Japanese Journal of Social Psychology 38 (2) 25 - 32 0916-1503 2022/12/25 [Refereed]
Japan issued many political apologies after World War II, although these failed to foster intergroup forgiveness. One possible reason for these failures may be the presence of within-country opposition to government apologies. It has been suggested that some elements of political apologies may be intended to mitigate such within-country opposition. Two studies (total sample size=1,500) tested whether a statement that dissociates past injustice from the country’s present political system and a statement that praises the country’s present system would mitigate opposition to a political apology. The results did not support the mitigating hypothesis. Moreover, we tested whether these statements would be particularly effective in reducing the opposition of strong opponents (e.g., individuals high in Social Dominance Orientation). Although this effect was significant in Study 1, a preregistered study (Study 2) failed to replicate it.
Apologies by political leaders to the citizens of a victimized country have attracted attention in recent years as a means of improving relations between nations. Existing studies have identified several elements that make such an apology effective, but from the politician's point of view, it is difficult to issue a statement containing all these elements, and they must then be chosen while considering domestic backlash and relations with countries other than the victimized one. However, it is not sufficiently clear how the victimized country's citizens weigh the elements of the apology when they accept it and how the nature of the harm caused changes this. Therefore, we conducted a survey experiment in Japan, adopting a conjoint design using scenarios depicting fictional US presidential apologies to Japan. Our experiment demonstrated three attributes particularly regarded as important in determining whether people would accept an apology: the reparation amount, whether the apology was official (formality), and the voluntariness of the apology. However, when something that people consider “sacred” has been harmed, reparation proposals are counterproductive, and the optimal apology form may depend on the nature of the harm.
South Korea–Japan FCR crisis and public opinion: Gathering survey data in real-time crisis development
Doi, S, Inamasu, K, Kohama, S, Tago, A
Kobayashi T. and Tago A. eds, Japanese Public Sentiment on South Korea (Routledge) 18 - 31 2021 [Not refereed]
Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 27 (3) 449 - 458 1078-1919 2021 [Refereed][Not invited]
Political apologies, which typically consist of (a) admission of injustice/wrongdoing, (b) acknowledgment of harm and/or victim suffering, (c) expression of remorse, (d) acceptance of responsibility, (e) offer of repair, and (f) forbearance, often meet opposition from the constituency of the apologizing government. This study investigated which of these 6 elements people would most strongly oppose. Eight hundred Japanese participants (400 men and 400 women, aged 20 to 79 years) indicated how much resistance they would feel to the Japanese government's expression of each of the 6 elements in a hypothetical political apology to an (unspecified) Asian country. The strongest resistance was associated with elements (a), (b), and (c), followed by elements (d) and (e), and the weakest resistance was reported for element (f). An exploratory cluster analysis identified the existence of a minority of the most resistant individuals (n = 64), whose mean resistance scores for elements (a) to (e) were greater than 5.5 on a 7-point scale. This group most strongly opposed elements (c) and (d), which were not the elements that the entire sample most strongly opposed. The most resistant individuals appear to have different sentiments regarding their government's political apologies than the rest of the population.
Journal of Global Security Studies 5 (2) 319 - 338 2057-3170 2019/11/01 [Refereed][Not invited]
Abstract
This study explores the political-economic determinants of military strategy during civil war to explain the intensity of suffering that certain conflict zones and their inhabitants suffer due to aerial bombing and landmines. Adversaries seeking post-war rents consider distinct consequences of weapons use in the target society: bombing causes instantaneous destruction, whereas landmines cause persistent but fading negative externalities on human activities, such as labor. Thus, it is expected that economic rents with different characteristics are associated with the use of different types of weapons because the benefits derived from these rents after the conflict vary. By focusing on the nature of economic rents available in conflict zones, this study demonstrates that aerial bombing is more likely when the targeted territory relies economically on renewable resources and industries such as agriculture, whereas landmines are more likely to be used in territories endowed with perishable resources such as gemstones. An empirical analysis utilizing newly compiled geo-coded data on the locations of US airstrikes and landmine contamination during the Cambodian Civil War finds strong positive associations between agricultural productivity and the number of airstrikes, and between the proximity to large gem deposits and landmine contamination, holding major tactical variables constant. The results suggest that societies' economic structures have a sizable effect on the manner in which adversaries fight a war and, therefore, affect how people suffer from it.
Political Communication 34 (2) 243 - 260 1091-7675 2017/04/03 [Refereed][Not invited]
Despite widespread concern over heated diplomatic debates and growing interest in public diplomacy, it is still incompletely understood what type of message is more effective for gaining support from foreign public, or the international society, in situations where disputing countries compete in diplomatic campaigns. This study, through multiple survey experiments, uncovers the effect of being silent, issuing positive justification, and negative accusation, in interaction with the opponent’s strategy. We demonstrate that negative verbal attacks “work” and undermine the target’s popularity as they do in electoral campaigns. Unlike domestic electoral campaigns, however, negative diplomacy has little “backlash” and persuades people to support the attacker. Consequently, mutual verbal fights make neither party more popular than the other. Nevertheless, this does not discourage disputants from waging verbal fights due to the structure similar to the one-shot prisoner’s dilemma. We also find that positive messages are highly context-dependent—that is, their effects greatly depend on the opponent’s strategy and value proximity between the messenger and the receiver.
Pacific and American studies 東京大学大学院総合文化研究科附属アメリカ太平洋地域研究センター,Center for Pacific and American Studies of The University of Tokyo,東京大学大学院 7 (0) 141 - 158 1346-2989 2007/03 [Refereed][Not invited]
This paper aims to demystify the United States'decision to abandon its long-standing polisy of not being primary arms supplier to the Middle East through a case-study analysis of ""offensive"" arms sales to Israel under the Johnson administration, particularyly the years 1963 1966.//I argue that this policy shift was the result of US policymakers'determination : mindful of both the weakness of the relatively moderate pro-US government and generally volatile nature of Israeli domestic politics : that arms sales to Jordan were increasing the possibility of an Israeli preemptive attack. In other words, out of fear that the moderate pro-US best to sell arms to Israel.//This analysis hopes to offer a new perspective on policies toward Israel in the LBJ era, which to this day remains a highly debated period of US diplomatiac history. Based on my research, it is clear that past examinations of the US policy during the LBJ years have failed to realize the increased importance attributed to Israel's domestic politics. Additionally, it is my contention that this shift led to a concomitant reduction in the US influence vis-a-vis Israel, as the precariousness of domestic politics enhanced the Israeli government's bargining power.//Thus, it can be said that LBJ-era policy vis-a-vis Israel was based on an entirely different set of perceptions from those used under either Eisenhower or Kennedy, and in fact, any pro-Israel policy slant was greatly due to the Johanson administration's desire to avoid an Israel pre-emptive strike and the outburst of Arab-Israeli conflict.研究ノートResearch Note
International Collaborative Research on Political Information Transmission by Using Survey Experiment Methods
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science:Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Fund for the Promotion of Joint International Research (Fostering Joint International Research (B))
本研究課題は、近世から近代にかけて、合意の保証メカニズムとしての人質制度がなぜ衰退したのかを、歴史的な実態の解明および社会心理学実験の手法を用いて解明することを目的とする。当初の計画において、研究初年度は西欧と日本における人質制度衰退の過程について探索的な検討を行い、仮説構築へとつなげる予定としていた。
こうした計画に沿って本年度は3回のオンライン・ミーティングを開催し議論を重ねた。具体的には、まず極めて多様な慣行を包含する概念である「人質」について、本研究課題についてどのように定義するかについて、古今東西の人質の慣行を参照しつつ、近代における国際テロリスト集団による人質略取や大戦期における占領地での人質問題なども射程に収めつつ分担者の西を中心に検討し、プロジェクトメンバー内で一定の共通理解を構築した。
次に、西欧における人質問題について、研究代表者である小濵を中心にKosto, A. J., 2012, Hostages in the Middle Ages (Oxford, UK: Oxford UP)などの先行研究を検討した上で、古代から近世までの人質の具体的についての事例収集を行った。さらに、東洋における人質の慣行について、分担者の前田を中心に、古代以降の漢民族と周辺民族との間の人質のやり取りから中世日本における人質制度の未成熟、そして16世紀半ば以降の人質の爆発的増加といった点について先行研究および事例を検討した。こうした多種多様な事例を参照しつつ、人質が当時の社会で果たしていた役割およびその成立条件について、分担者の三船を中心に集団間の信頼関係の醸成という視点から仮説の方向性を絞りこんだ。
Interdisciplinary Empirical Studies on Group Apology
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science:Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Research (Pioneering)
Date (from‐to) : 2020/04 -2022/03
Author : 多湖 淳, 三船 恒裕, 稲増 一憲, 大坪 庸介, 日道 俊之, 小浜 祥子
令和2年度は、同元年度に実施した複数の実験研究の知見を整理した上で、その論文執筆に注力した。新型コロナウィルスの影響を受け、国際学会が軒並み中止や延期になっているが、オンラインで実施されるワークショップなどにターゲットを絞って研究発表を行ったほか、実験については査読過程の経過にもよるが部分的な追試を行って修正や追加を行いつつ、高いインパクトファクターをもつ英文学術誌での研究公表を目指した。
たとえば、コンジョイント分析を用いた実験研究では、オバマ大統領(またはトランプ大統領)が、核兵器の使用について(または、ほかの謝罪が相当だと思われる論点について)日本に対して次のような謝罪をしたとして、謝罪Aと謝罪Bのどちらを受け入れたいと思うかを質問し、分析した。コンジョイント分析の強みは、たくさんの条件を組み込んだ実験が比較的資源を節約してできる点であった。公式度が高く、賠償の金品の大きい謝罪は受け入れられやすいなどが示された。この研究はAOPSSS(Asian Online Political Science Seminar Series)で報告し、多くのコメントを得た上で改稿し、現時点で国際学術誌の査読プロセスにある。ほかにも、いくつかの論文ができ、成果は国際学術誌で刊行済のもの、査読プロセスにあるもの、など着実に成果が上がっている。
The Decline and Renovation of International Institutions: Political Economic Analysis
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science:Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A)
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science:Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
Date (from‐to) : 2016/07 -2019/03
Author : KOHAMA Shoko
This research explored a mechanism of weapons selection during a war to offer an explanation for why certain conflict zones suffer intensely from particular forms of war damage, such as destruction by bombing and landmine contamination. We first developed a formal model in which adversaries seeking post-war rents choose between destructive and contaminating forms of fighting, depending on the nature of rents and their political institutions. The implications of the model were verified by a statistical analysis using the data on the Cambodian Civil War. The analysis demonstrated strong positive associations between agricultural productivity and the number of airstrikes, and between the proximity to gem deposits and landmine contamination. We also conducted a survey experiment and confirmed that respondents’ decision of employing nuclear arms in the context of a hypothetical nuclear war depends on the nature of rents and the size of their winning coalition.
This project investigated the mechanism through which ceasefires are maintained, with special attention to third-party involvement and using multiple methods such as formal modeling, quantitative analysis, and case studies. The main findings of the research are such that resource transfer during war destabilizes post-war peace and that third parties can promote post-war peace by managing adversaries’ resource use during ceasefire through foreign aids. One empirical paper was published in a peer-reviewed journal (with open access) and two more papers have been presented in domestic and international conferences and prepared for journal submissions.
This research team conducted a collaborative research project for April 2014-March 2019. It focused on the relationship between the external conduct of states and international institutions and produced 24 conference papers, 23 journal articles and 6 books.A major achievement was publication of an edited volume, Games of Conflict and Cooperation in Asia, from Springer in March 2017. The edited volume compiled 11 articles written by members of the research team on the realms of regional security and economy. Several articles examined how institutions influence interstate conflict and cooperation in the region, while others analyzed how regional institutions are shaped through states'strategic calculus in light of power, interest, and global institutions. The volume uncovered that regional institutions involve flexibility and ambiguity to accommodate with the shifting distribution of power, while retaining behavioral constraints to promote limited interstate cooperation.
This study has aimed to analyze how the conservative political regime of modern USA has evolved in the age of globalization after the 1980s. One of its major findings is the circulation system of neoliberal generic ideas through American domestic as well as international political economy. This circulation mechanism is maintained and promoted by the so-called Washington consensus composed by federal bureaucracy, conservative congressmen, financial and business community, and some public think tanks. The Washington consensus has been the heart of the present conservative regime and has been little affected by the changes of the governing parties and presidents. This study has found that modern political conservatives no longer adhere to the traditional or particularistic values but that they rather embrace universalistic neoliberalism.
This research uncovers why certain ceasefire lasts longer than others, using scientific methods including formal modeling, statistical analysis, and in-depth case study. Precisely, this study demonstrates that resource transfer during conflict causes ceasefire to fail under certain conditions. The hypotheses of the model are tested against data on ceasefire after WWII and cases including ECSC and Sino-Vietnamese conflicts. This project yields the following published and/or presented studies: “Peace and Violence after Conflict;” “The Logic of Mass Destruction: A Political-Economic Approach;” “Unilateral Defense in International Crises.”