Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Personality dimensions and attitudes towards peace and war

Personality dimensions and attitudes towards peace and war PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between major personality dimensions and attitudes towards peace and war.Design/methodology/approachThree samples – two consisting of British psychology students (n=64 and 121) and one of Israeli students (n=80), responded to measures of some or all of: five-factor inventory, SYMLOG trait form, general survey including authoritarianism; attitudes towards peace and war; specific attitudes towards peace and war policy.FindingsThe general attitude measures were associated with the specific attitudes. Both were associated with authoritarianism but not consistently with other personality dimensions.Research limitations/implicationsDescriptive findings might not generalize and need contextualization. Authoritarianism should be measured in any studies of attitudes related to peace, war, conflict, and structural violence.Practical implicationsPractitioners of peace education may first need to address high authoritarianism and low integrative complexity. Also, countering structural violence related, for instance, to poverty or prejudice/discrimination may require a comprehensive approach including collaborative work with clinical psychologists applying both implicit and explicit assessment tools.Originality/valueDocumenting links (and lack of them) among personality variables and attitudes towards peace and war has practical and theoretical value – and may contribute to organizational schemes shaped by personality structure and bearing implications for negotiations. In terms of a paradigm by Morton Deutsch, our results show individual differences in, and associations among, variables relating to the remediable likelihood of parties being differentially likely to find themselves in negatively vs. positively interdependent situations; and carrying out effective instead of “bungling” actions. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace Research Emerald Publishing

Personality dimensions and attitudes towards peace and war

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/personality-dimensions-and-attitudes-towards-peace-and-war-qIAm77QF2n

References (33)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
1759-6599
DOI
10.1108/JACPR-05-2016-0231
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between major personality dimensions and attitudes towards peace and war.Design/methodology/approachThree samples – two consisting of British psychology students (n=64 and 121) and one of Israeli students (n=80), responded to measures of some or all of: five-factor inventory, SYMLOG trait form, general survey including authoritarianism; attitudes towards peace and war; specific attitudes towards peace and war policy.FindingsThe general attitude measures were associated with the specific attitudes. Both were associated with authoritarianism but not consistently with other personality dimensions.Research limitations/implicationsDescriptive findings might not generalize and need contextualization. Authoritarianism should be measured in any studies of attitudes related to peace, war, conflict, and structural violence.Practical implicationsPractitioners of peace education may first need to address high authoritarianism and low integrative complexity. Also, countering structural violence related, for instance, to poverty or prejudice/discrimination may require a comprehensive approach including collaborative work with clinical psychologists applying both implicit and explicit assessment tools.Originality/valueDocumenting links (and lack of them) among personality variables and attitudes towards peace and war has practical and theoretical value – and may contribute to organizational schemes shaped by personality structure and bearing implications for negotiations. In terms of a paradigm by Morton Deutsch, our results show individual differences in, and associations among, variables relating to the remediable likelihood of parties being differentially likely to find themselves in negatively vs. positively interdependent situations; and carrying out effective instead of “bungling” actions.

Journal

Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace ResearchEmerald Publishing

Published: Jan 9, 2017

There are no references for this article.