Misperception in International Politics: A Typological Framework for Analysis

The study argues that in spite of seminal advances made, the literature dealing with the role of misperception in international politics suffers from over-generalization and some fuzziness. This encourages eclecticism in research and lack of differentiated theory, which takes into account the complexities of information processing in foreign policy-making. Thus, the paper notes the special attributes of information in that arena which is the base for image formation and definition of the situation. It is suggested that misperception is measured in terms of the gap between the real and the psychological environments, and the study points out in detail the dimensions of the three sets of components which make up these two environments: the constraints within which the individual performs, the specific contents of the environments, and the frame of reference factors. It then goes on to differentiate between three types of misperception: cognizance gap, relevance gap, and evaluation gap, and spells out the contingencies on which the range and areas of their effects are dependent. At the dynamic level, the process of adjustment of perceptual performance is described in terms of a three-sided typology: adaptation, nonadaptation, and mal-adaptation.