CDSn4001:
Conflict
Analysis
National misperception
as a cause of war
November 24, 2020
Miriam Matejova
Agenda
• Individual/perceptual lens on conflict
–How do leaders respond to ambiguity and
uncertainty in IR?
–Do decision-makers’ perceptions/
misperceptions/biases matter in global
politics?
–How can we use our knowledge of cognitive
biases to lessen the potential for/intensity of
conflict?
Unmotivated vs. motivated bias
• Unmotivated bias
– Results from the simplification/categorization that
decision makers use to make sense of the world
– Decision making characterized by bounded
rationality
– Bounded rationality: decision makers try to be
rational but face inherent limits on their ability to
do so (too much information, inability to process
it) → people take shortcuts, decision-making is
not irrational but imperfectly rational
Attribution
theory
• How preexisting beliefs shape
the interpretation of new
information
• Fundamental attribution bias
– People apply different
attributions to their opponents
than to themselves
– What does this tell us about
the security dilemma in IR?
Prospect theory
• How individuals weigh options is heavily
influenced by whether the outcome is seen as a
loss or a gain.
– Individuals are much more willing to take a risk to
avoid loss than to achieve gain.
• Results in a strong status quo bias in IR – leaders
will take great risks to protect what they have
Unmotivated vs motivated bias
• Motivated bias
– Due to some psychological need;
– The actor sees what they want to
see
– Cognitive dissonance: individuals
tend to construct internally
consistent views of the world.
When a new piece of information
doesn’t fit with internal beliefs →
psychological discomfort →
affects interpretation of new
information
Some thoughts
• Can theories about individual conflict be
applied on the actions/behavior of states?
• Are all causes of action justifiable?
• Why is militarism dangerous? Has militarism
gone away?
• Incentives to misrepresent: rational or not?