Anticipated results.

NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

CHAIR OF..

PROJECT PROPOSAL

«The Impact of Feature Films on the Perсeptions of Russian History»

Julieta Muradyan, 482

Research Supervisor:

Docent, Olga Gulevich

Linguistic Supervisor:

Title, Anna Mnatsakanyan

MOSCOW

The present research intended to cover most essential questions concerning the level of Russians’ militarism. The general objective of this project advances how the Mass Media representation of historical evidence influences the actual level of militarism in Russia. The subjects are going to respond to two questionnaires: Модель измерения ингрупповой идентификации: проверка на российской выборке (Е.Р. Агадуллина, А.В. Ловаков) and Опросник измерения уровня милитаризма Гулевич О.А. и Неврюева А.Н. X measures the social identification. Y – the level of militarism. After the first one they will watch military action hereupon they fill the second questionnaire. We assume to have the following results: the given military action movies influence the level of militarism.

Introduction

Background. The issue of this study is to research how the represented historical evidence in Mass Media influences the actual level of militarism of Russians. Knowing historical evidence of the native country is one of the main aspects that form social identification. On the other hand self-identification implies the way of how we determine ourselves and the members of the in-group united not only by the mutual past but the mutual future. Due to the actual Russian’s political and economical conditions caused by the Ukrainian conflict and the non-concrete vague position of the European Union and the USA there is necessity for measure and understanding the Russian people attitude towards war as a way of settling conflicts.

Problem statement. The main issue of the current research is to study way Mass Media representation of historical evidence influences the actual level of militarism in society. The general research hypothesis is the assumption that representation of historical evidence influences the level of militarism. There are three ensuing hypothesis:

1. If the Mass Media representation of military actions outcome is positive, the level of militarism is higher than the level influenced by the negative military outcomes represented in Mass Media.

2. The level of militarism is higher if the victims of the war actions are represented as military sources. On the other hand, it is lower if the victims are civilians.

3. If Mass Media represents positive outcomes for the further lifetime of the population after the war actions then the level of militarism rises. At the same time, if the represented outcomes are negative the level of militarism decreases.

Professional significance. Professional significance заключается в Новизне и практичсекой значимости нашего исследования. Новизна исследования заключается в отсутствии в российском и зарубежном научном знании данных об отношении граждан РФ к войне как способу решения политических и экономических проблем. Практическая значимость, полученных нами данных, выражается в возможности применения полученных нами данных для программ по изменению уровня милитаризма граждан РФ через изменение школьных программ истории, информации, транслируемой в СМИ и агитируемой в информационной среде.

Main Body

The literature review. Current research is a scientific novelty since there is no sufficient data about the mass media influence on the Russians’ attitudes towards war. Therefore the present research uses adjacent studies and data about foreign military attitudes.

Some scientists that have been researching such terms as peace and war came to the conclusion that “peace” and “violence” are not always antonyms and opposites (Galtung, 1964, 1981, 1985; Christie, 1997, 2006; Christie, Tint, Wagner, & Winter, 2008).

For instance, Galtung differs two major dimensions in these systems:

1) The first one bands from direct violence (such as obvert, obvious violence, wars). This kind of violence directly assaults and attacks someone’s well-being, harms the health and demolishes.

2) The second one ranges from structural violence (hidden and latent violence that attacks and destroys people slowly using social tools and arrangements such as exploitation and subordination).

Other researchers (such as Marchal, 2002) also debate that war and peace and not always mutually opposite. Taking this into consideration, they also argue that society’s attitudes toward war and peace may introduce two specific although negatively correlated measurements.

They assume that attitudes toward peace are foremost (but not exclusively) related with adoption of social harmony and equality (or refusal of structural kind of violence). On the other hand, attitudes toward war are mostly concerned with acceptance of direct violence (opposite to the renouncement of the direct kinds of violation). The negative relation stems partly from the multiplicity of the peace form and system since individuals may introduce and represent peace, at least partly, as a resistance to direct violence (negative peace).
Scientists argue that, even though, attitudes toward war and peace are supposed to be negatively correlated by the majority of the circumstances, they distinguish two different measurements. Thereby, researchers assume that can fall into four major groups:

1) The militarists that favor war and refuse peace

2) The pacifists that favor peace and reject war

3) The warlike peaceniks that favor both peace and war

4) The unconcerned. For them both peace and war are rejected.

It is significant to point out that even though scientists assume that some individuals have relatively inconsistent attitudes toward peace and war, for other individuals the attitudes can be generally compatible. For example, the warlike peaceniks are most likely to care about both. On the other hand the unconcerned do not appreciate either one. In a similar way, scientists and researchers faired that even though liberalism and conservatism are supposed to be opposite to society’s mind, there are some society’s members that consider these two terms as positive attitudes (Federico, 2007; Sidanius & Duffy,1988). Research by Heaven and Connors (2001) proved that RWA is generally related to the values of national power and rights, whilst SDO is primarily linked with the values of international equality and harmony. Moreover, Heaven, Organ, Supavadeeprasit, and Leeson (2006) showed that these values took precendence of RWA and SDO, which alternately preceded attitudes toward war in Iraq. Nevertheless, this can be contrasted with a more conventional model of the communication between ideological beliefs and values, that can suppose that SDO and RWA can prepossess individuals to hold concrete kinds of values (Altemeyer, 2006). Eventually, attitudes toward war and peace may have specific outcomes. Respectively, attitudes toward war and peace may have discriminating implications for people’s alacrity to be occupied in peace-related and war-related behaviors, with attitudes toward peace being generally linked to a willingness to contribute peace and attitudes towards war to readiness to contribute warlike behaviors.

Historical group awareness is significant in the process of self-identification. The mutual past of group’s influences the in-group unity and the mutual destiny positively. The importance of the research on connection between past and future is obvious due to the data provided by the clinical psychologists. The personality’s self-awareness throughout the past, present and future is directly associated with mental-health and well being (Haslam, Holme, Haslam, Iyer, Jetten & Williams, 2008; Jetten, Haslam, Pugliese, Tonks & Haslam, 2010; Wilson & Ross, 2003). The Self-identification violation throughout continuum is associated with depression, negative emotions, alienation and even suicide propensity (Bluck & Alea, 2008; Chandler & Proulx, 2008; Lampinen, Odegard & Leding, 2004; Pennebaker, 2003). This is explained by the fact that the knowledge about the past prevents people from feeling anxiety in connection with future uncertainty. According to Durkheim, continuity between past and future provides “existential security” (Durkheim, 1951). The same fact is observed at a collective level: a group prefers to realize that there is connection between their past and future (Sani et al., 2007). Consequently, mutual history forms individual social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). However a person is mortal the part that is defined by social identification is immortal thanks to the in-group’s further existence (Solomon & Greenberg, 1991). According to Liu and Hilton (2005) the history is represented to the society as an informational data about who the members of society are, where they have come from and what is their upcoming future and the further “path”. Moreover, the history defines the trajectory of the social identity’s form, the intergroup relationships and the manners of the present protection against the actual issues. Likewise, according to Liu and Hilton the historical representatives about the historical attitudes is a way to legitimate the social myths that explain the social structure and the resource allocation within the group. Sidanius and Pratto (1994) claim that the myths’ legitimacy is a direct intermediary between the global social goals and the discrimination’s results. The myths’ legitimacy supports the relationship’s hierarchy that regulates the resource allocation system, the social role and function determination within the group (Pratto & Cathey, 2002; Sidanius & Pratto, 1994). Nevertheless, there is no sufficient scientific data about the historical influence on the social ideology system for now. Eliza Techio и Magdalena Bobowik (Techio, Elza et al., 2010) провели исследование, целью которого было The purpose of this article’s research was the studying of the students’ opinions/views about the most significant historical events.

The selection was realized with 1179 Latin American, European and African students.The method of the research:Two different lists were constituted. The first one contained 40 different historical events. The second one – 40 different historical leaders. Both the events and leaders were located on the top of the International historical events throughout two or more cultures (Liu and other research 2005).

The subjects had to filter both lists (the historical events and historical leaders by the “significance” criteria and the “positivity-negativity” criteria. The results:

The data processing was realized by ANOVA statistics, which showed that the historical events that happened in Europe and North America were determined by students as positive ones (M = 4.42). The most positive mark was determined for the events in Africa (M = 4.68). The most neutral marks were given to the South American events (especially to the Argentina) where M = 3.17. Ultimately, the most negative marks were determined for the Spanish historical events (M = 2.93). Moreover, the obtained data was processed by the “Students criteria”. Pair comparison significance showed that political and military events are not determined to be as important as social or economical ones (for example, the Industrial revolution is much more influential than the French revolution). Thereby, the research proved that the historical event ranking by the “significance” and “positivity-negativity” criteria is caused by such prejudice as Eurocentrism, novelty and sociocentrism but not as politics and war.

Methods

To measure the level of militarism we use the Y questionnaire. Since militarism is closely related to social identification, the subjects before fulfilling Y they have to fill X. As a stimulus material the subjects were represented with 3 video materials (each one 1-3 minutes long) where war is directly illustrated by military actions, the war outcome for the further lifetime of the war participants, their families, victims and etc. The material was selected out of the most popular and ranked films and serials during the period of last 8 years. The participating subjects are represented with the students of the faculty of the World Politics and Economics of Moscow University. Their average age is f between 18 and 22. Both sex representatives take part in the study. In the course of the research the subjects are divided into two experimental groups:

1. The first group are represented a movie with positive military outcome.

2. The second are supposed to watch a film with negative military outcome.

Anticipated results.

We assume that the main hypothesis will be justified and the fact that the represented historical evidence in Mass Media influences the level of militarism. The research is expected to find out that the factors mentioned in the hypothesis have direct influence on the level of militarism:

1. Positive war outcome represented by Mass Media make the level of militarism increase.

2. Negative representation of the outcome decreases the level of militarism.

3. If the victims are represented as military sources, the level of militarism grows.

4. If the victims are civilians, the level of militarism descends.

5. The Mass Media that represents the positive outcomes for the future lifetime of the population after the war actions influences the militarism level positively.

6. The Mass Media that represents negative future lifetime influences the level of militarism in a negative way.

Conclusion

References

Galtung, J. (1964). An editorial. Journal of Peace Research, 1, 1–4.

Galtung, J. (1981). Social cosmology and the concept of peace. Journal of Peace Research, 18, 183–199. doi:10.1177/

002234338101800207.

Galtung, J. (1985). Twenty-five years of peace research: Ten challenges and some responses. Journal of Peace Research, 22,

141–158.

Christie, D. J. (1997). Reducing direct and structural violence: The human needs theory. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace

Psychology, 3, 315–332. doi:10.1207/s15327949pac0304_1.

Christie, D. J. (2006). What is peace psychology the psychology of? Journal of Social Issues, 62, 1–17. doi:10.1111/j.1540-

4560.2006.00436.x.

Christie, D. J., Tint, B. S., Wagner, R. V., & Winter, D. D. (2008). Peace psychology for a peaceful world. American

Psychologist, 63, 540–552.

Marchal, R. (2002). Les frontières de la paix et de la guerre [The boundaries of peace and war]. Politix, 58, 39–59.

Federico, C. M. (2007). Expertise, evaluative motivation, and the structure of citizens’ ideological commitments. Political

Psychology, 28, 535–561.

Sidanius, J., & Duffy, G. (1988). The duality of attitude structure: a test of Kerlinger’s criterial referents theory within samples

of Swedish and American youth. Political Psychology, 9, 649–670. doi:10.2307/3791532.

Heaven, P. C. L., & Connors, J. R. (2001). A note on the value correlates of social dominance orientation and right-wing

authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 925–930. doi16/S0191-8869(00)00194-X

Altemeyer, B. (2006). The authoritarians. Winnipeg, Canada: Author.

Haslam, C., Holme, A., Haslam, S. A., Iyer, A., Jetten, J., & Williams, W. H.

(2008). Maintaining group memberships: Social identity continuity predicts

well-being after stroke. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 18, 671–691

Jetten, J., Haslam, C., Pugliese, C., Tonks, J., & Haslam, S. A. (2010).

Declining autobiographical memory and the loss of identity: Effects on

well-being. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32,

408–416.

Wilson, A. E., & Ross, M. (2003). The identity function of autobiographical

memory: Time is on our side. Memory, 11, 137–149.

Bluck, S., & Alea, N. (2008). Remembering being me: The self-continuity

function of autobiographical memory in younger and older adults. In F. Sani

(Ed.), Self continuity; Individual and collective perspectives (pp. 55–70).

New York: Psychology Press

Chandler, M. J., & Proulx, T. (2008). Personal persistence and persistent

peoples: Continuities in the lives of individual and whole cultural communities.

In F. Sani (Ed.), Self continuity; individual and collective perspectives

(pp. 213–226). New York: Psychology Press.

Lampinen, J. M., Odegard, T. N., & Leding, J. K. (2004). Diachronic disunity.

In D. R. Beike, & J. M. Lampinen, & D. A. Behrend (Eds.), The self in

memory (pp. 227–253.). New York: Psychology Press.

Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide. London: Simon & Schuster.

Sani, F., Bowe, M., Herrera, M., Manna, C., Cossa, T., Miao, X., & Zhou, Y.

(2007). Perceived collective continuity: Seeing groups as entities that move

through time. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1118–1134.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.

In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup

relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (1991). A terror management

theory of social behavior: The psychological functions of self-esteem and

cultural worldviews. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social

psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 91–159.). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Liu, J. H., & Hilton, D.J. (2005). How the past weighs on the present: Social

representations of history and their role in identity politics. British Journal

of Social Psychology, 44, 537–556.

Pratto, F., & Cathey, C. (2002). The role of social ideologies in legitimizing political attitudes and public policy. In

V. Ottati, R. S. Tindale, J. Edwards, F. B. Bryant, L. Heath, D. C. O’Connell, Y. Suarez-Balcazar,&E. J. Posavac

(Eds.), The social psychology of politics (pp. 135–155). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality

variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.

LIU, J. H., GOLDSTEIN-HAWES, R., HILTON, D. J., HUANG, L. L., GASTARDO-CONACO, C., DRESLER-HAWKE, E., PITTOLO,

F., HONG, Y. Y., WARD, C.; ABRAHAM, S., KASHIMA, Y., KASHIMA, E., OHASHI, M., YUKI, M. & HIDAKA, Y. (2005).

Social representations of events and people in world history across twelve cultures. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 36

(2), 171-191.

Techio E., Bobowik M. (2010). Social representations of history, wars and politics in Latin America, Europe and Africa. [http://www.ehu.eus/documents/1463215/1504271/Techio_Bobowik_Paez_et_al_RPS_2010.pdf]

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14