General Examination for the Minor in Political Psychology
September, 2009
Department of Political Science
Ohio State University
Instructions. Answer one question from Section A, one question from Section B, and two
questions from Section C, for a total of four questions.
Section A: Theory in Political Psychology
1. Several general models of social and political cognition use a "dual-mode" information
processing paradigm. What are the two modes that allegedly guide our thinking, and is
such a characterization useful for political analysis? First, give a general description of
the two modes of thinking. Next, describe two different areas of social or political
psychology where this conceptualization has been applied. Be sure to describe specific
political applications for both of your examples, even if the original theory was
developed in a nonpolitical domain. Evaluate the dual-mode approach. What are its
strengths and weaknesses for political analysis?
2. Fields of scientific inquiry should be definable. What, exactly, is political psychology?
Has the meaning of political psychology changed over time, and does it mean different
things to scholars working in different substantive domains? Is the diversity of political
psychological theories and methods a strength or weakness of the field?
Section B: Research Methods in Political Psychology
1. Discuss some of the key differences between a survey and an experiment. For each,
explain if it is a defining difference, or if it is a difference merely in common practice. Be
sure to isolate and explain what TRULY distinguishes these two methods. How might
they be combined? Finish with a discussion of some question, problem, or phenomenon
in political psychology that has been investigated with both methods. What are the
characteristic strengths that each method presents?
2. Self-interest is one motive that has received much attention as a potential wellspring for
political attitudes and behaviors. Other researchers have considered alternative motives,
such as self-expression, social adjustment, and ego-defense. Imagine that it was your
professional mission to convince the research community that one of these various
motives was the pre-eminent source of political attitudes and behavior. How would you
do it? What methodologies would you employ? Suggest a research strategy, highlighting
the strengths and weaknesses of at least two empirical approaches. Try to cover all major
aspects of data collection.
Section C: Topics in Political Psychology
1. Identity has become a popular concept in international relations. What does it mean and
how should we conceptualize it? What do we know about its relationship with intergroup conflict and cooperation? What additional insight do we gain in our understanding
of international relations by employing the psychological notion of social identity?
2. There is debate among specialists on international relations about the importance of
norms. Sometimes norms are connected to notions of justice and even conceptions of
honor and fairness. What do we know about the effect conceptions of fairness and honor
have on decision-making? Do these sorts of considerations matter much when material
interests are on the table? How could research in the realm of international relations
contribute to the research done in economics and psychology in this regard or vice versa?
3. It is commonplace in contemporary analyses of international relations to argue that
perceptions matter. Perceived threat is at the heart of neorealism. Many argue that
mental constructions of the situation or the representation of the problem shape choice
and the application of norms. Perceived power has become as widely recognized
explanatory variable as any notion of objective power. At the same time, how to
conceptualize cognition, identify it, and measure it in ways that link it to appraisal has
evolved considerably. What is the best way to think about and measure mindsets and
perception in the foreign policy realm?
4. Values are thought to underlie the opinions of citizens and the behavior of nations. It is
popular to attribute international conflict to a clash of values or even civilizations, and to
attribute a citizen's political opinions and actions to his or her basic values. What are
values, how have they been conceptualized, and how have they been studied empirically
in the comparative international or domestic politics realms? How should we decide
whether to attribute the opinions and behavior of individuals or states to values, value
conflict, or some other factor? Your answer may focus on mass politics, international
politics, or both.
5. With all the talk about the political impact of the mass media, one would assume that
scholars agree that the media are, collectively, a powerful political force. Yet, there are
many scholars who say the political impact of the mass media is “minimal” at best. What
are the major theories about the political influence of the mass media, and what is the
evidence? In answering this question, be sure to define framing, agenda setting, and
priming and distinguish them from persuasion. In what ways are framing, agenda setting,
and priming alike, and how are they different? In what ways do the psychological
processes that mediate these effects matter, both normatively and empirically?
6. Discuss the current status of the key theoretical models that have been put forth to
explain public opinion on racial issues. In your view, which theoretical perspective makes
the most valuable contribution to our understanding of public opinion about racial
matters? What do you see as the limitations of this research tradition?
7. In some versions of democratic theory, the citizen's political beliefs and behaviors are
said to be guided by an abstract political ideology. Much of contemporary empirical
research has not been kind to this theory. Review the evidence for and against the
assertion of “ideological innocence”. How do you resolve the conflicting claims? What
are some of the major alternatives to the theory of an ideologically sophisticated public?