My Lai massacre, and the Holocaust rescuers of Le Chambon and elsewhere.

The required texts include: James David Barber, The Presidential Character; Irving L. Janis, Groupthink; Yuen Foong Khong, Analogies at War; Alex Roberto Hybel, Power Over Rationality; Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter; and Kristen Renwick Monroe, The Heart of Altruism. All of these readings are also available on reserve in the library, in the event someone wishes to save money and do the reading in the library.

Grades will be based on four essays, a video journal, class participation, and a final examination. Each essay should be no more than 7 double spaced pages with 1 inch margins and 12 cpi. You are assigned to write on four (out of nine) essay questions whose due dates are noted below. (N.B., you should not write on more than three of the first six topics.) Your essays should be analytical and not merely descriptive. I have read these materials, and do not need to be reminded of what I have read already. Do not summarize the authors' arguments, but rather integrate, analyze, and critique them. Be prepared to discuss each essay topic on the due date, whether or not you have chosen to write about that particular topic. Each student should also keep a video journal, writing a couple of pages on your thoughts and feelings about the in-class and assigned videos. Be sure to relate the videos to concepts from the class. Video journals are due the last day of class.

Tuesday September 12 An Introduction to Political Psychology

Thursday September 14 Introduction (continued)

Video: "Groupthink"

Tuesday September 19 Psychological Approaches to Foreign Policy Decision-Making

Read: Barber, chs. 1-4, pp. 1-122; Khong, chs. 1-2, pp. 3-46; Janis, ch. 1, pp. 2-13.

Thursday September 21 Kennedy

Video: "At the Brink"

Tuesday September 26 JFK's Demise and Resurrection: The Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Vietnam

Read: Janis, chs. 2, 6, pp. 14-47, 132-158; Barber, ch. 11, pp. 341-385; Khong, ch. 4, pp. 71-96.

Watch video on reserve in library: "The Kennedys"

Essay #1: Discuss and evaluate the evidence from the readings and videos that supports, and that which undermines, both Barber and Janis in their analysis of John Kennedy. For example, if one wished to explain decision making during the Bay of Pigs planning, which theory proves accurate, and why? How about the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Thursday September 28 Johnson

Read: Mark Schlesinger and Richard R. Lau, "The Meaning and Measure of Policy Metaphors," American Political Science Review vol 94 (Sept. 2000), pp. 611-625.

Video: Vietnam coverage from "LBJ"

Tuesday October 3 LBJ's Demise: Vietnam

Read: Khong, chs. 3, 5-7, pp. 47-70, 97-205; Janis, ch. 5, pp. 97-130; review Barber on LBJ.

Essay #2: A rational action for the United States with regard to Vietnam might well have been either to avoid deep military involvement in the first place, or to cut our loses and pull out during the mid-1960s. Yet the Johnson Administration opted to pursue a policy that was clearly failing. Contrast and evaluate Khong's, Janis's, and Barber's theoretical explanations of why the Administration apparently acted irrationally, or at least ineffectively, in pursuing the policy it did.

Watch video on reserve in library: "LBJ: A Biography"

Thursday October 5 Nixon

Video: Watergate footage from "Nixon"

Tuesday October 10 RMN's Demise: Watergate

Read: Janis, ch. 9, pp. 198-241; Barber, ch. 5, pp. 123-168.

Essay #3: Evaluate Janis's concept of groupthink and Barber's concept of "active negative" character as applied to Watergate and Nixon's Presidency. Discuss how well each concept fits the "facts" and assess how useful each is in explaining Watergate. Do they contradict or support each other? Does one theory "work" significantly better than the other?

Watch video on reserve in library: "The Real Richard Nixon: Part 3," Nixon on Watergate

Thursday October 12 Carter's Demise: Iranian Hostage Crisis

Read: Rose McDermott, Risk-Taking in International Politics, chs. 2-3, pp. 15-76; Barber, ch. 8, pp. 224-265.

Essay #4: Arguably, the Iranian Hostage Crisis brought down the Carter presidency and opened the door for Ronald Reagan's ascendancy. According to McKermott, why did the Carter administration take the actions it did, despite the obvious and great political and other risks involved? Evaluate McDermott's "test" of prospect theory. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of her application of prospect theory to the decisions that were taken with regard to the Shah and the hostage crisis. Finally, assess the role played by Carter's character, as identified by Barber, in the two decisions analyzed by McDermott.

Video: "Coverup"

Tuesday Oct 17 RR's Non-Demise: The Iran-Contra Affair

Read: Paul 't Hart, Groupthink in Government, ch. 14, pp. 215-269; Barber, ch. 13, pp. 398-455; and Buchanan, The Citizen's Presidency, ch. 6, pp. 137-187.

Essay #5: Why did the Reagan administration so obviously contradict its own stated policy and "trade arms for hostages"? Contrast and compare two explanations for this decision: Hart's groupthink explanation, and one based on Barber's analysis of presidential character. Critique Barber's analysis based on Buchanan's alternative analysis of presidency-relevant character. Which explanation seems most plausible in this instance, and why?

Thursday October 19 Bush and the Gulf War

Read: Alex Roberto Hybel, Power Over Rationality, chs. 1-3, pp. 1-56; Barber, ch. 14, pp. 456-483.

Video: "To the Brink of War"

Tuesday October 24 Psychological Approaches to Foreign Policy Decision-Making: Conclusions

Read: Barber, ch. 15, pp. 484-492; Khong, chs. 8-9, pp. 209-264; Janis, chs. 8, 10-11, pp. 174-197, 242-276; Hybel, chs. 4-5, pp. 57-101.

Essay #6: Contrast and compare Hybel's cognitive explanation of the Gulf War decision making with Barber's character-based explanation. Speculate about whether or not there appeared to be any groupthink involved, and relate Hybel's explanation to Khong's theory of analogical reasoning.

Thursday October 26 The Face of Racism

Video: "Blood in the Face"

Tuesday October 31 Authoritarianism

Read Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, chs. 1-5, 10-11, pp. 6-145, 235-308.

Essay #7: Altemeyer describes right wing authoritarianism. Apply his theory and research to an analysis of the right-wing extremists in the video, "Blood in the Face." Which parts of his theory and empirical research fit and which do not fit these individuals? Does his theory work equally well for right-wing followers and right-wing leaders?

Thursday November 2 Obedience & My Lai

Read: Kelman & Hamilton, Crimes of Obedience, chs. 1-2, 5 pp. 1-52, 103-135; Janice Gibson and Mika Haritos-Fatouros, "The Education of a Torturer," Psychology Today, Nov. 1986, pp. 50-58.

Video: "Remember My Lai"

Tuesday November 7

Essay #8: Kelman and Hamilton's discussion of the My Lai Massacre, and the video, Remember My Lai, describe individuals who appear to have committed "crimes of obedience" and those who either resisted unjust orders or acted heroically in the face of these crimes. What factors seem to have made the difference? What distinguishes those who obeyed unjust authority, and those who did not obey? Did Altemeyer's RWA seem to play a role, or not?

Video: "Weapons of the Spirit"

Thursday November 9 Heroic Rescue: The Case of Le Chambon

Read: Francois Rochat and Andre Modigliani, "The Ordinary Quality of Resistance: From Milgram's Laboratory to the Village of Le Chambon," Journal of Social Issues 1995, pp. 195-210.

Guest: Nelly Trochme Hewett

Tuesday November 14 Altruism & Politics

Read: Monroe, Heart of Altruism, chs. 1-5, 7, 10-11, pp. 3-118, 137-160, 197-238.

Essay #9: Analyze the factors that led the villagers of Le Chambon to shelter Jews during World War II, and compare and contrast them to the factors that Monroe identifies that led individual Europeans to become rescuers. Le Chambon is an example of concerted group action, whereas the rescuers' actions were often more akin to individual actions in the face of group pressure not to help. What are the relevant differences and similarities in the two cases?

Final Examination: TBA