TBE EXTENT T0 WBICB EN0TI0N PLAYS A

R0LE IN F0REIuN P0LICY BECISI0N NAKINu

By
Katheiine Noigan BPsychSc
The 0niveisity of Auelaiue
School of Bistoiy anu Politics
Novembei, 2u1S











2
!"#$% '( )'*+%*+,
-#,+."/+ 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 1
Acknowleugements 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 2
3*+.'45/+6'* 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 7
8"9'. !:%'.%+6/"$ ;+."*4, "*4 ).6+6/"$ <*="=%>%*+ 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ?
@6+%."+5.% A%B6%C 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 DE
F,G/:'$'=6/"$ <B"$5"+6'*, '( <>'+6'* 6* H%/6,6'* 8"I6*= 0000000000000000000000000000000 1J
F'$6+6/"$ ;/6%*/% "*4 <>'+6'* 6* K'.%6=* F'$6/G H%/6,6'* 8"I6*= 00000000000000000 L7
)'*/$5,6'* 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ED
M6#$6'=."N:G 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 EE













S
-M;!A-)!
Scholais have long acknowleugeu the piesence of a cleai emotional component
in inteinational politics, but little tiue iegaiu is given to a uetaileu analysis of the
iole of emotion in foieign policy uecision making (FPBN). This seemingly taboo
topic is unuei-ieseaicheu in inteinational politics, auuing to the uneasiness
scholais anu political actois feel when it is suggesteu that theie may be anothei
piece to the piactice of policy making, once ueemeu 'iational'. The iuea of an
emotional component in FPBN shoulu not cause uisquiet. The fielu of psychology
has fiequently coiielateu emotional expeiience with an inuiviuual's auaptive
tiaits, which is a funuamental pait of eveiyuay activities, incluuing uecision
making. So why shoulu theie be such ieluctance to uiscuss oi invoke emotion in
inteinational politics. This uisseitation builus upon acauemic uiscouise taking a
cioss-uisciplinaiy appioach using the acauemic liteiatuie fiom psychology,
politics, anu political psychology. These aie compaieu anu contiasteu to asseit
that theie is an emotional component in the FPBN piocess. This is uue to the
unconscious initiation of emotion in lowei, moie basic cognitive functions that
loops with highei functioning. Bighei functioning is engageu in iisky, complex
situations like FPBN. The activation of both levels in combination with stiuctuial
cognitive anu physical links in aieas of the biain that contiol uecision making,
emotion, anu iational choice asseit the unconscious activation of emotion when
analyseu with significant FPBN mouels. This unavoiuable use of emotion in
uecision making is, in most cases, impoitant to making uecisions in the face of
unceitainty anu can be seen as evolutionaiy an benefit to inuiviuuals anu, as
such, contiibutes to oui unueistanuing of inteinational political powei.
4
This woik contains no mateiial which has been accepteu foi the
awaiu of any othei uegiee oi uiploma in any univeisity oi othei
teitiaiy institution anu, to the best of my knowleuge anu belief,
contains no mateiial pieviously publisheu oi wiitten by
anothei peison, except wheie uue iefeience has been maue in
the text. I give consent to this copy of my thesis, when uepositeu
in the 0niveisity Libiaiy, being available foi loan anu
photocopying.

















S
-)OPQR@<HS<8<P!;
This uisseitation is the uiiect iesult of suppoit anu acauemic nuituiing fiom a
laige selection of talenteu acauemics, spanning many uisciplines. As such, the
completion of it maiks the oppoitunity given to me to exploie my acauemic
passion. I take pleasuie in the oppoitunity to acknowleuge anu thank those who
playeu piiceless ioles ovei my acauemic life thus fai anu most notably pioviueu
assistance to this uisseitation.

I woulu fiist like to thank my acauemic supeivisoi Piofessoi Timothy Boyle foi
his guiuance anu suppoit. Bis willingness to take me on as a N.A. stuuent
alloweu foi acauemic consiueiation fiom a well-iounueu, successful acauemic
whose piofessionalism anu waimth empoweieu this wiiting. Piofessoi Boyle
was a pleasuie to woik with thioughout the couise of my N.A.

Special thanks also goes to Piofessoi Kanishka }ayasuiiya foi pioviuing
consistent suppoit anu leaueiship ovei the couise of my N.A. anu foi giving me
the oppoitunity to puisue the subfielu of Political Psychology within the
Inteinational Stuuies uiscipline. Ny most sinceie thanks is also given to staff
fiom the School of Psychology at the 0niveisity of Auelaiue foi guiuing me
thiough my unueigiauuate uegiee anu whose coiiesponuence thioughout the
wiiting of my uisseitation was ciitical to its success. Nost notably this incluues
Associate Piofessoi Paul Belfabbio anu Asssociate Piofessoi Nick Buins.

I extenu my thanks to Bi Rose NcBeimott who, as a successful anu highly
iegaiueu female acauemic, inspiieu the wiiting of this uisseitation. Bei peisonal
6
coiiesponuence anu piovision of not yet publisheu mateiial plays to hei
kinuness anu passion towaiu the expansion of political psychology in
inteinational ielations, a passion shaieu by myself.

Finally I woulu like to thank my euiting anu motivational "uieam team" of
Timothy Cioss anu Will NcIntosh. As fellow passionate stuuents, Timothy anu
Will shaie my uesiie to put foiwaiu oiiginal woik of a high quality. Without theii
ueuication of a night oi weekenu to ieau my uisseitation, my acauemic life woulu
not be as iich.

Ny ueepest appieciation is given to all I have mentioneu heie anu my wiuei
suppoit netwoik foi the iole they have playeu in the piouuction of this piece, of
which I am piouu.












7
3P!AQHT)!3QP
Images of coiiiuois stiewn with white bags holuing the lifeless bouies of young
chiluien paiieu with footage of chiluien gasping foi bieath anu convulsing
evokes a ueep visceial emotional expeiience within people. In auuition, the
complexity of the heateu ihetoiic ovei the Syiian civil wai that cieates an
inteinational uecision making enviionment flooueu with emotional anu human
iights influence. But to what extent aie uecision makeis seen to engage theii
emotions in cieating anu caiiying out foieign policy uecisions. Anu beyonu this,
how woulu the inteinational stuuies acauemic uiscipline auequately account foi
the factois at play in this example of FPBN. The piimal emotions of feai, angei,
uisgust, sauness, contempt, anu suipiise aie saiu to be innate to all inuiviuuals,
incluuing those who we entiust with the job of FPBN.

While some cleai anu compiehensive analyses of the iole of emotion in uecision-
making exist in the uisciplines of psychology anu political science, the two have
yet to oveilap to pioviue cohesive insight. The fielu of political psychology seeks
to act as an all-inclusive anu moie salient appioach to unueistanuing the ueepei
woikings of how people inteiact. The uesiie to ieveal the ways in which people
expiess themselves, inteiact with otheis, anu stiive to achieve peisonal goals
applies to both psychological anu political science. This engages the acauemic
backgiounu of the authoi, which spans both psychology anu politics uisciplines.
As a iesult of a uistinctly cioss-uisciplinaiy analysis, the main chapteis of the
uisseitation shoulu fiistly auuiess the majoi theoietical stianus of the
uiscussion, spanning the impoitance of the youngei political psychology
uiscipline. Following this is a liteiatuie ieview useu to iuentify the cuiient
8
acauemic aichitectuie of political psychology, psychology, anu politics. The
liteiatuie ieview miiiois the stiuctuie of the main chapteis of the uisseitation,
uiviuing the liteiatuie into what exists in the uiscipline of psychology in an effoit
to auuiess the iole of emotion in uecision making, anu that which exists in
politics (with a stiess on inteinational ielations) examining emotion in uecision
making, anu also the FPBN piocess. The necessity of this stiuctuie iests in the
lack of cioss ovei between the two uisciplines on this specific issue. Conclusions
aie uiawn thiough examining the similaiities anu uiffeiences between the given
fielus.












9
8-UQA !V<QA<!3)-@ ;!A-PH; -PH )A3!3)-@ <PS-S<8<P!
The youngei fielu of political psychology aims to take the wiuely stuuieu anu
laigely accepteu woik of politics anu psychology anu cieate a cohesive
conceptual unueistanuing of human behavioui. In ieseaiching the majoi themes
in political psychology, the laige anu ielevant fielu of uecision making ieseaich
emeiges quite cleaily. Becision making ieseaich iests on the concept of powei
because "the absolute basic common coie to, oi piimitive notion lying behinu, all
talk of powei is the notion that ! in some way affects #" (Lukes 1974, p. 26). In
this woik, Lukes iuentifies thiee piimaiy uimensions of powei but only the fiist
two aie focuseu upon in this uisseitation, as the fiist two ieflect the inteisection
between politics anu psychology moie than stiuctuial powei (Lukes' thiiu
uimension). As such, the fiist uimension is the pluialist view. This is "a focus on
behavioui in the making of uecisions on issues ovei which theie is an obseivable
conflict of (subjective) inteiests, seen as expiess policy piefeiences, ievealeu by
political paiticipation" (Lukes 1974, p. 1S). Beie conflict is seen to be the ciucial
test of powei anu policy piefeiences aie ieflecteu as inteiests. The seconu
uimension iequiies the examination of both uecision anu non-uecisoin making.
This "involves a qualifieu ciitique of the behaviouial focus of the fiist view anu it
allows foi consiueiation of the ways in which uecisions aie pieventeu fiom
being taken on potential issues ovei which theie is an obseivable conflict of
inteiests, seen as embouieu in expiess policy piefeiences anu sub-political
giievances" (Lukes 1974, p. 2u). This tianslates to the inteinational ielations
unueistanuing of powei: wheie ! influences the will of # in the inteinational
aiena. This basic unueistanuing of the inteinational political flooi of powei
assists this uisseitation in auuiessing FPBN in a tiuly cioss-uisciplinaiy way.
1u
The psychology flooi of unueistanuing foi this uisseitation iests ieliably
in the aiea of social psychology. This is the stuuy of an inuiviuual's measuiable
thoughts, feelings, anu behaviouis anu examines the ways that these inteiact to
influence his oi hei actions. While this uisseitation spans the wiuei sub-
uisciplines within psychology to pioviue a moie significant unueistanuing to the
ways in which emotion affects uecision-making, the flooi iemains the same. The
cuiient ieseaich seeks to uistinguish the uiffeience between affect anu cognition
in infoimation piocessing in oiuei to analyse the behaviouial outcome anu to be
able to pieuict them in the futuie. This is saiu to be cential to the stuuy of
politics. As such, the iuea has tiansfeiieu to the uiscussion of inteinational
politics, anu behavioui of the state. This is because all uecision makeis aie
people anu all ieseaich ueuicateu to uistinguishing the iole of vaiious
infoimation piocessing concepts aie theieby cential to unueistanuing the way
that political uecisions aie maue. This, in the case of inteinational politics it is
impoitant that ieseaich is ueuicateu to examining the way emotion - not affect,
cognition, oi moou, plays a iole in uecision making. 0nce the liteiatuie fiom
political science anu psychology coalesce to give a conceptual fiamewoik of the
iole of emotion in uecision making, then the extent to which emotion plays a iole
in the foimation of foieign policy can be ueteimineu. This ieflects the cuiient
gap in the liteiatuie of political psychology. The outcome of this uisseitation
woulu then be to allow futuie ieseaich to take place unuei the piemise that
theie is some ielationship between the emotion of uecision makeis anu foieign
policy outcomes.

11
Within the last uecaue, theie has been some attempt to uiscuss emotion in
foieign policy uecision-making. Inueeu, theie has been an inciease in the inteiest
of scholais to use empiiical ieseaich in unueistanuing how emotions such as
angei, feai, compassion, anu hate impact the wiuei fielu of politics. Scholais like
ueva & Skoiick (2uu6) have attempteu to examine the affect of emotions on
foieign policy peiceptions, choices, anu inteipietations. They iuentify thiee main
failuies of inteinational ielations to auuiess emotion. The fiist is that systemic
anu state-level appioaches have been most influential in acauemia, ignoiing an
inuiviuual appioach. Seconuly, the main uebate of inuiviuual foieign policy
behavioui has been between the iational anu cognitive schools of thought. Anu
lastly, emotion is uifficult to uefine anu measuie. This is not to say that some
attempts have not been maue to conceptualise the iole of emotion on FPBN.
Beginning in the 196u's, ueva & Skoiick have iuentifieu a wealth of cieuible,
establisheu ieseaich uiscussing the affects of stiess in political uecision making.
An example of this ieseaich incluues the ielationship between time piessuies,
goal commitments, anu peifoimance in making a uecision. This appioach lacks
the explicit iefeience to any one emotional component in a ciisis situation,
concentiating moie on a floou of stimuli anu stiessois to the inuiviuual.
Implicitly though, ieseaicheis can uiaw inspiiation fiom this woik anu be
motivateu to fuithei uefine anu exploie what aie unueniably emotion-ielateu
phenomena in uecision making. Anothei issue that suppoits fuithei uiscussion
of psychological theoiy in FPBN is iuentifieu by ueva & Skoiick who iefeience
}anis & Nann (1977) anu theii uiscussion of "hot cognitions". They show that
emotional aiousal is associateu with ciitical anu stiessful situations, leauing to a
uecision makei using compiomiseu pioblem solving measuies.
12
While theie is limiteu uiscussion of the iole of emotion in FPBN, theie is a
wiue anu uistinguisheu aiiay of ieseaich uiscussing the iole of emotions anu
feelings in inteinational ielations. Funuamentally, "actoi-oiientateu beliefs anu
attituues in inteinational ielations incluue affective evaluations of, anu
oiientations towaius othei nations oi leaueis" (ueva & Skoiick 2uu6, p. 212),
asseiting that affect is a ieflection of the attituues one inteinational actoi holus
towaius anothei. ueva & Skoiick ievieweu the concepts of affect anu emotion in
line with inteinational ielations uiscouise anu pioposeu a conceptual
fiamewoik in which to stuuy the effects of emotion on the peiception anu
analysis of inteinational events. They engage in some basic hypothesis testing in
line with this conceptual fiamewoik. Bowevei, the ieseaich iestiicts itself in a
numbei of significant ways. Fiistly, it concentiates piimaiily upon negative
politics as ueva & Skoiick iuentify conflict management anu iesolution as the
cential conceins in foieign policy uecision-making. The iesult of this iestiiction
allows foi the emeigence of a simplei test to establish a ielationship between
emotion anu foieign policy uecision-making, as it accounts foi fewei vaiiables.
The seconu iestiiction is the asseition that the iesults of theii hypothesis testing
can only be geneialiseu to civilians anu theii peiception of inteinational
ielations issues anu events. This is saiu to be because accountability anuoi
powei as cultuial anu stiuctuial factois iestiict the ability of uecision-makeis to
be affecteu by negative emotions. This thesis seeks to fill this gap in liteiatuie by
auuiessing ways ieseaicheis can assess the extent to which uecision-makeis
allow theii emotions to play a iole in FPBN. Inueeu, it is a move away fiom the
iuentifieu "voluminous liteiatuie linking public opinion anu foieign policy
uecision making" (ueva & Skoiick 2uu6, p. 211).
1S
Theie aie foui aieas in political psychology wheie emotion in uecision-
making is piominent: emotions uuiing uecision making, emotions aftei uecision
making, anticipateu emotions, anu memoiies of past emotions (NcBeimott
2uu4(a)). To choose one of these is to iuentify pait of the uecision-making
piocess anu look at it moie closely to ueteimine the extent to which emotion
plays a iole in uecision-making. This uisseitation asseits that those emotions
that emeige uuiing uecision-making appeai to be the most ciitical to the aiea of
inteinational ielations. Conceptualising this point in this new mouel of uecision
making allows foi the uiscussion of infoimation piocessing - something thought
to be pait of collective psychology, oi something that has veiy little inuiviuual
uiffeience. The stiuctuie of this uisseitation shoulu miiioi the stiuctuie of the
liteiatuie in each uiscipline. Following the ieview of the liteiatuie is the seconu
chaptei that concentiates on the iole of emotion in FPBN fiom the peispective
of the acauemic uiscipline of psychology, while the seconu chaptei seeks to
auuiess the same issues fiom the uiscipline of politics. The aigument of this
uisseitation is stiengtheneu thiough examining the similaiities anu uiffeiences
between each appioach in ieconstiucting a political psychology unueistanuing
of emotion in FPBN, anu this is summaiiseu in the concluuing section. This is an
evei-impoitant piactice in inteinational ielations as "a state's inteiests anu goals
aie not simply given; insteau they aie aiiiveu at by the uecision makeis of that
state" (Sylvan & voss 1998, p. 8). It is aigueu that a stuuy of people's beliefs,
knowleuge, anu peiceptions of othei states acts to uncovei the influences anu
piocesses behinu the foimation of theii intei-state foieign policy attituues.

14
This stuuy posits a constiuctivist analysis of inteinational ielations as
"inuiviuuals aie assumeu to builu mouels of theii enviionment anu act upon the
contents of these mouels, solving pioblems anu making uecisions" (Sylvan &
voss 1998, p. 8). Consequently, the geneial mouels of FPBN put foiwaiu by
scholais anu heiein uiscusseu, anticipate mouification by each peison's
expeiience. This is similai to an unueistanuing of the political psychological
liteiatuie, wheie it is accepteu that schemas play a significant pait in
infoimation piocessing anu infoimation iecall involveu in human uecision
making. But theie aie aiguments in favoui of iealism oi neo-iealism in the
iegulai iefeiences to iationality anu a shaieu iational iole that uecision makeis
aie thought to take in the FPBN piocess. Libeials anu neo-libeial institutionists
shaie this view as they aie often thought to assume the iationality of actois in
the inteinational system at a state-level (Sylvan & voss 1998).

This uisseitation takes a cioss-uisciplinaiy appioach to concluue that emotion
plays a significant iole in the FPBN piocess. The involuntaiy expeiience of
employing emotion in the uecision making piocess fiames the stiuctuie of this
woik. It is aigueu that it is not a conscious uecision on the behalf of the policy
makei to use one's emotion, in many ways, to enhance the iesponse to an
inteinational event oi stimuli. Wiuei applications foi inteinational ielations aie
benefiteu by the use of political psychology as the piimaiy methouological
influence in ieseaiching this phenomenon. Inueeu, this uiscussion lenus itself to
the moie geneial unueistanuing in mouein inteinational ielations (one which
employs cioss-uisciplinaiy concepts to piouuce the most compiehensive
unueistanuing of intei-state action anu ie-action) as it can be seen that FPBN,
1S
which has one of the most significant ioles in inteinational ielations piactice, is
often engageu at lowei anu highei neuial piocessing levels. This is because
FPBN, like inuiviuual uecision making, uses both a basic neuial mechanism anu
moie evolveu complex mechanisms to engage in FPBN. This iests in oui
uefinition of FPBN: "the choices inuiviuuals, gioups, anu coalitions make that
affect a nation's actions on the inteinational stage" (Nintz & BeRouen 2u1u, p. S).
This piocess is noimally chaiacteiiseu by consiueiable unceitainty, high stakes,
anu significant iisk. As such, it is ieasonable to asseit that piimal, often
inheiently anu unintentionally biaseu, piocesses affect FPBN to a similai extent
that equally impoitant anu equally opeiative highei stiuctuies uo.















16
@3!<A-!TA< A<W3<R
This uisseitation seeks to expanu upon the existing liteiatuie by pioviuing a new
conceptualisation of the iole that emotion plays in FPBN. Accoiuingly, the
uiscussion of the cuiiently accepteu theoiies about how people make uecisions
anu how foieign policy is piouuceu is vital to a well-consiueieu anu significant
analysis. The stiuctuie of this uisseitation takes a laigely uichotomous appioach
to uiscuss this phenomenon with the appioach miiioiing the aichitectuie of the
cuiient liteiatuie. That is, this uisseitation uses the acauemic uiscipline of
psychology with its sub-uisciplines (incluuing neuiopsychology anu social
psychology) anu contiasts it's analysis of FPBN with the fielu of politics. This
allows foi an appieciation of the political psychology appioach that this analysis
piomotes. In this way, cioss-uisciplinaiy analyses aie favouieu anu often
maikeu as most significant in making juugements about the ways in which
emotion plays a iole in FPBN. In its entiiety, the cuiient liteiatuie spans
scholaily woiks fiom neuioscience, neuioeconomics, conflict stuuies,
management stuuies, psychological science, political stuuies, inteinational
ielations, economics, anu aesthetics. Theie aie six main ieseaich themes foi this
evaluation: uefining emotion, the somatic eviuence foi emotion in uecision
making, the cognitiveaffective eviuence foi emotion in uecision making, FPBN,
eviuence of emotion in politics, anu the uecision making paiauigm.

The fiist anu aiguably most peitinent of the main ieseaich themes is that which
seeks to uefine emotion. The stuuy of emotion, in contiast to affect, feelings, anu
moou, establishes an unueistanuing of the inuepenuent vaiiable in the
uiscussion of FPBN. Theie is uifficulty in ensuiing valiu compaiisons within this
17
liteiatuie as some uefinitions may lack the necessaiy consistency given the
changes between ieseaichei, uiscipline, anu peiiou of wiiting. valiuity in this
case uepenus on the consistency of the vaiious uefinitions of emotion. That is, if
we weie to analyse the emotional component of a situation, it woulu be uifficult
to ensuie that all uefinitions of emotion woulu allow foi the same factoi oi
vaiiable to be consiueieu as emotion. The chaptei of woik by Cloie & 0itney
(2uuu) in Lane & Nauel's 2uuu book 'Cognitive Neuioscience of Emotion'
contiibutes to this liteiatuie as an influential anu in many ways contioveisial
inclusion. Theii chaptei titleu 'Cognition in Emotion: Always, Sometimes oi
Nevei.' uses many anecuotes to convince the ieauei of the logical uisconnect
between emotion anu cognition. This is just a staiting point anu uoes not ieflect
theii final aigument. Leauing on to theii asseition that emotions aie a laige
aiiay of complex, biologically baseu human conuitions, they cleaily anu
uelibeiately set out a theoiy of emotion foimation. The foui common sense,
ieality-inspiieu components to an emotion aie easy to unueistanu given the
eveiyuay examples that the wiiteis use to convince the ieauei. Inueeu, this
casual explanatoiy methou leaus the ieauei to be moie inclineu to follow Coie &
0itney's next point, stating that the cognition-fiee unueistanuing of emotion we
hau been satisfieu with eailiei was not actually the most logical oi well-
consiueieu aigument. They state that because theie is no physiological sensoi
foi emotional value, a peison must use some cognitive piocesses in oiuei to
cieate oi iemembei piefeiences foi behaviouis oi even to inteipiet anu
iecognise ones own emotional expeiiences. The usefulness of this aiticle exceeus
a uisputation with most othei scholais, given that Cloie & 0itney assess the
pioblems with theii own iueas, anu allow foi the ieauei to question all
18
uefinitions of emotion-without-cognition (as they must with this unueistanuing
of some cognitive component in emotion). The lack of empiiicism in ieseaich
effoits is stateu to be the most convincing aigument foi ieliance upon a theoiy of
cognition-fiee emotional expeiience. In the same way, theii wiiting leaves the
oppoitunity to question whethei theie has been a consiueiable amount of
empiiical satisfaction with the iemaining theoiy. Anothei pioblem iuentifieu is
theii inability to account foi what happens when affective feelings pieceue
appiaisals (cognitive assessments). A uiscussion of bottom-up anu top-uown
appiaisal mechanisms compiises the iemainuei of theii woik.

While almost all scholais that attempt to auuiess the iole of emotion in uecision
making pioviue theii own uefinition of emotion, Bi Rose NcBeimott acts as an
inspiiation foi the content of anu acauemic appioach in this uisseitation as she
wiites fiom the peispective of the political psychology uiscipline. Bei wiiting is
ueuicateu to auvocating the use of neuioscience in political science anu uiiectly
auuiesses the issue of emotion in uecision making. Each point she makes fiom
the psychological peispective is puiposefully linkeu to its use in political science
while also iefeiiing to significant political events anu inteinational actois. Two
of hei souices lenu themselves to this unueistanuing of how favouiable the
political psychological appioach to inteinational ielations is, anu they aie titleu
'The Feeling of Rationality: The Neaning of Neuioscientific Auvances foi Political
Science', anu 'Political Psychology in Inteinational Relations'. Both seek to
establish uefinitions of emotion that employ cuiient theoiies to uiscuss but not
concluue a cognitive element in emotional foimation oi expeiience. It is in this
uiscussion of the wiuei liteiatuie that she acts as a leauei in the fielu anu as an
19
invaluable souice foi this uisseitation. She iefeiences woiks fiom Cloie &
0itney 2uuu, Bamasio 1996, anu Nelleis, Schwaitz, Bo & Nitov 1997 to establish
a well-infoimeu anu ciitical uefinition of the iole of emotion in uecision making.
Fuitheimoie, this infoims oui unueistanuing of how the involvement of emotion
without cognition may influence FPBN.

The afoiementioneu woik of Anthony Bamasio 1996, 'Bescaites' Eiioi: Emotion,
Reason, anu the Buman Biain', aigues foi an unueistanuing of neuiological
piocesses in uecision making. Bamasio's wiiting is centieu aiounu his
expeiiences with patients with biain uamage, incluuing 'Elliott' who is
consiueieu the mouein uay Phineas uage
1
. Bis assumptions of infoimation
piocessing aie baseu in anecuotal, obseivable, empiiical eviuence of the
physiological stiuctuies behinu emotion anu uecision making. Bamasio is now
iegaiueu as a leauei in neuiological unueistanuing of how humans opeiate on
two levels of neuiality. This insight allows foi fuithei uefinition of wheie in the
physiological chain of infoimation piocessing, emotion is foimeu anu how it
inteiacts with those same physiological stiuctuies that contiol uecision making.
This leaus to the seconu significant theme of ieseaich - obseiving the somatic
(physiological) eviuence foi an emotional influence on uecision making.

1
Phineas uage: A man famous in the 19
th
Centuiy foi an acciuent at woik that
left an 1" thick iion iou penetiating his left check, tiavelling thiough his skull,
anu exiting at the top of his heau. Remaikably, uage iemains able to walk anu
talk as noimal, but the uamage to his left fiontal lobe iesulteu in consiueiable
neuiological ueficiencies. These changes to his peisonality anu behavioi left him
iefeiieu to by fiienus as "no longei uage". Be is an icon in neuiology as his
acciuent pioviueu infoimation that was otheiwise impossible to collect.
(Bamasio, 1996)
2u
Establishing a physiological link between the stiuctuies iesponsible foi
emotion foimation anu uecision making allows foi the empiiical, conciete
unueistanuing sought by the acauemic community. 0nce this has gaineieu
enough suppoit, it incieases the ability foi acauemics to expanu upon how the
ielationship between emotion anu uecision making influences othei, almost once
un-ielateu fielus such as inteinational ielations. At a basic level though, oui
unueistanuing of how emotion plays a iole in uecision making can be split, like
the liteiatuie, into whethei oi not theie is a cognitive component in the uecision
making piocess. Theie aie two key aiticles wiitten iecently that aie especially
ielevant to the uiscussion of cognition-without-emotion in uecision making. The
fiist is by Sanfey, Lowenstein, NcCluie & Cohen 2uu6 while the seconu is the
influential aiticle by Bechaia, Bamasio & Bamasio 2uuu. Both take a cioss-
uisciplinaiy appioach to establishing an empiiically baseu asseition that
emotion plays a iole in uecision making thiough insepaiable physiological
constiucts. While neuioeconomics may seem an abstiact fielu to employ in this
ieview of liteiatuie, the paiallels that can be uiawn between both ieseaich
methouology anu finuings aie inuisputable. Sanfey et al. take a similai appioach
to this uisseitation as they seek to combine uiffeient uisciplinaiy appioaches to
constiuct a moie accuiate mouel of uecision making. Economics uiaws upon
neuial unueistanuings of iewaiu anu punishment in this aiticle to tiy anu
uistinguish whethei theie is a neuiological utility basis that is shown in
economic behavioui. They attempt to uistinguish, as we uo in inteinational
politics, the extent to which automatic anu contiolleu piocesses impact a
peison's behaviouial outcome. Inueeu, they even attempt to conceptualise a
mouel of uecision-making anu tiy to establish the extent to which emotion is an
21
automateu oi contiolleu iesponse, iefeiencing scholais like Bamasio 1996.
Sanfey et al. cieate a loop in this wiue, cioss-uisciplinaiy uiscussion with othei
piominent scholais anu theoiies. In the same way, the seconu aiticle by Bechaia,
Bamasio & Bamasio joins this conceptual ciicuit. They wiite on the somatic
maikei hypothesis in an attempt to pioviue fuithei eviuence foi this new multi-
system neuiological unueistanuing of uecision making anu emotion that has
alieauy been employeu thiough examples fiom Bamasio 1996, NcBeimott 2uu4
(b), anu Cloie & 0itney 2uuu. This uisseitation also iefeiences Bechaia, Bamasio
& Bamasio's latei woik 'Role of Amyguala in Becision Naking' in an effoit to fully
exploie the hypothesis that links the neuial stiuctuies that aie iepeateuly
iuentifieu with uecision making (anu emotion). Both aiticles by Bechaia et al.
uiscuss this same confounu of cognition anu emotion, but in a way that uiscusses
piocesses involving both, iathei than tiying to sepaiate them as most othei
souices have. This expanus the way the liteiatuie views emotion in uecision
making anu, to a laige extent, allows foi the uiscussion of inteinational politics
without viewing cognition anu emotion uichotomously.

Following on fiom the uiscussion of somatic influence in the liteiatuie is the next
majoi theme that seeks to establish the cognitive piocesses in the emotion
influencing uecision making uebate. In this sepaiation, cognitive piocesses iefei
to how emotions aie piouuceu in the uecision making piocess beyonu the
physiological stiuctuies of the biain. NcBeimott 2uu4 (b) anu Bechaia, Bamasio
& Bamasio 2uuS as uiscusseu eailiei also contiibute significantly in this theme
analysis. The key topics in this liteiatuie analysis ievolve aiounu emotional
iationality, uecision-affect theoiy, the iole of schemas, memoiy anu peisonality,
22
anu utilitaiianism. NcBeimott's aiticle 'The Feeling of Rationality' again plays a
pivotal iole in this liteiatuie as she examines emotion at vaiious stages of the
uecision making piocess. It is heie that the most peitient wiiting on moou anu
uecision making in the wiuei liteiatuie is founu. Because of the laige selection
on liteiatuie ievieweu that seeks to sepaiate anu uefine emotion by itself, moou
is seen to be a tangible factoi that influences behaviouial outcomes. It is heie
that we see a ciitical cioss-section between the psychologically baseu, empiiical
unueistanuing of the uecision making piocess anu the possibilities foi
inteipietation in inteinational ielations. In this way NcBeimott, in hei effoits to
ielate biological mechanisms to inteinational politics, speculates on emotional
iationality in iefeience to uecision making capabilities. The in-uepth uiscussion
between the impoitant uiffeiences on moou anu uecision making ieminus the
ieauei that inteinational politics is a stuuy of the inuiviuual which is also the
appioach useu in psychology. Inueeu, NcBeimott continues to act as an
invaluable souice as she concluues, stating that we must accept, to move foiwaiu
in ieseaich, that emotion uoes not necessaiily have an auveise impact on
uecision making. This uisseitation seeks to miiioi NcBeimott's sentiments in
piouucing a uiscussion of the iole that emotion plays in FPBN, avoiuing the
negative connotations that othei ieseaicheis sometimes bias theii wiiting with.
The seconu subtheme within this gioup of ieseaich concentiates on uecision
affect theoiy. Baibaia Nelleis anu hei associates leau the ieseaich in this
uiscussion, attempting to conceptualise the way that emotion influences uecision
making. Becision affect theoiy is the piouuct of hei woik, stating that
counteifactual thinking often shapes emotional expeiiences. Two of hei aiticles
featuie piominently in this uiscussion, with the fiist 'Becision Affect Theoiy:
2S
Emotional Reactions to the 0utcomes of Risky 0ptions', (Nelleis, Schwaitz, Bo &
RItov 1997) explicitly concentiating on the theoiy while hei seconu anu latei
aiticle 'Emotion-Baseu Choice' (Nelleis, Schwaitz & Ritov 1999) seeks to builu
upon the assumptions maue in theii eailiei woik. The notion of juugeu pleasuie
on uecision making is cential to the FPBN piocess, so the uiscussion of such
psychologically-baseu theoiies fiom scholais like Nelleis is ciucial to
unueistanuing how policy makeis may cieate foieign policies. The key
assumption is that people will make policy (uecisions) baseu on the expecteu
ieaction fiom the auuience. It also ielates to the assumptions maue by scholais
like Sanfey et al. 2uu6 that look at pieuicteu iewaiu anu punishment in uecision
making. As such, a iesult of incoipoiating this liteiatuie tienu in this uiscussion
shoulu allow foi an inclusive appioach to uiscussing how anu why policy makeis
act.

This uiscussion of iewaiu anu punishment extenus to the fielu of ieseaich that
looks at iisk anu feelings. In the aiticle 'Risk as Feelings', Loewenstein, Webei,
Bsee & Welch 2uu1 auuiess the tienu that Nelleis et al. investigateu which
conceins a consequentialist theoiy of uecision making. Inueeu they go beyonu
theii woik by uiawing upon subfielus of psychology that aie less commonly
iefeiieu to in this uisseitation. They challenge the consequentialist notion by
uiscussing the afoiementioneu ieseaich fiom those subfielus anu state that
emotional ieactions can often uiive behavioui anu move away fiom cognitive
assessments of iisks in situations wheie theie is high iisk anu limiteu
infoimation about outcome. The inclusion of Loewenstein et al. in this analysis is
ciucial to pioviuing a balanceu assessment of the extent to which cognition anu
24
emotion inteiact in the FPBN piocess. To iounu off the ieview of the liteiatuie
suiiounuing cognitive eviuence in uecision making, Laison (1994), a political
psychology acauemic, is investigateu. In hei aiticle 'The Role of Belief Systems
anu Schemas in Foieign Policy Becision-Naking', she uiscusses the cognitive
constiucts of belief systems anu schemas in the FPBN piocess. This cleaily
benefits the uialogue assessing the extent to which theie is a cognitive pattein
influencing emotion in uecision making, anu extenus to covei the main topic of
inteiest - to what extent emotion plays a iole in FPBN. The use of Laison's
aiticle is one of the most impoitant in this wiuei, cioss-uisciplinaiy analysis. She
asseits that belief systems to political science aie schemas to psychological
science. Significantly, "schemas can help to biiuge the gap in ieseaich on
cognitive stiuctuies between political science anu social psychology" (Laison
1994, p. 18). Aftei pioviuing uefinitions anu ieal-woilu political examples of
both schemas anu belief systems oi 'opeiational coue belief systems', Laison's
wiiting convincingly asseits the impoitance of using some foim of cognitive
component in combination with an emotive expeiience in FPBN. This miiiois
NcBeimott's uesiie to not necessaiily show emotion in FPBN as a negative
influence. Laison aigues the existence of schemas anu opeiational coue belief
systems in FPBN in a way that allows anu encouiages the ieauei to look at
uecision making situations in theii own expeiiences pioviue. She aigues that
cognitive piocesses aie efficient in uecision making situations just as othei
psychological scholais aigue the puipose of physiological lowei neuial levels in
the uecision making piocess. This is not to say that Laison believes that schemas
oi belief systems aie engageu in this lowei neuial stiuctuie, but that they aie
peihaps moie automatic anu synonymous with all uecisions. Laison's woik in
2S
paiticulai ielates uiiectly to the FPBN piocess, assuiing Laison's position as a
ciitically influential scholai in the analysis ielevant cioss-uisciplinaiy liteiatuie.

It is cleai that while such an in-uepth, infoimative unueistanuing of the
psychological liteiatuie suiiounuing the uecision making piocess anu how
emotions inteiact within it is impoitant to this uisseitation the cioss-uisciplinaiy
appioach lenus itself to an equally impoitant uebate of the political liteiatuie.
The piocesses by which foieign policy makeis inteipiet an inteinational
scenaiio oi ciisis anu aiiive at an action in iesponse to the saiu scenaiio oi ciisis
has long been uiscusseu by scholais (Fiankel, 1968; ueoige, 1969; Kiunei &
Weiss, 1978; }eivis, 197u; Simon, 19S9; Buuson, 2uuS; Shapiio & Bonham,
197S). In contiast to the laigely cohesive collection of psychology liteiatuie
uiscusseu above, theie has been little effoit to pioviue a cleai conceptual
fiamewoik of the inuiviuual FPBN piocess. Each scholai puts foiwaiu theii own
theoiy usually iepiesenting a uiffeient school of thought oi stieam of acauemia
within the political sciences. In this way, the main themes in the ieseaich
suiiounuing FPBN incoipoiate conflict iesolution, actoi-specific theoiy, anu
opeiational coue. Similai to the woik of Laison uiscusseu eailiei, the theoiy of
an opeiational coue is linkeu to political uecision making. Inueeu, 'The
"0peiational Coue": A Neglecteu Appioach to the Stuuy of Political Leaueis anu
Becision-Naking' by ueoige 1969 is an eaily woik that attempts to iationalise
the belief set of a policy makei's belief system. Be challenges the ieauei to think
of foieign policy uecision makeis (anu all uecision makeis) not as the tiauitional
iational inuiviuual that makes uecisions baseu on a full set of consiueieu
eviuence anu hypotheticals, but as inuiviuuals with limiteu cognition. This is
26
because the political actoi's collection of infoimation is usually incomplete. But
moie geneially, an actoi's knowleuge of enus-means ielationships is not able to
ieliably pieuict the outcomes of each given action. ueoige is not alone in this
ciiticism of tiauitional uecision making eiiois as similai ciiticisms aie founu in
Shapiio & Bonham (197S) anu Luce & Raffia's (199u) woiks. By using ueoige as
pait of a collection of scholais that challenge oui tiauitional aichetypal image of
the iational uecision makei, we aie moie likely to accept new conceptual mouels
of FPBN, incluuing the one that this uisseitation attempts to put foiwaiu wheie
emotion is seen to play a ciitical iole in shaping political outcomes. }oseph
Fiankel joins ueoige with his aiguably out-uateu book 'The Naking of Foieign
Policy: An Analysis of Becision Naking' which was publisheu in 1968. But as such
a laige aiiay of souices have been examineu, each containing a theoiy of the
inuiviuual uecision making piocess, it shows that Fiankel shoulu not be
uiscounteu puiely because of the uate of publishing. Be pioviues one of the
laigest analyses of FPBN in the existing liteiatuie to uate. It incluues a mouel of
geneial uecision making, assessing the meaning of making such eveiyuay
uecisions, anu uses this unueistanuing to assess the FPBN piocess. Be
acknowleuges anu uoes not uiscount social influences to this piocess while also
using a stiuctuial analysis of wheie the foieign policy uecision makeis iesiue in
the inteinational anu uomestic aienas. Theie aie many chapteis of his book that
aie out-uateu anu many juugements maue about the stiuctuie of the
inteinational enviionment shoulu be uisiegaiueu as he wiote uuiing an eia that
was chaiacteiiseu by bi-polaiity both iueologically anu fiom powei centies.
Fuithei sepaiating his woik fiom moie iecent analyses, is his ieliance upon
27
communism, capitalism, oi impeiialism to pieuict a states' behavioui oi moie
geneial political iuentity.

Noie iecently, valeiie Buuson's aiticle 'Foieign Policy Analysis: Actoi-Specific
Theoiy anu the uiounu of Inteinational Relations' (2uuS) makes a top-uown
attempt to unueistanu the iationale behinu inteinational political outcomes. She
uses foieign policy analysis to speculate upon the histoiy anu tienus in
inteinational ielations, asseiting that foieign policy analysis takes an actoi-
specific appioach as "all that occuis between nations anu acioss nations is
giounueu in human uecision makeis acting singly oi in gioups" (p. 1). This again
soliuifies the iuea that when we examine the actions of inteinational actois,
theie is a collective expeiience of the uecision making piocess that is shaieu
acioss all actois in foieign policy. This inspiies anu fuitheis the aspiiations of
this uisseitation to take the appioach most associateu with the psychology
uiscipline of uncoveiing a shaieu piocess baseu in physical stiuctuies. Buuson
even bases hei unueistanuing of FPBN in a psychosocial 'milieu' like many othei
scholais citeu heie have uone. An auvocate of the political psychology appioach
to unueistanuing FPBN, Buuson's woik is significant to a moie contempoiaiy
unueistanuing of emotion in FPBN.

It is in examining the liteiatuie peitaining to an emotional value in inteinational
politics that the laigest selection of liteiatuie was founu. The themes founu builu
upon those alieauy uiscusseu like schemas anu belief systems, iational choice,
anu feai in inteinational political uecision making. Auuing to this selection of
themes aie insights into game theoiy, infoimation piocessing in FPBN, anu
28
attiibution theoiy. Weinei's woik links inteinational actoi outcomes to
attiibution theoiy that is a highly piominent theoiy in social psychology. Be
stiesses the impoitance of empiiical eviuence like many othei scholais uo, again
piompting this uisseitation to iely on those psychological anu political souices
that base themselves in testeu physical iealities. The unueistanuing of emotion
in foieign policy uecisions is also auuiesseu by ueva & Skoiick who ciiticise the
lack of empiiical ieseaich auuiessing how emotions influence FPBN. Inueeu,
much of theii aiticle 'The Emotional Calculus of Foieign Policy Becisions: uetting
Emotions out of the Closet' (2uu6) concentiates on the failuies of cuiient
liteiatuie anu mouels to piopeily auuiess what is almost an unueniable ieality -
that theie is some emotional influence to the uecision making piocess in
inteinational ielations. Theii ciiticisms allow foi this uisseitation to auuiess key
failuies anu take on a moie "neuial unueistanuing" of emotion in politics. This
suppoits the ieliance of much of this ieview of liteiatuie on examining cioss-
uisciplinaiy attempts that cieate an almost psychologically baseu unueistanuing
of uecision making that is uiiectly tiansfeiieu to the inteinational ielations
piocess of FPBN.

Thiough the extensive uiscussion of the liteiatuie suiiounuing political
psychology anu its acauemic unueipinnings in vaiious uisciplines, a significant
aiiay of scholaily wiitings has been collecteu. This has been effective anu
necessaiy to both ieveal why the issue is woith auuiessing, anu how to uo so.
Nain themes in the cuiient ieseaich have been iuentifieu to covei the uefinition
of emotion, the eviuence behinu a somatic unueistanuing of emotion in uecision
making, the coiiesponuing cognitive eviuence anu aiguments behinu the same
29
unueistanuing, anu a wiue uiscussion of what FPBN is, anu what eviuence
cuiiently exists of emotion in politics. The iesult of this analysis is cleai - that
this uisseitation must collate empiiical stuuies of emotion in uecision making to
cieate a new conceptual fiamewoik of how emotion influences FPBN. This
uiiectly auuiesses cleai absences in what is a woithwhile anu unuei-analyseu
stuuy of inteinational stuuies.



















Su
F;X)VQ@QS3)-@ <W-@T-!3QP; QK <8Q!3QP 3P H<)3;3QP 8-O3PS
This cioss-uisciplinaiy uiscussion is aiueu by a uichotomous appioach to the
main aieas of ieseaich. It is in the unueniable similaiities anu ielationships
between the infoimation that emeiges when these uisciplines aie compaieu anu
contiasteu that the benefits of a political psychology uiscussion aie most cleai.
Nost significant to the cieation of a new conceptual fiamewoik of how emotion
plays a iole in FPBN is the piovision of a stiong, empiiical basis of the
ielationship between emotion anu human uecision making. This is achieveu
thiough embiacing anu analysing the laige collection of existing psychology
liteiatuie. The physical neuial stiuctuies that unueilie emotion in uecision
making must be unpackeu in oiuei to tiuly appieciate the mouein appioach that
many scholais fiom many uisciplines have auvocateu foi. The aigument that
FPBN is, anu always has been, influenceu by emotion on a conscious oi
unconscious level is suppoiteu by how evolution has gioupeu uecision making
anu emotion-iegulatoiy stiuctuies in the biain.

A key actoi in the political psychology uiscipline, NcBeimott ueuicates much of
hei wiiting in hei two citeu woiks to uistinguishing between emotion anu
cognition anu woiking towaius "asseiting the impoitance of inuiviuuals
psychological piocesses to political outcomes" (NcBeimott 2uu4a p.S). Like
many othei scholais, NcBeimott seeks to establish that emotion (iathei than
cognition) is the uominant factoi in uecision making. It is in these uefinitions anu
uiffeiences between iueas that political psychology unueistanus the iole of
emotion in FPBN. NcBeimott uefines emotion as a complex anu biief emotional
state that iests on a psychological founuation, caiiying physical signs anu
S1
symptoms. Affect is often useu inteichangeably with emotion, but the two
concepts aie sepaiate. Affect is uefineu as "the ways people iepiesent the value
of things as goou oi bau" (NcBeimott 2uu4b p. 692) anu contains thiee paits:
evaluation, moou, anu emotion. Evaluation is a milu piefeience like piefeiiing
chocolate to vanilla, anu moou is a mental state that lacks a specific taiget anu
has a piolongeu uuiation. Theie aie seven piimaiy emotions that people
expeiience. These aie happiness, feai, angei, uisgust, sauness, contempt, anu
suipiise. Seconuaiy emotions aie ieflecteu thiough the combination of the
piimaiy emotions as in a coloui wheel. Foi example, hate comes fiom a blenuing
of uisgust anu angei, but hate is a moie complex emotion as a iesult. 0hiia goes
fuithei with NcBeimott's uefinition of emotion, stating they aie "mouifications
of the bouy, wheieby the active powei of the saiu bouy is incieaseu oi
uiminisheu, aiueu oi constiaineu, anu the iueas of such mouifications" (0hiia
2u11, p. S82). In this uesciiption it appeais that emotions aie not the tiauitional
seven that NcBeimott iefeis to, but aie consiueieu to be changes of bouily states
causeu by an exteinal oi inteinal stimulus anu the awaieness of such bouily
changes. Loewenstein et al. (2uu1) auus to the selection of uefinitions that make
up oui unueistanuing of emotion. They gioup emotions into eithei anticipatoiy
oi anticipateu emotions. Anticipatoiy emotions aie immeuiate piimitive
ieactions to a iisk oi feelings of unceitainty anu can be things like feai, anxiety,
uieau. Anticipateu emotions aie not expeiienceu immeuiately, but aie expecteu
to be expeiienceu in the futuie. This is not to say that theie is no ielationship
between the two, as an anticipatoiy emotion of anxiety may be felt about
expeiiencing an anticipateu emotion of sauness oi angei in the futuie. It is easy
to hypothesise situations in which emotions may impact on uecision making
S2
following fiom this example of iisk anu emotions that Loewenstein et al.
examine. Fuithei analysis shows that theie is a cleai uistinction between the
unconscious anu conscious expeiience of emotion anu its ielationship with
uecision making.

Physiological Explanations of Emotion in Becision Naking:
Fiom a physiological peispective, emotion occuis as a iesult of exteinal anu
sometimes inteinal stimulation. Neuial changes occui in conjunction with the
physiological piocessing of this stimulus anu can be anything fiom an inciease in
heait iate to a iise in auienaline. NcBeimott stiesses the impoitance of the
neuioscientific peispective in unueistanuing uecision making in politics, anu
that is to help answei a cential question of political psychology: unuei what
conuitions uo emotions help uecision making. She suggests that we consiuei
how emotion baseu mouels can amplify oui existing mouels of uecision making,
asseiting that in a move towaiu emotional iationality, we connect cognitive
neuioscience anu political science. Emotion consists of foui majoi components: a
motivational component, a somatic component, a behaviouial component, anu a
subjective-expeiiential component (Cloie & 0itney 2uuu; NcBeimott 2uu4a). As
such, emotion is seen to incluue a peison's thoughts, motivations, bouily
sensations, anu peisonal sense of expeiience. These chaiacteiistics uistinguish it
fiom moou, affect, anu feeling. Anothei impoitant uistinction to make is between
emotion anu cognition, anu this foims the basis of oui unueistanuing of the ways
that emotion can influence FPBN anu human uecision making in geneial. The
common misconception is that emotion $% cognition as a iesult of some piocess
of appiaisal, but iecent empiiical eviuence enables us to asseit that it is not
SS
necessaiily tiue. This is because of the uual level theoiy of infoimation
piocessing. A plethoia of iecent scholais have asseiteu that futuie ieseaich
shoulu consiuei this neuial unueistanuing of emotion in politics (NcBeimott
2uu4a; NcBeimott 2uu4b; ueva & Skoiick 2uu6; Buuson 2uuS; Shapiio &
Bonham 197S; Sanfey et al. 2uu6). Inueeu, NcBeimott wiites, "mouein
neuiopsychology inuicates that iational uecision-making, wheie an inuiviuual
consiueis costs anu benefits, is in fact uepenuent on piioi emotional piocessing"
(NcBeimott 2uu4a p. 1SS).

She iefeiences Anthony Bamasio as a neuioscientist with unique ieseaich
leauing to an auvanceu unueistanuing of the piimacy of emotion in uecision
making. Bamasio conuucteu this ieseaich on patients with biain uamage anu has
compileu one of the most significant inventoiies of patients with paiticulai kinus
of biain uamage in the woilu. As such, he is able to convincingly asseit that theie
is a uiiect causal linkage between neuiology, uecision making, anu emotion.
"Elliot", Bamasio's patient who was acknowleugeu as the mouein-uay Phineas
uage, suffeieu uamage to his ventiomeuial piefiontal coitex (vmPFC) aftei biain
suigeiy to iemove a tumoui. Following his suigeiy, Elliot was unable to opeiate
effectively within his social anu peisonal ciicumstances, iegaiuless of his
intelligence. This alloweu Bamasio to concluue that the ventiomeuial section of
the biain plays a significant iole in emotional piocessing, iesulting in Elliott
losing the ability to make eveiyuay uecisions in a timely oi effective mannei. The
example useu is when Elliot takes half an houi to ueciue on the time of his
follow-up appointment, using cost-benefit calculations anu othei "iational"
stiategies to come up with a uecision. NcBeimott iecognises that while this un-
S4
emotional appioach is sometimes useful foi making uifficult longei-teim
uecisions, shoit-teim anu 'eveiyuay' uecisions often suffei as a iesult of
inauequate emotional engagement in the uecision making piocess. Bamasio
himself speculates "emotion anu feeling, along with the coveit physiological
machineiy unueilying them, assist us with the uaunting task of pieuicting an
unceitain futuie anu planning oui actions accoiuingly" (1996, p. xiii). This
physiological machineiy is uiviueu into two levels. The lowei level iegulates the
piocessing of emotion, along with bouily functions that aie necessaiy foi oui
suivival. As such, the lowei level of infoimation piocessing is constantly in
contact with all oigans in the bouy. This allows foi the bouy to be involveu in a
chain of opeiations that loops to the highest levels of ieasoning, uecision making,
anu theiefoie social behaviouis, anu ingenuity. While this loop links lowei levels
of infoimation piocessing with highei ieasoning, the lowei levels aie able to
woik inuepenuently of highei ieasoning. Bighei ieasoning cannot opeiate
inuepenuently of lowei piocessing. The stiuctuie of lowei neuial ieasoning is
baseu aiounu the limbic system. This system of stiuctuies incluues the
hypothalamus (iesponsible foi iegulating the autonomic neivous system)
meaning that lowei piocessing has uiiect influence upon physiological aiousal in
iesponse to emotional stimulus. This system ieceives input fiom sensoiy
ieceptois (e.g., optic neive, skin tempeiatuie, etc.) anu iesponus by senuing
messages to the autonomic, paiasympathetic, anu sympathetic neivous system.
The amyguala is seen to play an even moie significant iole in the limbic system
in uiscussion of emotion anu uecision making. This is exemplifieu by Bachaia et
al.'s somatic maikei hypothesis.

SS
This pioposes that the amyguala anu oibitofiontal coitex (pait of the
piefiontal coitex) aie the key playeis in the neuial ciicuit foi juugement anu
uecision making. They blenu exteinal anu inteinal sensoiy infoimation that
conceins somatic (bouily) anuoi emotional states but at uiffeient levels so to
contiibute uiffeiently to the uecision making piocess. This theoiy iests on the
unueistanuing of both &'$()'* anu %+,-./)'* inuuceis. Piimaiy inuuceis aie
stimuli that eithei thiough leaining oi conuitioning will piouuce states that aie
eithei pleasuiable oi unpleasant (e.g., a snake). Seconuaiy inuuceis aie
geneiateu by the iecall of an emotional event (eithei hypothetical oi
expeiiential) oi peiceiving a piimaiy inuucei (e.g., snake) that geneiates
thoughts anuoi memoiies about that inuucei. As a iesult of these thoughts anu
memoiies about a piimaiy inuucei, a somatic state is aiouseu (e.g., fiom the
memoiy of snake encountei). The amyguala is an essential stiuctuie in the
neuial system foi tiiggeiing these somatic states fiom a piimaiy inuucei,
wheieas the vmPFC is impoitant foi the tiiggeiing of those somatic states fiom
seconuaiy inuuceis. In a loop emulating the piocesses between highei anu lowei
ieasoning in infoimation piocessing, the vmPFC is uepenuent upon the neuial
actions of the amyguala but becomes less contingent upon amyguala stimulation
aftei auolescence. The amyguala is necessaiy foi acquiiing new emotional
attiibutes to piimaiy inuuceis (e.g., a spiuei), but not foi ietiieving olu, pie-
establisheu emotional attiibutes. The piimaiy iole of the amyguala is to ielate a
stimulus oi 'thing' with an emotional attiibute. It is heie that the stiuctuie of the
vmPFC becomes moie ciitical to unueistanuing the neuial pathways linking
emotion anu uecision making. Seveial iecent auvances have iuentifieu that the
S6
vmPFC is actually a stiuctuie that aius in the encouing of affective values of
emotional stimuli (piimaiy inuuceis) (Winecoff et al. 2u1S; Bechaia et al. 2uuu).

Nost significant to inteinational politics is the neuiology of uecision making in
the face of an unceitain anuoi complex situation, as that is what confionts
actois in FPBN. Bamasio's unueistanuing of highei coitical piocessing is useu
heie as social oiganisms aie saiu to use the neocoitex in unceitain, complex
situations. The neocoitex is pait of the fiontal aiea of the biain which was
uevelopeu latei in evolution than the lowei, piimal stiuctuies of the limbic
system which is able to assess a stimuli anu iesponu without using ieasoning oi
willpowei. In auuition to the woik piouuceu by neuiopsychology anu neuiology
scholais is the woik of Sanfey et al. (2uu6) who examine ieseaich on uecision
making fiom the fielu of neuioeconomics. Sanfey et al. aie auvocates of a cioss-
uisciplinaiy appioach to the stuuy of uecision making, with much of what they
uncovei contiibuting to oui unueistanuing of how unueilying neuial piocesses
effect the uecision making piocess. They view the contiollability of neuial
piocesses as a continuum, unlike most scholais uiscusseu eailiei in this chaptei
who view infoimation piocessing as an almost bi-polai system of lowei anu
highei neuial piocessing. While Sanfey et al. uistinguish between automatic anu
contiolleu piocessing wheie automatic is fast anu efficient anu ieflect the
opeiation of a highly tiaineu (haiuwiieu) mechanism (e.g., low level piocessing),
anu contiolleu is highly flexible anu able to suppoit a wiue aiiay of goals with
ieasoning (e.g., highei infoimation piocessing). The example they give is in
uiiving a manual cai - the novice uses a high level of contiol while the
expeiienceu uiivei uses automatic piocesses. The continuum view incoipoiates
S7
uecision making in a new fiamewoik. It states that automatic piocesses aie
initially useu to ueteimine behavioui, but contiolleu piocesses aie activateu
when the iuentifiable costs fiom letting automatic piocesses leau on become too
high. They piopose then that human behavioui is best thought of as being
goveineu by inteiaction between subsystems that aie able to favoui uiffeient
alteinatives foi any given uecision. Emotions aie then seen to be highly
automateu iesponses that coulu benefit fiom an expansion in the unueistanuing
of the unueilying neuial mechanisms.

Anothei theoiy that links emotion anu uecision making is that of the somatic
maikei hypothesis (Bechaia et al. 2uuu). This states that uecision making is a
piocess influenceu by specific maikei signals that come about in bioiegulatoiy
piocesses. These can incluue inteinal stimulation that aie piocesseu into
emotions at the unconscious level anu contiibute to an expeiienceu emotion at
the conscious level. This uistinction between conscious anu unconscious
emotional expeiience is impoitant to this analysis. That is, the extent to which
emotion plays a iole in FPBN is laigely ueteimineu upon whethei the uecision
makei is conscious of its influence anu whethei a foieign policy uecision is
consciously maue involving inuiviuual emotional expeiience oi not. This is not to
say that the use of emotion in making foieign policy uecisions is uetiimental oi
fiowneu upon, but is uebatably seen as taboo in the tiauitional uecision makei
aichetype. Bechaia et al. (2uuu) play an infoimative iole in oui unueistanuing
of how human ieasoning anu uecision making inteiact with uiffeient neuial
levels. It is alieauy establisheu that at the lowei levels of neuiality theie is an
automatic, unconscious emotional stimulation without the piesence of a
S8
cognitive oi affective component. Bechaia et al. go beyonu the cuiient
unueistanuing of what it means to be invoking uiffeient neuial stiuctuies in
uecision making. Nost significantly, they show that neuial stiuctuies foi uecision
making, woiking memoiy, anu emotional iegulation iest in the piefiontal coitex.
The significance of this is that piocesses such as woiking memoiy, emotion, anu
attention suppoit all of oui cognitive opeiations. This leaus to the conclusion
that when invoking a highei oi employing ieasoning techniques when making a
uecision, we will geneially use use some emotional component thus engaging
lowei levels of neuiality as well in the loop sequence stateu eailiei. uiven that
FPBN is often a complex uecision making situation, then uecision makeis will
always use those highei neuial piocesses as well as the lowei levels. The
stiuctuial iealities woulu asseit that the uiscussion of cognition in the emotion
in FPBN uebate is then ciucial.

Cognitive Explanations of Emotion in Becision Naking:
Theie is a laige aiiay of ieseaich within the fielu of psychology ueuicateu to a
cognitive explanation foi the iole of emotion in uecision making. Theoiies of the
ways that cognitive piocesses influence the iole emotion plays in uecision
making aie meiely theoiies anu aie most convincing when useu in conjunction
with physical eviuence. It is not suipiising then that many of the most influential
scholais uiscusseu eailiei in this chaptei also offei some of the most significant
iueas on how oui cognitive piocesses aie employeu in conjunction with
emotions when making uecisions in inteinational affaiis. The main theoiies in
this analysis centies aiounu emotional iationality, outcome unceitainty anu iisk,
anu the influence of schemas on uecision making piocesses anu outcomes.
S9
Schema ieseaich has been paiticulaily peitinent to scholais who have attempteu
to quantify the extent that emotion can influence FPBN. NcBeimott
accompanies this analysis with an aiticle on the 'feeling of iationality',
contiibuting to hei alieauy influential position within the politics of emotion
liteiatuie. In this, she explains the impoitant anu well-establisheu ielationships
between moou anu uecision making. Noou, a cognitive phenomenon, is not to be
useu inteichangeably with emotion as uefineu eailiei. The two ways in which
moou is useu in these cognitive piocesses is thiough both moou congiuence anu
moou uepenuent ietiieval. Noou congiuence is wheie an inuiviuual is moie
likely to iecall events that aie in line with theii moou. Noou uepenuent ietiieval,
on the othei hanu, is wheie people's moou affects theii ability to iecall
infoimation like memoiies of past events. She asseits that these phenomenon
help the ieaueis to iuentify stimuli that coulu, eithei consciously oi
unconsciously, influence a foieign policy uecision makei. This suggests that if a
moou (a peisistent emotional expeiience) is expeiienceu, it may impact the ways
that infoimation is iecalleu anu the quality of a uecision outcome. She uses the
example of happy people tenuing to be moie expansive in theii juugements. This
also ielates to oui unueistanuing of how emotions may be influenceu by an
anticipateu event by ievoking memoiies oi policy outcomes useu in a past event,
linking to the emotional state it cieateu foi the foieign policy uecision makei.
Inueeu, she wiites that the expecteu emotional state can be a pait of the peison's
utility calculation.

The topic of iationality in choice is also unueistoou by psychology acauemics
Bastie & Bawes in theii book 'Rational Choice in an 0nceitain Woilu: The
4u
Psychology of }uugement anu Becision Naking' (2u1u). Being a 'iational' actoi in
unceitain oi unknown ciicumstances is ciitical to a libeial iueological uiscussion
of FPBN. Bastie & Bawes uefine iational behavioui as "behavioui that
maximizes the value of consequences" (p. 2S7). It is the aigument suiiounuing
what a valuable choice is that uictates most of the unknown in iational choice
theoiy. They uo pioviue some insight into the systematic piocess of how humans
juuge these choices. 0! ')1$-.)2 ,3-$,+ ,). 4+ /+5$.+/ )% -.+ 13)1 (++1% 5-6'
,'$1+'$)7
89: ;1 $% 4)%+/ -. 13+ /+,$%$-. ()<+'=% ,6''+.1 )%%+1%> !%%+1% $.,26/+% .-1 -.2*
(-.+*? 461 )2%- &3*%$-2-@$,)2 %1)1+? &%*,3-2-@$,)2 ,)&),$1$+%? %-,$)2
'+2)1$-.%3$&? )./ 5++2$.@%>
8A: ;1 $% 4)%+/ -. 13+ &-%%$42+ ,-.%+B6+.,+% -5 13+ ,3-$,+>
8C: D3+. 13+%+ ,-.%+B6+.,+% )'+ 6.,+'1)$.? 13+$' 2$<+2$3--/ $% +E)26)1+/
),,-'/$.@ 1- 13+ 4)%$, '62+% -5 &'-4)4$2$1* 13+-'*>
(4) ;1 $% ) ,3-$,+ 13)1 $% )/)&1$E+ F$13$. 13+ ,-.%1')$.1% -5 13-%+ &'-4)4$2$1$+%
)./ 13+ E)26+% -' %)1$%5),1$-.% )%%-,$)1+/ F$13 +),3 -5 13+ &-%%$42+
,-.%+B6+.,+% -5 13+ ,3-$,+>G (Bastie & Bawes 2u1u, p. 16).
These aie cleaily compaiable to the theoiies of FPBN put foiwaiu by many
scholais in the latei examination of the political liteiatuie. This is because
iationality is consistent again with the chaiacteiistics of the successful uecision
makei aichetype. This ielates to a utilitaiian function that is citeu as a commonly
iecognisable cognitive attiibute in the uecision making piocess. 0tility theoiy is
a populai example of iational choice. Luce & Raffia's woik is a notewoithy
auuition to the liteiatuie, citing 'Inuiviuual Becision-Naking 0nuei 0nceitainty'
(199u). While theii woik is uiscusseu in moie uepth in the latei analysis of
41
FPBN in the face of unceitainty, it lenus itself equally usefully to this analysis of
inuiviuual uecision making in geneial conuitions of unceitainty. Theii aiticle
may well have been inspiieu, like this uisseitation is, by the woik of Simon
(19S9). This is because both woiks state cleai iueological links between the
utility function anu mouein game theoiy. The conclusion of a simultaneous
examination of these aiticles is that inuiviuual uecision making involves the
cognitive piocesses utiliseu when a uecision makei employs a iigoious
examination of possible outcomes anu consequences in oiuei to make the best
uecision. This is consistent with Simon's eaily obseivation that classical uecision
making is simply a piocess of a peison choosing among known anu unknown
alteinatives that aie linkeu with outcomes anu consequences. Simon, along with
many othei scholais, attiibutes tiauitional utility uecision making with the
populai computational mouel of uecision making. This is consistent with the
uiscipline of psychology favouiing a computational iepiesentation of physical
anu cognitive stiuctuies in the biain. Inueeu, using a computational
iepiesentation of the inuiviuual uecision making piocess allows foi political
scientists to make moie geneial anu empiiically baseu obseivations about
piactices like FPBN. Simon favouis the computational mouel as a 'piogiam'
consisting of a laige numbei of ciiteiia that can be applieu to uiffeient action
options that geneiate a possible couise foi action. The computei (actoi) assesses
its enviionment anu chooses the action most appiopiiate foi that enviionment
aftei consiueiation of a laige aiiay of ciiteiia.

The piogiession of ieseaich since the wiiting of Simon (19S9) anu Luce & Raffa
(199u) appeais to acknowleuge anu in many cases move on fiom the basic
42
computational mouel of cognitive assessment foi uecision making in unceitain
situations. Loewenstein et al. in theii 2uu1 aiticle titleu 'Risk as Feelings' auus to
this moie tiauitional unueistanuing. They also wiite in line with cuiient tienus
that seek to sepaiate cognition anu affect in looking at the emotional expeiience
associateu with uecision making. They suggest that emotional ieactions to iisk
situations can actually oveipowei oi ignoie cognitive assessments of iisks. In
those situations, emotional ieactions can uiive behavioui, ueteimining the
couise of action in oui computational inteipietation. Noie iecent ieseaich in
emotion anu iisky uecision making is iefeienceu, stating that the iiskiei the
uecision making situation, the moie likely the piocess behinu uecision making is
to be baseu (eithei explicitly oi implicitly) in cognitive activity. Examples of this
aie seen in theii uiscussion of anticipatoiy anu anticipateu emotions (as stateu
eailiei) anu the effect that an emotional expeiience can have on uecision making.
That is, humans aie influenceu by the possibility of expeiiencing a futuie
emotion aftei uecision making anu the anticipation of that emotion may uiive
theii uecision making. They even examine the iecent ieseaich that inuicates the
quality of uecision making suffeiing when affective inputs (cognitively-giounueu
peisonal uispositions to favouiable ciiteiia) aie suppiesseu when using a pio's
anu con's appioach oi similai stiuctuially iigiu appioaches. This is because
affective ieactions to stimuli can often be quickei anu less complex than
cognitive evaluations like those associateu with highei piocessing (e.g., iational
uecision making). The significance of this insight is not to say that a less complex
anu fastei uecision making piocess woulu be auequate oi favouiable in FPBN,
but iathei that the complete uismissal of basicgeneial emotive influence may
not leau to the most successful FPBN outcome.
4S
The final task in examining the cognitive influence in uecision making is
to assess how people come up with these highly influential inuiviuual affective
inputs that have been shown to influence uecision making. Impoitantly, this
involves examining the social psychology liteiatuie on schemas anu ieviewing
the woik of scholais who asseit that belief systems anu schemas play a
significant iole in FPBN. This isolates the inteinal stimuli that piovoke an
emotional expeiience anu influence the uecision making piocess. Auuiessing this
issue uiiectly is Laison in hei aiticle 'The Role of Belief Systems anu Schemas in
Foieign Policy Becision Naking' (1994). She is anothei auvocate of the political
psychology appioach to examining the iole of emotion on FPBN. As such, she is
able to uiaw paiallels between theoietical appioaches to elements of the
uecision making piocess between psychology anu politics. She states that belief
systems in political sciences aie the equivalent of schemas in psychology.
Eviuence of this is that they aie both cognitive-baseu, stiuctuieu, anu the levels
of expeitise may vaiy. Schemas aie associateu with highei cognitive piocesses,
while political belief systems also lack the geneiality that schemas uo. She
uefines political belief systems as meiely being an actoi's beliefs about the
political spheie. Schemas exist at this highei level of cognitive piocessing,
meaning that they encompass these political belief systems of a political actoi,
but also incluue specific examples anu analogies. Inueeu, "schemas can help to
biiuge the gap in ieseaich on cognitive stiuctuies between political science anu
social psychology" (Laison 1994, p. 18). This is because schematic theoiy
explains abstiact ieasoning anu analogical thinking. Schemas aie then uefineu as
a "cognitive stiuctuie that iepiesents knowleuge about a concept oi type of
stimulus, incluuing its attiibutes anu the ielations among those attiibutes"
44
(Laison 1994, p. 18). They aie maue up of specific cases, analogies, abstiact
knowleuge, anu exemplais. This uiaws togethei the theoiies uiscusseu in the
eviuence behinu cognitive influence in emotion's iole in uecision making anu
FPBN, iecognising that people commonly use piioi knowleuge anu expeiience of
pievious pioblem solving memoiies to auuiess a complex uecision making
situation. The utility of having belief systems is that they may act as a filtei on
iiielevant oi inconsistent infoimation, scaling uown the magnituue of
infoimation that is piesenteu to a uecision makei in a complex situation like
auuiessing an auveise inteinational event. Schemas then also help an inuiviuual
to inteipiet meaning out of theii suiiounuings. They help to highlight the most
impoitant iueas in a situation oi stoiy, often placing weight on these uuiing
encouing in infoimation piocessing. This allows foi ease in iecalling infoimation
when confionteu with similai situations. The theoiy incieases its significance
when it aigues that it is baseu in efficiency of cognitive piocesses. Because
cognitive piocesses aie limiteu anu must be utiliseu to limit infoimation stoiage
anu pievent ovei-complexities in infoimation piocessing foi futuie iecall,
schemas seive to benefit oui long-teim memoiy. This is because long-teim
memoiy has a wealth of ioom to stoie memoiies wheieas oui shoit-teim
memoiy is often flooueu with stimuli so it must be filteieu anu encoueu to be
stoieu foi the long-teim. In the case of iecall foi policy puiposes, schemas also
act to fill in infoimation gaps when we aie not piesenteu with enough
infoimation to engage wholly in the complex uecision making piocess. Laison,
with moie significance foi FPBN, states that schemas foi ceitain events aie
iefeiieu to as "sciipts" anu pioviue a set of iules foi hanuling paiticulai types of
situations. Sciipts give the policy makei ueclaiative anu pioceuuial infoimation
4S
about how to act. Policy makeis aie then able to select fiom the action
alteinatives by foiming expectations about how the othei actoi oi gioup will
iesponu to each policy option.

It is eviuent that thiough the uiscussion of the most peitinent themes in the
psychology liteiatuie suiiounuing the iole of emotions on uecision making, that
theie aie unueniable paiallels to be uiawn between the iealities of how people
make uecisions anu the ways that foieign policy uecision makeis opeiate. This
analysis has spanneu the uefinition of emotion, the neuiological basis to uecision
making, anu the complex cognitive stiuctuies put in place to utilise infoimation,
assess alteinatives, anu engage in a policy uecision as an inteinational actoi. By
pioviuing an aiiay of theoietical appioaches within social psychology,
neuiopsychology, anu political psychology, the most compiehensive
unueistanuing can be gaineu. This also allows foi the maximum numbei of
similaiities anu uiffeiences to be uiawn fiom the cioss-uisciplinaiy appioach
that this uisseitation takes. As such, the following analysis of the political
ieseaich shoulu take the same line of uiscussion. This uisseitation is caiefully
stiuctuieu in a way that allows foi the appieciation of knowleuge that each
iespective fielu has, but also to point out the significant gaps in oveilapping
ieseaich agenuas. This is in the face of cleai benefits that each political science
coulu gain fiom embiacing the psychological unueistanuing of political issues,
anu vice veisa. This chaptei concluues with sentiments echoing many of the
political psychology acauemics that have inspiieu its veiy wiiting: that futuie
ieseaich into FPBN in paiticulai must incoipoiate a compiehensive analysis of
46
infoimation piocessing fiom a neuiological peispective to fully appieciate the
ways that inuiviuuals act when faceu with a pioblem solving situation.























47
FQ@3!3)-@ ;)3<P)< -PH <8Q!3QP 3P KQA<3SP FQ@3)X H<)3;3QP 8-O3PS
This chaptei will assess the wealth of political stuuies that seek to account foi
emotion in inteinational politics following in a stiuctuially similai way to the
fiist chaptei that auuiesses the wiuei psychological uiscussion of the ways in
which inuiviuuals iesponu to stimuli anu make a uecision. By uiscussing theoiies
of the FPBN piocess, anu by examining the main themes speculating the iole of
emotion in inteinational politics, this uisseitation shoulu concluue to what
extent emotion plays a iole in FPBN.

The ievision of mouels of FPBN is aiguably the most significant auuition that the
political science liteiatuie contiibutes to this uiscussion. Taking a laigely
constiuctivist iueological ioute, seveial scholais have attempteu to
conceptualise the uecision making piocess in which inteinational actois opeiate.
This bottom-up appioach of isolating the cognitive anu social piocesses that
uiive an inuiviuual in inteinational politics to make policy uecisions is moie
uesiiable than a tiauitional top-uown one of looking at the outcome anu woiking
backwaius to speculate what factois may have influenceu it. This miiiois the
tiauitional behaviouial sciences appioach to uisceining the piocess between
cognitive mouel anu outcome. That is, the empiiically valiu, testable way of
mouelling human uecision making uiscusseu eailiei in this uisseitation.

Nouels of FPBN:
Shapiio & Bonham's influential woik explicitly sets out a mouel of FPBN baseu
in the uiscussion of peiception, cognition, anu infoimation piocessing. This is
especially ielevant to the uiscussion of emotion in the FPBN piocess, as eailiei
48
analysis establisheu that emotion anu cognition aie moie closely ielateu anu
haiuei to sepaiate than most psychology anu politics scholais tiauitionally
believe. Beliefs aie cential to the FPBN piocess, iepiesenting the oveiall
expeiiences of the uecision makei anu theii expectations about the uecision
enviionment. Beliefs aie saiu to be templates with which uecision makeis filtei
infoimation. Similaily, these beliefs aie iesponsible foi ielating all possible
policy options to peiceptions about the motives anu possible actions of othei
states. Theie aie thiee concepts that link togethei to cieate a belief. These aie,
the "affective" that iefeis to eithei the policy objectives, oi inteiests of an actoi
in the inteinational aiena. The "cognitive" component iepiesents the beliefs
about actions that the actoi holus of othei states in the inteinational system.
Lastly, the "conative" concept holus infoimation about all alteinative policies
fiom which the uecision makei must choose (Shapiio & Bonham 197S). This
constiuctivist view of the inuiviuual anu society is founu thioughout all theoiies
of FPBN. As such, the causal anu casual inteiplay of the concepts cieates a
"cognitive map" of the uecision makeis belief system, with the cleai outcome of a
uecision being maue. Fig. 1 below cleaily iepiesents this cognitive map. Shapiio
& Bonham fuithei asseit that this giaphic iepiesentation suppoits the iuea that
uecision makeis believe inteinational events aie causally ielateu. As such,
uecision makeis woulu infei that causal ielationships unueilie inteinational
events anu the coiiesponuing actions of states (peiceiveu causality), uespite the
lack of eviuence to suppoit causality (Shapiio & Bonham 197S; }eivis 197u;
Weinei 198S).
49



Figuie 1: Auapteu fiom Shapiio & Bonham, 197S
Su
Theie aie foui piocesses in this FPBN mouel piesenteu in the instance
when a uecision makei is given a new situation peitinent to theii state in the
inteinational system anu theie is a iequiieu iesponse fiom theii goveinment.
The fiist is the amplification of beliefs, the seconu is the seaich foi an
explanation, the thiiu the seaich foi policy options, anu lastly, the choice of a
policy (Shapiio & Bonham 197S). While this concise mouel may appeai simple, it
is in the uetails of each piocess that the complexity of uecision making is seen.
Inueeu, the fiist piocess (as seen in fig. 1) shows a stimulus of an inteinational
event that leaus uiiectly to the amplification of beliefs. Concise statements about
the uevelopments of the inteinational activity oi issue aie feu into this mouel,
activating the belief system of the uecision makei. When piocessing this
infoimation, each ielevant oi impoitant piece of infoimation is 'highlighteu' anu
stoieu in the memoiy foi latei use. Aftei a multituue of infoimation about the
inteinational event is ieceiveu, highlighteu, anu stoieu, the memoiy is seaicheu
foi similai concepts that hau been stoieu in the past. A causal pathway between
those highlighteu concepts is cieateu leauing to a highlighteu, amplifieu set of
concepts that foim a "subset of conceptual oveiviews" (Shapiio & Bonham 197S,
p. 164) foi futuie use in the uecision making piocess. The seconu stage is the
seaich foi an explanation. In this piocess, the uecision makei assesses the extent
to which they believe they possess all the necessaiy infoimation to compiehenu
what has occuiieu. 'Explanation' in this case is saiu to be "the aiiows oi paths
connecting a set of two oi moie highlighteu concepts" (Shapiio & Bonham 197S,
p. 164). The initial concept is most commonly the inteinational actois own
motivation oi intent. The path is maue fiom intentmotivation to
consequence(s). 0nce this new infoimation has maue concepts in the cognitive
S1
system of a uecision makei, they seaich foi aiiows between the highlighteu
concepts anu piepaie them foi futuie piocessing. To emulate the classical
conceptualisation of infoimation piocessing in a computational mouel, this stage
of the piocess can be seen as couing foi futuie use of the infoimation. These fiist
two stages of the FPBN mouel auequately explain the ways uecision makeis
classify new infoimation into existing theoiies, images, anu beliefs. The valiuity
of Shapiio & Bonham's iueas is maintaineu as infoimation piocessing theoiies in
psychology anu political psychology alike, anu have stiesseu the significance of
piioi conuitioning to iueas on the ability of futuie uecision making ovei the foui
uecaues since theii aiticle was publisheu.

The thiiu piocess of this FPBN mouel is seaiching foi policy options. This occuis
once all possible explanations of the inteinational issue have been stoieu in the
memoiy, allowing the uecision makei to seaich foi possible policy options. This
iequiies exploiing explanatoiy paths that iun between the possible policy
(conative concepts) anu the factois that aie at iisk (affective concepts), assessing
which option oi combination of vaiious options woulu iesult in the most
effective solution. The piesence of pathways of ielationships between conative
anu affective concepts aie saiu to cieate a matiix of causality linkages in the
uecision makeis cognitive map. Inueeu, the uecision makei "looks foi options
that he thinks will give him some contiol ovei events in the inteinational system.
Be thus selects a policy that he believes will set off a seiies of events that will
have an impact on his policy objectives" (Shapiio & Bonham 197S, p. 17u). This
insight is cleaily in line with the theoiies put foiwaiu by Weinei (198S), linking
uecision making with theoiies of attiibution. All thiee of Weinei's causal
S2
uimensions can explain Shapiio & Bonham's thiiu piocess in theii mouel of
FPBN. Theie is seen to be inteinal peiceiveu locus of contiollability as a uecision
makei in foieign policy assumes that they have contiol ovei the actions of
otheis. Similaily, stability is taken into contiol in an assumption that success is
uepenuent upon picking the iight policy uecision, anu contiollability is assumeu
as a uecision makei uses a significant amount of effoit in the uecision making
piocess to piouuce an outcome that benefits theii goals in the inteinational
system. Choosing a policy fiom a numbei of alteinatives is the fouith anu last
piocess in the foieign policy uecision makei mouel. The pievious thiee stages in
FPBN have been equally attiactive to scholais, but only acioss a small numbei of
uisciplines. Compaiatively, choosing a policy oi making the final uecision is
wheie the most ieseaich into uecision making has been conuucteu, with many
scholais attempting to put foiwaiu the best mouel foi choice. Acioss the cuiient
liteiatuie then, the fouith piocess is seemingly complex as theie is a uichotomy
between qualitative anu quantitative attempts to ueteimine uecision making
outcomes. Tiauitional socio-psychological peispectives woulu asseit that the
most effective way of quantifying a uecision outcome is to consiuei the means in
which uecision makeis weigh up the foieign policy uecision thiough expecteu
outcome analysis of qualitative methous. Noie iecent theoiies that account foi a
calculateu behaviouial outcome woulu put foiwaiu that a quantitative appioach
with specific equations cieateu aiounu those same outcome expectations aie
moie efficient anu valiu. In Shapiio & Bonham's analysis they employ a
lexicogiaphic uecision calculus, assuming the uecision makei uses theii most
impoitant policy objective fiist to ueteimine whethei the alteinatives affect the
objective uiffeiently. If no uistinguishable auvantages aie uiscoveieu, a seconu
SS
objective is testeu, continuing the statistical piocess until one objective maiks
one alteinative as bettei than the otheis. This appioach takes into account the
numbei of positive paths between alteinatives anu outcomes that weie coueu
eailiei on in the FPBN piocess. This shows the ways by which the mouel
ueteimines the best outcome is by compaiing all possible alteinatives with
stiong pie-assesseu cognitive pathways.

Thiough this uetaileu anu iueologically significant piocess, the mouel of FPBN is
seen to be affecteu laigely by memoiy anu a uecision makeis cognitive map.
Inueeu, Shapiio & Bonham concluue theii aiticle by suggesting that futuie
appioaches to FPBN analysis woulu lenu itself to examining the stiuctuie of
cognitive mapping. The significance of a political psychology analysis is cleai in
this attempt to piogiess the ways in which the uecision making piocess is
unueistoou. The same neeu to connect auequate uiscussion of cognitive mapping
foi FPBN is constant thioughout the following foity yeais of liteiatuie.

An example of the statistical liteiatuie that compiises the othei half of the
ieseaich methouology uichotomy is shown thiough Luce & Raffia (199u) in theii
examination of game theoiy unuei unceitainty. They pioviue both a statistical
analysis of choice consiueiing a set of acts (!9? !A? !C? .) anu what they iefei to as
a state of natuie (%9? %A, .), an concept they hope to be "intuitively cleai". To each
paii of an act anu a state, theie is a consequence oi an outcome. The uecision
makei cieates a piobability uistiibution, listing possible consequences oi
outcomes in ielation to a chosen piefeience oi utility function helu by the
uecision makei. A uecision is maue in an attempt to maximising the specific
S4
utility oi piefeience of the uecision makei, taking all possible outcomes into
consiueiation fiom the ) &'$-'$ piobability uistiibution. This is uisplayeu in the
foim of a table, allowing foi a stiuctuieu analysis of uecision making when theie
is some iisk involveu (as seen in Luce & Raffia 199u p. S7 analogy of an
omelette). Risk is unueistoou to be an unuesiiable outcome oi consequence of a
uecision. The woik of Luce & Raffia is extenuable beyonu quantitative
explanatoiy methous of uecision making, as they aie able to speculate, baseu on
ieseaich in a bottom-up manoi, that theie aie paiticulai piocesses thiough
which uecision makeis inteiact with otheis anu opeiate in an unceitain
situation. This is uiiectly tiansfeiable to FPBN in the inteinational enviionment,
uespite theii analysis being fiom a geneialist behaviouial scientific appioach.
They state that in a game, unceitainty is a iesult of the unknown uecisions of the
othei playeis. In the mouel they piopose then, unceitainty is ieuuceu when it is
assumeu that each playei knows the aspiiations of the othei playeis anu those
playeis will take whatevei actions necessaiy to achieve theii goals. Anothei
uiiectly tiansfeiable example that Luce & Raffia use is a scenaiio wheie theie is
a two-actoi, non-zeio sum, non-coopeiative game wheie playei (actoi) 1 is the
uecision makei anu playei (actoi) 2 is the auveisaiy. The uecision makei
chooses fiom an optimal set of possible stiategies oi acts that aie available to
them. 0ne of these is to geneiate an ) &'$-'$ piobability uistiibution (like in the
eailiei example) of the possible actions of the auveisaiy thiough examining the
stiategic aspects of the game, anu what 'psychological' infoimation is known
about the auveisaiy. To choose the appiopiiate action to take, the uecision
makei iefeis to this piobability uistiibution. While this non-zeio sum conflict
scenaiio, it seives as a sounu uesciiption of the ciicumstances in which uecision
SS
makeis opeiate in the inteinational aiena, the analysis that Luce & Raffia use is
able to go beyonu anu speculate as to how this ) &'$-'$ uistiibution is maue by
the uecision makei. This is an impoitant auuition to the existing liteiatuie on
FPBN anu incoipoiates alieauy piominent theoiies of infoimation piocessing
fiom the acauemic uiscipline of psychology.

The concept of cieating an inteinal piobability uistiibution foi uecision making
ielates back to the cognitive mouel of the FPBN piocess uiscusseu eailiei
(Shapiio & Bonham 197S; }eivis 197u). It is ieasonable to suggest that the
cieation of an ) &'$-'$ piobability uistiibution is baseu upon those same
cognitive pathways that aie cieateu when we assume that uecision makeis
believe inteinational events aie causally ielateu. Theiefoie, the iepeateu
asseition that uecision makeis believe (although this may not be tiue in
piactice) that theie is an unueilying causal linkage between events anu the
actions of othei states anu inteinational actois. As such, we come again to the
conclusion that theie aie a numbei of positive paths between uecision making
options anu outcome that weie coueu in the cognition of a uecision makei eaily
in the FPBN piocess. Conclusively then, it is cleai that the most effective way of
iuentifying anu uiscussing FPBN is thiough the acauemic lens of political
psychology as it allows foi ample uiscussion of infoimation piocessing anu
political outcome.

This classic paiauigm of confusing causality anu coiielation leaus to the
inclusion of wiuei social psychology theoiy, as is tiue in the stuuy of all uecision
making, not just FPBN. The iefeience to attiibution theoiy is pait of the
S6
founuation of uecision making theoiy anu is acknowleugeu by Shapiio &
Bonham. Inueeu, analysis of attiibution theoiy (Weinei 198S) ieveals a stiong
link between attiibution anu emotion. Theie aie thiee causal uimensions: locus,
stability, anu contiollability. Locus peitains to the belief of inteinal oi exteinal
contiol; stability iefeis to the expecteu success of the outcome, while
contiollability is the peiceiveu ielationship between effoit expenuituie anu
outcome (Weinei 198S). It is cleai that in the uiscussion of FPBN, that the iueas
Weinei conceptualises anu that Shapiio & Bonham anu }eivis uiscuss aie
peitinent anu funuamental to the unueistanuing of both the uecision making
piocess anu to intei-state inteiaction. Nost significant though is the asseition
that peiceiveu causality affects a vaiiety of emotional expeiiences. Weinei is
confiuent in his own empiiical piactices anu asseits that the enu iesult of this
analysis is that by examining the stiuctuie of thinking thiough uiscussion of
motivation, contiol, anu outcome, the uynamics of feeling anu action aie ielateu
in a way that extenus its geneiality to pievalent human emotions. It is the hope
of this ieseaich that by establishing a conceptual fiamewoik that examines the
pievalent human emotional expeiience upon uecision making, the iueas can
geneialise anu extenueu to FPBN.

Fiankel's book publisheu in 1968 titleu 'The Naking of Foieign Policy: An
Analysis of Becision Naking' is a uiscussion of how people make uecisions with
some anecuotal eviuence of how these aie founu in FPBN piactices. This is in
contiast to scholais like Shapiio & Bonham oi Luce & Raffia who aie able to put
foiwaiu a cleai constiuctivist mouel of FPBN. The usefulness of Fiankel is not
lost, howevei, as analysis of his aigument helps oui unueistanuing of how
S7
geneialist theoiies of the cognitive uecision making piocess aie so easily
extenueu to FPBN. Be wiites about the meaning of uecisions, stating that theie
aie two social foices playing on the mouel. These can be cential (incluuing the
uecision making meuium) oi peiipheial (incluueu in oui suiiounuings).
Examples of cential influences may be the inteinational political uoctiine to
which the actoi oi goveinment subsciibes to like communism oi capitalism. Be
then uefines 'access', 'infoimation', anu 'auvice' - infoimation piocessing
concepts that have been long uiscusseu in this uisseitation, stiessing theii now
unueniable influence in FPBN. These aie all pait of the pie-uecision piocess. The
post-uecision piocess involves implementation, accountability, anu
inteipietation. Be stiesses that these aie not completely sepaiate as elements of
pie anu post-uecision piocesses can be useu at uiffeient times. Foi example,
accountability is often as influential in the pie-uecision stage of a foieign policy
as it is aftei the policy has been maue. The consiueiation of alteinatives is again
saiu to be veiy impoitant to claiity uuiing the uecision making piocess. Be states
that in capacity foi action, the inteinational enviionment shoulu allow foi the
uecision makei to completely coeice oi peisuaue the ielevant agents. In uoing
so, the situation must not be too naiioweu to excluue itself oi be in 'excessive
isolation' fiom inteinational politics as a whole as this woulu pay insufficient
attention to the wiuei global outcomes of foieign policy. Inueeu, iational choice
in the FPBN piocess is encouiageu to avoiu a foim of 'utopianism'. Be believes
this foieign policy goal is uangeious as it is not in touch with ieality. It is in the
ways that foieign policy uecisions aie assesseu that the ieseaich wiuens anu
becomes incieasingly iuentifiable with eveiyuay piactice. This move in ieseaich
S8
focus also allows foi the uiscussion of scholais that have taken an inteiest in the
cognitive element of foieign policy.

Influences fiom Inteinational Relations Sub-Bisciplines:
ueva, Nayhai & Skoiick (2uuu) opeiate in the conflict iesolution spheie of
inteinational ielations liteiatuie anu speculate on the cognitive calculus of
FPBN. This mouels the mental calculations of FPBN with the funuamental
asseition that inuiviuuals conuuct uecision making, so mouels shoulu ieflect
theii inuiviuual capabilities. 0thei scholais miiioi this human-baseu appioach
anu account foi inuiviuual uiffeiences by pieuicting it like in schema theoiy
(Laison 1994). In the uiscussion of long teim memoiy, Sylvan & voss (1998)
iefeience the peisonal knowleuge of an inuiviuual anu asseits that an actoi's
beliefs anu knowleuge aie pait of a mouel of linkeu fiames which aie semantic,
affective, anu auuiess theii cuiient level of activation within the uecision making
stiuctuie. So then, foi a foieign policy uecision makei, inuiviuual uiffeiences aie
accounteu foi in the wiuei political ieseaich focusing on cognitive stiuctuies in
political actois. This is to utilise the 'fluiu' anu 'complex' enviionment in which
FPBN takes place (ueva et al. 2uuu). They aie not uissimilai to the cognitive
stiuctuies uiscusseu in the psychology liteiatuie eailiei. Auuitionally,
opeiational coue analysis has long been uiscusseu in inteinational ielations
(Walkei, 199S). But the iealities aie cleai in that theie is little empiiical ieseaich
on how emotions influence FPBN. Cognition has been linkeu with anu accepteu
by inteinational ielations anu has been bieacheu fiom within the uiscipline anu
acioss uisciplines in fielus of psychology anu sociology. But the same cannot be
saiu foi emotion-baseu ieseaich. ueva & Skoiick (2uu6) speculate that the
S9
inuiviuual appioach is ovei-shauoweu by the moie tiauitional systemic anu
state-level appioaches that have been long favouieu by scholais of inteinational
ielations. Anothei failuie they iuentify is again uue to this piefeience to stuuy
cognition anu iationality ovei emotion, uespite oveiwhelming eviuence fiom
almost all inteinational ielations iueologies. Foi example, feai plays a cential
iole in iealist inteipietations of inteinational secuiity. Constiuctivists, again,
view emotions as a lens in which inteinational actois make sense of theii
suiiounuings (Bleikei & Butchison, 2uu8).

Noie iecent analyses of inteinational ielations have sought to pioviue fuithei
insight into these uebateu shoitcomings. They possibly lie in the giounu of
inteinational ielations, eluciuateu thiough Buuson's analysis of foieign policy
analysis. She states, "foieign policy analysis is chaiacteiiseu by an actoi-specific
focus, baseu upon the aigument that all that occuis between nations anu acioss
nations is giounueu in human uecision making acting singly oi in gioups",
(Buuson 2uuS, p. 1). In hei woik we see that most contempoiaiy inteinational
ielations woik (like that inteipieting FPBN) gives the impiession that this
giounu of inteinational ielations lies within states, iathei than in the collective
expeiienceu by inuiviuuals. ueva & Skoiick aie again useu as a ieliable souice of
balance in this analysis, explaining how cuiient mouels of emotion in
inteinational ielations imply that "actoi-oiientateu beliefs anu attituues in
inteinational ielations incluue affective evaluations of anu oiientations towaiu
othei nations oi leaueis" (ueva & Skoiick 2uu6, p. 212). So peihaps it is not that
actoi-specific mouels uo not allow foi an emotional component, but iathei that
cuiient tienus in acauemia uo not allow foi it. Contiasteu to Buuson's asseition
6u
that the woik ielating a uecision makei to a 'unitaiy iational actoi' (e.g., the
state) is not the best appioach to foieign policy analysis, a methouological
iefoimation may be what inteinational stuuies iequiies. Buuson, an auvocate foi
psychological uiscussion in aiu of moie compiehensive inteinational ielations
analysis, is stein in hei uisciimination between olu-fashioneu analyses of state
behavioui anu what aie moie successful analyses baseu on human uecision
making piocesses. This appeais to be the most convincing eviuence peitinent to
this uisseitation: that emotion is a woithwhile factoi to examine in FPBN anu to
inteinational ielations as a uiscipline.

Conclusively then, employing mouein inteipietations of FPBN anu examining
the iole that emotion plays in inteinational politics allows foi the most ielevant
analysis of the political science liteiatuie suiiounuing the extent to which
emotion plays a iole in FPBN. The sepaiation of this liteiatuie fiom the oluei
style of state-baseu, tiauitional iealist iational actoi theoiies is impoitant foi
this uisseitation as it auvocates the now wiuely-accepteu neeu foi ieneweu
inteiest in how humans make uecisions. This incluues the ueficient uiscussion of
emotion in FPBN. Bespite the uiscussion of numeious mouels of FPBN within
the liteiatuie, theie have been little scholaily effoits to ueteimine the extent to
which emotion plays a iole in the FPBN piocess. In tuin, the benefits to aiise
fiom this cioss-uisciplinaiy uiscussion of the extent to which emotion is a factoi
in FPBN aie cleaily seen in the laige gaps left by each uiscipline when uiscusseu
sepaiately.


61
)QP)@T;3QP
The stuuy of emotion is cleaily a significant theme in inteinational ielations
ieseaich, with its value founu in all majoi ieseaich aieas in the uiscipline. The
cuiient volume of ieseaich conuucteu on the iole of emotion is gieatly skeweu
in ielation to its neeu. Thiough this analysis of the political psychology liteiatuie
spanning the acauemic uisciplines of psychology anu inteinational politics, it is
visible that emotion has been of lessei impoitance. This is in the face of many
scholais stating they wisheu they hau conuucteu moie ieseaich into the iole of
emotion eailiei in theii caieeis. To concluue this compiehensive ieview of both
fielus, the conceptual fiamewoik in which we see emotion in FPBN shoulu be
cleaily quantifieu.

The similaiities between the two collections of acauemic liteiatuie aie stiiking
anu emphasise the significance of this ieseaich aiea. Even when extenuing the
uiscussion to the neuiology of uecision making, theie aie similaiities between
what woulu noimally be consiueieu psychological unueistanuings of
infoimation piocessing anu uecision making anu the mouels pioposeu by foieign
policy theoiists of FPBN. The compiehensive ieview also allows foi the optimal
uefinitions anu most effective mouels of behavioui to be put foiwaiu. As such,
emotion can be uefineu with 0hiia's unueistanuing "mouifications of the bouy,
wheieby the active powei of the saiu bouy is incieaseu oi uiminisheu, aiueu oi
constiaineu, anu the iueas of such mouifications" (0hiia 2u11, p. S82) as it
poitiays emotion as a piactical, inescapable component of the bouy anu minu. It
uoes not constiain its unueistanuing to one uisciplinaiy bouy, aiuing this
analysis. Refeiencing NcBeimott, emotion has motivational, somatic,
62
behaviouial anu subjective-expeiiential components to it which aius to
uistinguish it fiom moou, feeling, oi affect. Similaily, theie aie foui components
to Shapiio & Bonham's FPBN mouel. The amplification of beliefs, the seaich foi
an explanation, seaich foi policy options, anu lastly is the choice of a policy. This
is the most compiehensive anu efficient mouel uiscusseu in this uisseitation
with its own flow-chait of the piocess. Shapiio & Bonham's FPBN analysis
closely miiiois the human uecision making piocess with highly stiuctuieu
components ielating to a foieign policy makeis schemas, influence of
enviionment, piocess of choosing a policy option, anu the outcome of actually
piouucing a policy. So in oui unueistanuing of the FPBN piocess, an event
happens anu is then subjecteu to a iange of neuial infoimation piocessing
stiuctuies. The input is 'amplifieu', showing that the foieign policy uecision
makei is engaging in cognitive piocesses to stait coming up with a policy
solution. These incluue engaging ones schematic unueistanuing of the situation.
A foieign policy uecision makei's schema is a cognitive stiuctuie that iepiesents
all of theii knowleuge about the stimulus, incluuing past memoiies, abstiact
knowleuge, examples, anu analogies. This is often in line with theii opeiational
coue belief system, a concept that while lightly uiscusseu within this uisseitation,
was populai in political science befoie the engagement of the psychology
liteiatuie on the moie useful schema theoiy. This is saiu to incluue the foieign
policy uecision makei's beliefs about the political woilu incluuing which
inteinational ielations iueology they favoui anu ielate closei to. The schema anu
belief system act as a filteiing piocess in this example, allowing foi the policy
makei to answei the following questions: is theie enough ueuuctive suppoit foi
an explanation. Anu is theie enough ueuuctive suppoit foi one alteinative. If
6S
these questions aie answeieu 'no', then accoiuing to the mouel put foiwaiu, the
policy makei must go back anu seaich past events foi inuuctive suppoit. This
continues until suppoit is founu anu a uecision can be maue.

Psychology auus to oui unueistanuing of this piocess, as the cuiient mouels uo
not explain the infoimation piocessing stiuctuies oi the iole of emotion in these
enough. Emotion can suiface thiough an exteinal oi inteinal stimulation, but is
not synonymous with cognition. That is, the ieseaich uiscusseu extensively
above uebates anu invaiiably concluues that theie is not always a cognitive
element to emotion, but always an emotive component in cognition. Nouein
neuiopsychologists asseit that iational uecision makeis who opeiate using
methous like costbenefit analyses aie uepenuent upon piioi emotional
piocessing. Bamasio's example of his patient 'Elliot' taking half an houi to make
his next appointment time baseu on the inability to engage emotion in his
uecision making piocess uue to a biain injuiy is again useu to show that not all
iational uecision making piocesses aie efficient, effective, oi optimal. This
asseits that theie has to be something moie than just iationality oi utility to help
Elliot make a uecision. The ieseaich cleaily states a link between the use of
emotion anu the incieaseu uecision making ability when faceu with unceitainty.
The uual level of infoimation piocessing we gain fiom neuiopsychology helps to
explain this. This is because theie is emotional stimulation at the lowei levels of
neuial stimulation. Builuing upon this is oui unueistanuing of highei coitical
piocessing that occuis once the lowei levels aie engageu. So then the piocess of
cognitive anu somatic feeuback must be involveu in highei piocessing - useu in
uecision making in unceitain situations oi when unueitaking moie complex
64
cognitive stiategies. uiven the piimal, iegulatoiy natuie of the lowei
infiastiuctuie, exteinal oi inteinal stimuli aie taken on a path of piioi emotional
piocessing befoie moie auvanceu 'iational' uecision making pioceuuies aie
engageu. The stiuctuial iealities of the biain anu cential neivous system loop
make this possible, as we know that the paiasympathetic, sympathetic, cential
anu autonomic neivous systems aie engageu in piioi piocessing. The key
uecision making ielationship between the amyguala anu oibitofiontal coitex
also make it possible to assume that theie is a blenu of inteinal anu exteinal
(somatic anu emotional) states in uecision making. This uual piocessing
infoimation theoiy is the most significant to inteinational ielations.

Levels of expeiience aie also a factoi in FPBN. This is exemplifieu in Sanfey et
al.'s analogy of uiiving a manual cai. 0nce complex actions aie piacticeu (like
FPBN), they become automatic anu less likely to involve highei neuial
piocessing. Theiefoie, the likelihoou of some emotional factoi contiibuting to
FPBN is highei if it is quick, efficient, oi seen as shoit-teim. Bowevei, ieseaich
shows that as uecision makeis aie faceu with moie uifficult situations like a
moie complex inteinational event, then the continuum theoiy of neuial
piocessing states that the minu iuentifies that the iisks of using automatic
iesponses aie too high anu will ieveit to a moie complex uecision making
piocess. Anothei factoi that has been shown to negatively influence FPBN is
moou. This is because moou impacts on memoiy encouing anu ietiieval. So in
the case of a policy makei, a pieviously emotionally stimulating event like a
teiioiist attack may have uiminisheu the policy makei's ability to iecall what
ieally happeneu in that situation, impacting theii ability to make sounu uecisions
6S
in its iecuiience. 0ui cognitive unueistanuing of human uecision making anu
FPBN is that it is baseu on uecision making assets, the possible consequences of
choice, the piobability uistiibution in unceitain situations, anu is baseu on
choice within the constiaints of enviionment anu piobable outcomes. Theiefoie,
we can ueuuce that the engagement of an emotional component in FPBN is not
exclusively a benefit oi limitation.

This cioss-uisciplinaiy appioach anu uiscussion of such a wiue selection of
liteiatuie allows this uisseitation to concluue that emotion uoes play a key iole
in the FPBN piocess. In fact, it is moie likely that the engagement of emotionally
baseu values anu expeiience is involuntaiy, iathei than a conscious uecision on
the behalf of the policy makei. The wiuei conclusions foi inteinational ielations
coulu not have been establisheu without the acceptance of psychology as a
contiasting anu complimentaiy uiscipline. This incluues changing the way we
see FPBN piocesses, cential to the inteinational ielations unueistanuing of
powei. Futuie ieseaich shoulu seek to builu upon the well-consiueieu
assumptions maue heie anu establish fuithei to what extent emotion plays a iole
in FPBN in uiffeient iegions, along uiffeient inteinational ielations iueologies,
anu in the face of laige cultuial uiffeiences. Fuithei ieseaich woulu uo much to
stiengthen the asseitions this uisseitation puts foiwaiu as it establishes a new
conceptual fiamewoik foi the unueistanuing of the iole of emotion in foieign
policy uecision making.



66
M3M@3QSA-FVX
Ahmeu, S 2uu4, H3+ I6216')2 J-2$1$,% -5 K(-1$-., Routleuge, New Yoik.

Bechaia, A, Bamasio, B & Bamasio, AR 2uuu, 'Emotion, Becision Naking anu the
0ibitofiontal Coitex', I+'+4')2 I-'1+L, vol. 1u, pp. 29S-Su7.

Bechaia, A, Bamasio, B & Bamasio, AR 2uuS, 'Role of Amyguala in Becision-
Naking', H3+ !..)2% -5 13+ M+F N-'< !,)/+(* -5 O,$+.,+%, vol. 98S, pp. SS6-S69.

Bleikei, R & Butchison, E 2uu8, 'Feai no moie: Emotions anu woilu politics',
P+E$+F -5 ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 O16/$+%, vol. S4, pp. 11S-1SS.

Bowei, uB 1981, 'Noou anu Nemoiy', !(+'$,). J%*,3-2-@$%1, vol. S6, no. 2, pp.
129-148.

Cloie, uL & 0itney, A 2uuu, 'Cognition in Emotion: Always, Sometimes, oi
Nevei.', I-@.$1$E+ M+6'-%,$+.,+ -5 K(-1$-., eus. Lane, RB & Nauel L, pp. 24-61,
0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess, New Yoik.

Ciawfoiu, NC 2uuu, 'The Passion of Woilu Politics: Piopositions on Emotions
anu Emotional Relationships', ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 O+,6'$1*, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 116-1S6.

Bamasio, AR 1996, Q+%,)'1+%= K''-'7 K(-1$-.? P+)%-.? )./ 13+ R6(). #')$.,
Putnam & Sons, New Yoik.
67
Bolan, C} 2uuS, 'Economic Policy anu Becision Naking at the Inteisection of
Bomestic anu Inteinational Politics: The Auvocacy Coalition Fiamewoik anu the
National Economic Council', H3+ J-2$,* O16/$+% S-6'.)2, vol. S1, no. 2, pp. 2u9-2S6.

Fiankel, } 1968, H3+ T)<$.@ -5 U-'+$@. J-2$,*7 !. !.)2*%$% -5 Q+,$%$-. T)<$.@,
0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess, New Yoik.

uauaiian, SR 2u1u, 'The Politics of Thieat: Bow Teiioiism News Shapes Foieign
Policy Attituues', H3+ S-6'.)2 -5 J-2$1$,%, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 469-48S.

ueoige, AL 1969, 'The "0peiational Coue": A Neglecteu Appioach to the Stuuy of
Political Leaueis anu Becision-Naking', ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 O16/$+% V6)'1+'2*, vol. 1S,
no. 2, pp. 19u-222.

ueva, N & Nintz, A 1997, Q+,$%$-.()<$.@ -. D)' )./ J+),+7 H3+ I-@.$1$E+W
')1$-.)2 Q+4)1+, Lynne Riennei Publisheis, Coloiauo.

ueva, N & Skoiick, }N 2uu6, 'The Emotional Calculus of Foieign Policy Becisions:
uetting Emotions out of the Closet', in Reulawsk, B (eu.), U++2$.@ J-2$1$,%7 K(-1$-.
$. J-2$1$,)2 ;.5-'()1$-. J'-,+%%$.@, Palgiave Nacmillan, uoiuonsville, viiginia.

ueva, N, Nayhai, } & Skoiick, }N 2uuu, 'The Cognitive Calculus of Foieign Policy
Becision Naking: An Expeiimental Assessment', S-6'.)2 -5 I-.52$,1 P+%-261$-.,
vol. 44, pp. 447-471.

68
Bastie, R & Bawes, RN 2u1u, P)1$-.)2 I3-$,+ $. ). X.,+'1)$. D-'2/7 H3+
J%*,3-2-@* -5 S6/@+(+.1 )./ Q+,$%$-. T)<$.@, SAuE Publications, Thousanu
0aks, Califoinia.

Beimann, Nu & Kegley }i., CW 199S, 'Rethinking Bemociacy anu Inteinational
Peace: Peispectives fiom Political Psychology', ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 O16/$+% V6)'1+'2*,
vol. S9, no. 4, pp. S11-SSS.

Buuson, vN 2uuS, 'Foieign Policy Analysis: Actoi-Specific Theoiy anu the
uiounu of Inteinational Relations', U-'+$@. J-2$,* !.)2*%$%, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-Su.

Buuson, vN 2uu7, U-'+$@. J-2$,* !.)2*%$%7 I2)%%$, )./ I-.1+(&-')'* H3+-'*,
Rowman & Littlefielu, Naiylanu.

}anis, IL & Nann, L 1977, Q+,$%$-. T)<$.@7 ! J%*,3-2-@$,)2 !.)2*%$% -5 I-.52$,1?
I3-$,+? )./ I-(($1(+.1? Fiee Piess, New Yoik.

}eivis, R 197u, J+',+&1$-. )./ T$%&+',+&1$-. $. ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 J-2$1$,%, Piinceton
0niveisity Piess, Piinceton, New }eisey.

}ohnson, E} & Tveisky, A 198S, 'Affect, ueneialization, anu the Peiception of
Risk', S-6'.)2 -5 J+'%-.)2$1* )./ O-,$)2 J%*,3-2-@*, vo. 4S, no. 1, pp. 2u-S1.

69
Kiunei, BR & Weiss, }A 1978, 'In Lieu of Rationality: Psychological Peispectives
on Foieign Policy Becision Naking', H3+ S-6'.)2 -5 I-.52$,1 P+%-261$-., vol. 22, no.
4, pp. 7u7-7SS.

Laison, BW 1994, 'The Role of Belief Systems anu Schemas in Foieign Policy
Becision-Naking', J-2$1$,)2 J%*,3-2-@*, vol. 1S, no. 1, pp. 17-SS.

Loewenstein, uF, Webei, E0, Bsee, CK & Welch, N 2uu1, 'Risk as Feelings',
J%*,3-2-@$,)2 #622+1$., vol. 127, no. 2, pp. 267-286.

Lowenstein, u & Schkaue, B 1999, 'Woulun't it be Nice. Pieuicting Futuie
Feelings', in Kahneman, B, Bienei, E & Schwaitz, N (eus.), D+22W#+$.@7 H3+
U-6./)1$-.% -5 R+/-.$, J%*,3-2-@*, Russel Sage, New Yoik.

Luce, BR & Raffia, B 199u, 'Inuiviuual Becision-Naking 0nuei 0nceitainty', in
Nosei, PK (eu.), P)1$-.)2$1* $. !,1$-.7 I-.1+(&-')'* !&&'-),3+%, Cambiiuge
0niveisity Piess, Cambiiuge, 0niteu Kinguom.

Lukes, S 1974, J-F+'7 ! P)/$,)2 Y$+F, Nacmillan, Lonuon.

NcBeimott, R 2uu4a, J-2$1$,)2 J%*,3-2-@* $. ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 P+2)1$-.%, 0niveisity of
Nichigan Piess, Nichigan.

NcBeimott, R 2uu4b, 'The Feeling of Rationality: The Neaning of Neuioscientific
Auvances foi Political Science', J+'%&+,1$E+% -. J-2$1$,%, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 691-7u6.
7u
Nelleis, B, Schwaitz, A & Ritov, I 1999, 'Emotion-Baseu Choice', S-6'.)2 -5
KL&+'$(+.1)2 J%*,3-2-@*, vol. 128, no. S, pp. SS2-S4S.

Nelleis, BA, Schwaitz, A, Bo, K & Ritov, I 1997, 'Becision-Affect Theoiy:
Emotional Reactions to the 0utcomes of Risky 0ptions', J%*,3-2-@$,)2 O,$+.,+,
vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 42S-429.

Nintz, A & BeRoun, K 2u1u, X./+'%1)./$.@ U-'+$@. J-2$,* Q+,$%$-. T)<$.@,
Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess, New Yoik.

0hiia, B 2u11, 'Beneficial Roles of Emotion in Becision Naking: Functional
Association of Biain anu Bouy', J%*,3-2-@$,)2 H-&$,%, vol. S, pp. S81-S92.

Reuu, SB 2uu2, 'The Influence of Auviseis on Foieign Policy Becision Naking: An
Expeiimental Stuuy', S-6'.)2 -5 I-.52$,1 P+%-261$-., vol. 46, pp. SSS-S64.

Reulawsk, B 2uu6, U++2$.@ J-2$1$,%7 K(-1$-. $. J-2$1$,)2 ;.5-'()1$-. J'-,+%%$.@,
Palgiave Nacmillan, uoiuonsville, viiginia.

Renshon, } & Leinei, }S 2u11, 'Becision-Naking, the Role of Emotions in Foieign
Policy', in Chiistie, B} (eu.), H3+ K.,*,2-&)+/$) -5 J+),+ J%*,3-2-@* Y-26(+ 9, }ohn
Wiley & Sons, West Sussex.

71
Sanfey, Au, Lowenstein, u, NcCluie, SN & Cohen, }B 2uu6, 'Neuioeconomics:
cioss-cuiients in ieseaich on uecision-making', H'+./% $. I-@.$1$E+ O,$+.,+%, vol.
1u, no. S, pp. 1u8-116.

Schwaiz, N 199u, 'Feelings as Infoimation: Implications foi Affective Influences
on Infoimation Piocessing', in Naitin, LL & Cloie, uL (eus.), H3+-'$+% -5 T--/ )./
I-@.$1$-., Psychology Piess, Nahwah, New }eisey.

Schwenk, CR 1984, 'Cognitive Simplification Piocesses in Stiategic Becision-
making', O1')1+@$, T).)@+(+.1 S-6'.)2, vol. S, no. 2, pp. 111-128.

Schwenk, CR 1988, 'The Cognitive Peispective on Stiategic Becision Naking',
S-6'.)2 -5 T).)@+(+.1 O16/$+%, vol. 2S, no. 1, pp. 41-SS.

Shapiio, N} & Bonham, uN 197S, 'Cognitive Piocesses anu Foieign Policy
Becision-Naking', ;.1+'.)1$-.)2 O16/$+% V6)'1+'2*, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 147-174.

Simon, BA 19S9, 'Theoiies of Becision-Naking in Economics anu Behaviouial
Science', H3+ !(+'$,). K,-.-($, P+E$+F, vol. 49, no. S, pp. 2SS-28S.

Slovic, P, Fischoff, B & Lichtenstein, S 1977, 'Behaviouial Becision Theoiy',
!..6)2 P+E$+F -5 J%*,3-2-@*, vol. 28, pp. 1-S9.

Smith, S, Baufielu, A & Bunne, T 2uu8, U-'+$@. J-2$,*7 H3+-'$+%? !,1-'%? I)%+%,
0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess, New Yoik.
72
Stein, }u 2uu8, 'Foieign Policy Becision-Naking: Rational, Psychological, anu
Neuiological Nouels', in Smith, S, Baufielu, A & Bunne, T (eus.), U-'+$@. J-2$,*7
H3+-'$+%? !,1-'%? I)%+%, 0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess, New Yoik.

Svenson, 0 1979, 'Piocess Besciiptions of Becision Naking', Z'@).$[)1$-.)2
#+3)E$-6' )./ R6(). J+'5-'().,+, vol. 2S, pp. 86-112.

Svenson, 0 1992,' Biffeientiation anu Consoliuation Theoiy of Buman Becision
Naking: A Fiame of Refeience foi the Stuuy of pie- anu pos-Becision Piocesses',
!,1) J%*,3-2-@$,), vol. 8u, pp. 14S-168.

Sylvan, BA & voss, }F (eus.) 1998, J'-42+( P+&'+%+.1)1$-. $. U-'+$@. J-2$,*
Q+,$%$-. T)<$.@, Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess, Cambiiuge.

veitzbeigei, Y 199u, H3+ D-'2/ $. H3+$' T$./%7 ;.5-'()1$-. J'-,+%%$.@? I-@.$1$-.?
)./ J+',+&1$-. $. U-'+$@. J-2$,* Q+,$%$-.()<$.@, Stanfoiu 0niveisity Piess,
Califoinia.

Walkei, Su 199S, 'Psychouynamic Piocesses anu Fiaming Effects in Foieign
Policy Becision-Naking: Woouiow Wilson's 0peiational Coue', J-2$1$,)2
J%*,3-2-@*, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 697-717.

Weinei, B 198S, 'An Attiibutional Theoiy of Achievement Notivation anu
Notivation', J%*,3-2-@$,)2 P+E$+F, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. S48-S7S.
7S
Winecoff, A, Clitheio, }A, Caitei, RN, Beigman, SR, Wang, L & Buettel, SA 2u1S,
'ventiomeuial Piefiontal Coitex Encoues Emotional value', H3+ S-6'.)2 -5
M+6'-%,$+.,+, vol. SS, no. 27, pp. 11uS2-11uS9.





















Woiu Count: 1S,S71