print

Methods of neuroscience in studying world politics

Lebedeva M.M.,

MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, mmlebedeva@gmail.com

elibrary_id: 250953 | ORCID: 0000-0003-4162-0807 | RESEARCHER_ID: C-2309-2013

Zinovieva E.S.,

MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, elena.zinovjeva@gmail.com

elibrary_id: 625192 |

Article received: 2023.02.15. Accepted: 2023.06.29


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2023.05.09
EDN: GAFBFW

Rubric: Theory and methodology of political studies

For citation:

Lebedeva M.M., Zinovieva E.S. Methods of neuroscience in studying world politics. – Polis. Political Studies. 2023. No. 5. P. 141-152. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.05.09. EDN: GAFBFW

The publication was supported by the MGIMO University development programme “Priority 2030”.

Abstract

Neuroscience is actively developing and penetrating into social areas of scientific research. Compared to other areas of the social sciences, international relations and world politics have been less concerned with neurostudies, since the conduct of experiment, which is the main method of neuroscience, is limited. The research question of the article is the following: how does neuroscience open up new opportunities for the study of world politics and, in particular, international negotiations? Neuroscience is aimed at obtaining objective data. In the history of international research, there were periods of increased interest in objective research methods. The last period is associated with the fourth industrial revolution and the emergence, among other things, of neuroscience. The article highlights four areas of neuroscience in the field of international relations and world politics: 1) The role of cognitive and emotional processes, the problem of leadership, cooperation and conflict in international relations and world politics in decisionmaking and interaction; 2) Differences in the course of neuroprocesses among representatives of different cultures; 3) The possibility of transferring data obtained by neuroscience to international relations and world politics; 4) Limitations and emerging benefits of using neuroscience in international research.

Keywords

neuroscience, objective research methods, international negotiations, international relations and world politics.

 Full Text

Agbanyo, G.K., & Wang, Y. (2022). Understanding cross-cultural differences in conceptualizing international trade patterns: a neuroeconomic perspective. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 16, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.916084

Alós-Ferrer, C. (2018). A review essay on social neuroscience: can research on the social brain and economics inform each other? Journal of Economic Literature, 56(1), 234-264. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20171370

Aquilar, F., & Galluccio, M. (2008). Psychological processes in international negotiations: theoretical and practical perspectives. Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71380-9

Atzil, S, Gao, W, Fradkin, I, & Barrett, L.F. (2018). Growing a social brain. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 624-636. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0384-6

Axelrod, R., Hamilton, W.D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211(4489), 1390-1396. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7466396

Boksem, M.A.S., De Cremer, D. (2010). Fairness concerns predict medial frontal negativity amplitude in ultimatum bargaining. Social Neuroscience, 5(1), 118-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910903202666

Capraro, V., & Cococcioni, G. (2015). Social setting, intuition and experience in laboratory experiments interact to shape cooperative decision-making. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1811). http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.0237

De Almeida, A.T., Roselli, L.R.P., Morais, D.C., & Costa, A.P.C.S. (2021). Neuroscience tools for group decision and negotiation. In D.M. Kilgour, & C. Eden (Ed.), Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation (pp. 315-338). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49629-6_53

Dolan, T.M. (2016). Emotion and strategic learning in war. Foreign Policy Analysis, 12(4), 571-590. https://doi.org/10.1111/fpa.12052

Edinger, H. (2021). Theory of irrational politics: classical realist lessons on foreign policy analysis. International Studies Review, 23(4), 1181-1207. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viaa095

Fisher, R., Ury, W.L., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston, MA: Houghton Milfflin.

Franks, D.D. (2010). Neurosociology: the nexus between neuroscience and social psychology. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5531-9_7

Franks, D., & Turner, J. (Ed.). (2013). Handbook of neurosociology. New York, London: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4473-8

Gammon, E. (2020). Affective neuroscience, emotional regulation, and international relations. International Theory, 12(2), 189-219. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971919000253

Glimcher, P.W., Camerer, C.F., Fehr, E., & Poldrack, R.A. (Ed.). (2009). Neuroeconomics: decision making and the brain. London: Elsevier Academic Press.

Holmes, M. (2014). International politics at the brain's edge: social neuroscience and a new “Via Media”. International Studies Perspectives, 15(2), 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12012

Holmes, M. (2018). Face-to-face diplomacy. Social neuroscience and international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108264761

Jost, J.T., Nam, H.H., Amodio, D.M., & Van Bavel, J.J. (2014). Political neuroscience: the beginning of a beautiful friendship. Political Psychology, 35, 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12162

Kelman, H.C. (2005). Building trust among enemies: the central challenge for international conflict resolution. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(6), 639-650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.07.011

Knopf, J.W. (2003). The Importance of International Learning. Review of International Studies, 29, 185-207. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210503001852

Lee, N., Broderick, A.J., & Chamberlain, L. (2007). What is ‘neuromarketing’? A discussion and agenda for future research. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 63(2), 199-204. https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.03.007

McDermott, R. (2011). New directions for experimental work in international relations. International Studies Quarterly, 55(2), 503-520. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2011.00656.x

Morris, M.W., & Mason, M.F. (2009). Intentionality in intuitive versus analytic processing: insights from social cognitive neuroscience. Psychological Inquiry, 20(1), 58-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400902794548

Nye, J.S. (1987). Nuclear learning and US–Soviet security regimes. International Organization, 41(3), 371-402. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027521

Price, R., & Sikkink, K. (2021). International norms, moral psychology, and neuroscience (elements in international relations). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108966610

Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Gallese, V., & Fogassi, L. (1996). Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Brain Res. Cognitive Brain Research, 3(2), 131-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/0926-6410(95)00038-0

Sanfey, A.G. (2007). Social decision-making: insights from game theory and neuroscience. Science, 318(5850), 598-602. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1142996

Sanfey, A.G., Rilling, J.K., Aronson, J.A., Nystrom, L.E., & Cohen, J.D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. Science, 300(5626), 1755-1758. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1082976

Schutt, R.K., Seidman, L.J., & Keshavan, M.S. (Ed.). (2015). Social neuroscience: brain, mind, and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674286719

Soutschek, A, Sauter, M, & Schubert, T. (2015). The importance of the lateral prefrontal cortex for strategic decision making in the prisoner's dilemma. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15, 854-860. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-015-0372-5

TenHouten, W., Schussel, L., Gritsch, M.F., & Kaplan, C.D. (2023). Hyperscanning and the future of neurosociology. Sociological Methodology, 53(1), 139-157. https://doi.org/10.1177/00811750221128790

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391-425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764

Wright, N.D. (2015). The biology of cooperative decision-making: neurobiology to international relations. In M. Galluccio (Ed.), Handbook of International Negotiation (pp. 47-58). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10687-8_5

Anokhin, K.V. (2021). Cognitome: in search of fundamental neuroscience theory of consciousness. Zhurnal vysshei nervnoi deyatelnosti imeni i.P. Pavlova, 71(1), 39-71. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31857/S0044467721010032

Bondarenko, D.M, Gavrilov, V.V., Dremlyuga, R.I., Klyucharev, V.A., Kononchuk, D.V., Kuznetsov, A.M., Lukin, A.L., Rozov, N.S., Chugrov, S.V., & Yurchenko, E.S. (2022). Modern neuro/cognitive sciences and humanities: what can they give each other? Oriental Institute Journal, 2, 140-167. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24866/2542-1611/2022-2/140-167

Dezhina, I.G., & Nafikova, T.N. (2020). Global landscape of neuroscience and place of Russia. World Eсonomy and International Relations, 64(9), 37-47. (In Russ). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-9-37-47

Glozman, J.M., & Krukow, P. (2013). The social brain: new understanding. Moscow University Psychology Bulletin, 2, 121-133. (In Russ.)

Lebedeva, M.M., & Zinovieva, E.S. (2023). International negotiations in the digital age. Vestnik RUDN. International Relations, 23(1), 144-156. (In Russ). https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2023-23-1-144-156

Naumenko, T.V., & Larina, Yu.M. (2020). Neuroethics and international security. Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 27. Global Studies and Geopolitics, 1, 29-40. (In Russ.) 

See also: