Psychological Study of Patriotism PLEASE HELP!

Dear Fellow Kossacks, I need some help. I am currently putting together a social psychology experiment that I hope will not only contribute to basic "science", but also shed light on the mechanisms underlying unscrupulous politics.

The basic premise is that when someone is accused of something that they believe to be false, they will in some circumstances respond to disprove the allegation, sometimes in a costly and unwise way.

For instance, when during the McCarthy era people were suspected of being Communists, they were often forced to forcefully refute the allegations, often requiring them to abandon wholesome beliefs and allegiances that were deemed to be suspect. Today, with history repeating itself, the same is true of allegations of being "unpatriotic." To take one case, failure to support the war in Iraq is enough to call into question one's patriotism in some circles.

The request after the jump...

The study that I'm putting together is a simple one. My hypothesis is that if I can find a way to call into question people's patriotism, I can get them to a) be silent about their convictions that might be deemed unpatriotic (e.g. being against the war in Iraq), and b) endorse positions that they would otherwise oppose because these positions are labelled patriotic (e.g. The Patriot Act). The responses of people who have been called unpatriotic will be compared to those who haven't been so accused.

I've tried to be concise in my explanation here, but I realize further explanation may be required and I'd be happy to provide in upon request.

The Request

Part I: References to political literature that anecdotally describes this phenomenon. Particularly from the McCarthy era.

Part II: I need some way of making people feel like their patriotism is being called into question. I expect that this study will be administered by a "canvasser," that is someone approaching people on the street with a survey of sorts.

Now this person can't just call everyone a traitor. One thing to do is perhaps read a fictitious newspaper headline calling people who, for instance oppose the war, unpatriotic. My fear is that this won't be effective. I would like the person to really feel like their patriotism has been called into question, while at the same time being ethical about the whole thing. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I'll keep everyone posted on the progress and results of this survey. The implication of the hypothesis is that you can get people to agree with your views by calling them unpatriotic. I'm sure this is something people here are already well acquainted with, but I'd like to have some solid evidence. Thanks in advance for your help!

•  Take a look at the social psych literature

  regarding "Modeling"  The perceived  status of the "interviewer" is highly important but also as it relates to the interviewee's subculture

  by Mindman on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 01:14:24 PM PDT

•  Some thoughts

  Any experiment that measures changes in beliefs due to external prompting is difficult to do because it is difficult to prove that it was your prompt that influenced the change (if you are actually able to prompt a change).  You also have to make sure that what you use to measure pre-existing beliefs is equivalent to what you use to measure post experiment beliefs.  You say that you would select people on the street, but I think using college students would be more effective because this partly is tied to authority responses such as was seen in Milgram.  If I were doing this I would devise a computer based simulation in which one group was given a fictional scenario heavily laden with patriotic language and one written in neutral terms.  I would then have the subjects gather in a group in an on-line discussion forum and have them discuss and answer basic questions about the scenario.  I would then devise a coding scheme to measure the language they used along with the cognitive complexity demonstrated by the two groups.  I would then re-administer a belief survey and check for changes in basic beliefs.  You could then answer both of their hypotheses: did their overall beliefs change?  did they articulate those beliefs in a group dialogue?  Just a thought on how I would do it if I were a political psychologist.

  by Dave the pro on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 01:24:34 PM PDT

  •  This is much simpler

    By randomly choosing who we would be calling unpatriotic and who we would not do so to, we can then compare their responses. If one group is significantly different than the other then our manipulation (calling them unpatriotic) can be inferred to be the cause of the different attitudes.

    What I'm really looking for is the best way to make someone feel unpatriotic. For instance, offering people a miniature US flag for $30, which they will obviously not buy. That's not ideal, but that's my point, I'm looking for something that's better.

    by nussbaumski on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 03:32:10 PM PDT

    •  Of course

      Of course you would use a random sample with one group being the control.  I just wonder how you measure the effect.  It sucks carrying out an experiment and your measuring device is bad.

      by Dave the pro on Sat Aug 28, 2004 at 06:53:43 PM PDT

•  Politics on the Couch

  I don't know if these books would be helpful because I haven't gotten around to reading them yet, but if you're interested in the intersection of politics and psychology, you might be interested in these books:

  Politics on the Couch: Citizenship and the Internal Life

  The Political Psyche
  

  by hyperbolic pants explosion on Fri Aug 27, 2004 at 01:56:14 PM PDT