Daniel Heradstveit

A Discursive Practices Approach to Collective Decision-Making

Using a discursive frame of meaning, Colemans notions of the power and interests of actors in a collective decision-making process are reoriented to emphasize the power of competing understandings of a policy situation. The contribution of actors to the collective decision-making process has an impact through their association with various idea elements or discursive practices which comprise their cognitive maps. The performance of a computer simulation model of collective decision-making based on these assumptions is examined using cognitive maps and interview data collected from officials who participated in Norwegian oil policy decision-making. The simulation model produced a set of understandings that is more or less similar to the actual public debate on oil policy and a ranking of policy preferences that coincides with the actual decision to begin oil exploration in northern Norway.

Attribution theory and Arab images of the Gulf war

This article describes the results of an in-depth interview study of Arab elites in the wake of the Gulf war, research that only partially supports a crucial finding of research on actor-observer differences in social attribution. Although the aggregated explanations of these Arab respondents were consistent with the predictions of the theory, the attributions of Iraqs behavior by Egyptian elites, and attributions of the Coalitions behavior by Moroccan and Tunisian elites were not fully consistent with the hypothesis. These results were interpreted to suggest the importance of distinguishing, in applications of attribution theory, between complex political situations and simple social situations, the perspective of actors versus observers, and cultural differences in discursive practices.

Decision-Making in the Face of Uncertainty: Attributions of Norwegian and American Officials:

Recent research suggests that when decision-makers are confronted with uncertainty they are more likely to engage in simple-minded thinking, such as the judgmental heuristics that have been studied by attribution theorists. In this article we examine how foreign policy decision-makers in Norway and the United States struggled with the uncertainties that surrounded a series of incidents in northern Norway involving Soviet ships. The analysis of cognitive maps based on open-ended interviews with the deci sion-makers reveals that their central beliefs influenced the way they processed information and made decisions. As predicted by attribution theory, Norwegians attributed their own actions to situational constraints, but they were more inclined to explain Soviet behavior as a function of dispositional factors. The American officials, on the other hand, interpreted Norwegian behavior dispositionally, and Soviet behavior situationally. The policy implications of the attribution behavior of the decision-makers sug gest a number of policy recommendations for both countries.

Ideological Dimensions of Media Messages in International Conflict

The 1982 Lebanon war differed from other conflicts by virtue of the extensive coverage that the mass media accorded to both sides. This coverage was criticized throughout the West, and in Norway complaints were directed particularly at the Norwegian National Broadcasting Corporation (NRK), which is a state monopoly. It was with reference to this debate that the Head of Broadcasting, Bjartmar Gjerde, asked the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs to conduct an inde-

Book Review : Thomas G. Hart: The Cognitive World of Swedish Security Elites. Swedish Studies in International Relations 6. Scandinavian University Books, Stockholm 1976, 227 pp

years, especially in the United States, where scholars like Alexander L. George at Stanford University, Ole R. Holsti at Duke University, Robert Jervis at the University of California, Herbert C. Kelman at Harvard University, Robert Axelrod at the University of Michigan, Matthew G. Bonham at the American University and Michael Shapiro at the University of Hawaii as well as many others have major projects within this field. The findings and assumptions of cognitive theory are based mainly on work done by social psychologists, and the application of the theory to political science is not without serious methodological problems in addition to the very controversial nature of the theory itself. In spite of this, there is a growing consensus that the cognitive approach represents one of the more promising paths to pursue in political science. Increasingly the cognitive approach has focused on decision-making, creating a longsought linkage to political behaviour. It is generally agreed that previous research has dealt too much with the formation of beliefs and attitudes, while less attention has been paid to the more problematic linkage from beliefs and attitudes to information processing and behaviour.

A Profile of the Palestine Guerrillas

The objectives and strategy of the Palestine guerrilla movement as well as the im mediate problems faced by it are analysed. It is concluded that future development will depend on the internal evolution of the guerrilla movement which is confronted with serious internal power struggles. Developments will also be determined by the future pattern of politics among the Arab States. The Arab world including the Pales tinians themselves is divided over whether or not to support the Palestine guerrilla movement, and about the form and extent of any such support.

Arab Demands and Desires in the Conflict with the State of Israel

This study, which is based on a series of interviews conducted in Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon in March-April 1970, focuses on Arab attitudes towards a negotiated settlement with the state of Israel. The Arab world, it appears, is divided into those who want to liberate Palestine while rejecting negotiations, and those whose main concern is to liberate the territories occu pied in the 1967 war, viewing negotiations as useful to this end. With many factors difficult to assess in terms of their relative importance and weight, the outcome of the struggle for the upper hand between the adherents of the two strategies becomes even more uncertain. Both strategies, however, are deeply rooted in the Arab world. Because of this, it is also concluded that a negotiated settlement, along the lines of the UN resolution of November 1967, would not be a basis for lasting stability in the area, notwithstanding its reducing the likelihood of new local wars.

Norwegian Policy in the Middle East Crisis of I967

The article discusses motives behind the Norwegian refusal to sign the British proposal for a declaration claiming that Nassers closing of the Gulf of Aqaba on 22 May 1967 was illegal. A signing of the declaration would have implied a non-neutral stand in the conflict. It is concluded that the case selected indicates a general Norwegian neutralist attitude when armed conflicts between Israel and the Arab countries occur, and that this policy is based partly on security considerations as well as on economic interests. It also appears that the Norwegian stake in the efforts of the United Nations in the area has contributed to the arguments and considerations for maintaining a neutralist attitude. This neutral line has been pursued while the Norwegian people at large have been in sympathy with the Israeli position and at times have articulated demands for a more pro-Israel policy. This has not, however, persuaded the Government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to change their policy.