Extending the Three‐ and Four‐Headed Eagles
The Foreign Policy Orientations of American Elites During the 80s and 90s
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6337669 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jerel A Rosati (University of South Carolina), Jerel Rosati, John Creed, J M Creed (College of Charleston) |
| Year | 1997 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 583-623 |
| Publication date | 1997-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0162-895X • E-ISSN: 1467-9221 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/0162-895x.00069 |
| OpenAlex | W2042895357 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 70 |
With the breakdown of the foreign policy consensus of the Cold War years, there has been a resurgence in examining the beliefs of the public and their role in U.S. foreign policy. The most extensive of these studies has been conducted by Holsti and Rosenau who have found first three and then four competing schools of thought. Our purpose is to build off Holsti and Rosenau's analyses and extend their argument. Research based on the content analysis of foreign policy and national opinion journals from 1980 to 1989 demonstrates that there is more diversity and complexity in the range and content of beliefs held by American leaders than Holsti and Rosenau have yet been able to capture through their “three‐” and “four‐headed eagles.” Although the three‐headed eagle serves as a useful scheme for categorizing the broad foreign policy perspectives of American leaders, it de‐emphasizes important differences in beliefs and ignores at least two foreign policy orientations that exist within their general categories. This is not a mere academic exercise, for it sheds light on the level of diversity and complexity of elite beliefs, which enriches an understanding of the politics of U.S. foreign policy since Vietnam. A preliminary examination of foreign policy and national opinion journals from 1990 to 1994 indicates that American elites are changing and adapting while at the same time, they are absorbing profound global changes into their prevailing belief systems, as predicted by the political psychological literature. This suggests that the diversity and complexity present in the 80s is likely to persist and grow throughout the 90s. Our research also suggests the importance of developing alternative methods to complement reliance on survey research in order to capture more fully the diversity and complexity of the foreign policy beliefs of Americans
Argument (complex analysis · Diversity (politics · Economics · Elite · Foreign policy · International relations · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Public opinion · Sociology · Economic Sanctions and International Relations · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Nuclear Issues and Defense
A Test of the “News Diversity” Standard
Culture Clash or Democratic Peace
The Shape of Elite Opinion on U.S. Foreign Policy, 1992 to 2004
Knowledge without power
A New Perspective on the Foreign Policy Views of American Opinion Leaders in the Cold War and Post-Cold War Eras
Features of foreign policy birds
Understanding the war in Ukraine
Worldviews in Foreign Policy
Ideology and discontent
Content analysis
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Controlling the Sword
Political participation in the United States
The American people and foreign policy
The personal president
Presidential power
Change in the International System
Perception and Misperception in International Politics
Perceptions and Behavior in Soviet Foreign Policy
The ‘Operational Code’
The Structure of Foreign Policy Beliefs Among American Opinion Leaders-After the Cold War
Monthly Review in Historical Perspective
Competing Visions for U.S. Grand Strategy
Shattered Peace
Consensus Lost. Consensus Regained
The Case for Adjustment
The Case for Leadership
American Hegemony
The Real National Interest
America without the Cold War
Dateline Campaign '92
Public Opinion
The Cloud of Danger
And All That
The Purposes of American Power
The Power to Lead
The Case for Pragmatism
The United States and the World Economy
U.S. Imperialism in the 1990s
Third World Debt—Past and Present
International Economic Distress and the Third World
Intervention in Vietnam and Central America
Questions for the Peace Movement
U.S. Foreign Policy
U.S. Soviet Policy and the Electoral Connection
Public Opinion, Domestic Structure, and Foreign Policy in Liberal Democracies
The United States, the Soviet Union, and the Politics of Opposites
Vietnam, Consensus, and the Belief Systems of American Leaders
The Structure of Foreign Policy Attitudes among American Leaders
Bipartisanship, Partisanship, and Ideology in Congressional-Executive Foreign Policy Relations, 1947-1988
Elites and Masses
The Foreign Policy Beliefs of Women in Leadership Positions
The Interface Between Beliefs and Behavior
A framework for research on foreign policy behavior
The Domestic and Foreign Policy Beliefs of American Leaders
American Public Attitudes toward Foreign Policy
The Three-Headed Eagle
The Foreign Policy Beliefs of American Leaders
A Discursive Practices Approach to Collective Decision-Making
Elites and Masses
Assumptions and Dilemmas in the Study of Americans' Foreign Policy Beliefs
Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
On the Foreign Policy Beliefs of the American People
How People Organize the Political World
The Third Debate
The Meaning of Vietnam
Empire as a Way of Life
How are Foreign Policy Attitudes Structured? A Hierarchical Model
Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting
The Rise, Fall and Future of Détente
In Defense of Intervention
Economic Imbalances and World Politics
The Renovation of American Foreign Policy
The Structure of Elite Foreign Policy Beliefs
The New Internationalism
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,29 |
| Citation span | 1998 - 2025 (28) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |