It has now become very fashionable to discuss the psychological aspects of international relations. Its study has been greatly influenced by psychological theories and research, particularly in America, yet little attention has been focused on the state of the art of the communications aspect of international relations, namely psychological operations. (Psychological operations is broader than psychological warfare in that it deals with friendly and neutral, as well as hostile, audiences.) The present review seeks to identify and assess the principles of, and recent developments in, this field and to advance several proposals for further progress in analysis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
This definition is adapted from the US Department of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, USGovernment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1974).
2.
(a) R. J. Barret, PSYOP: What is it? Military Review, LII, 57–72 (1972); (b) For an excellent study of the dynamics of international perception, see R. A. Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New York (1976).
3.
LasswellH. D., The structure and function of communication in society. In The Communication of Ideas, ed. by L. Bryson, Harper and Row, New York (1948).
4.
SchrammW., Communication research in the United States. In The Science of Human Communication, ed. by Wilbur Schramm, Chapter 1, pp. 1–16Basic Books, New York (1963).
5.
TanakaY., Psychological factors in international persuasion. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science CCCXCVIII50–64 (1971).
6.
Historical literature dealing with US psychological operations is far from rich. It includes the following: (a)DaughertyW. E, and JanowitzM.(eds.), A Psychological Warfare Casebook, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (1958); (b) M. Dyer, The Weapon on the Wall, The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore (1959); (c) H. D. Lasswell, Propaganda Technique in World War I, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1971); (d) D. Lerner, Sykewar, George W. Stewart, New York (1951); (e) P. M. A. Linebarger, Psychological Warfare, Combat Forces Press, Washington, D.C. (1954).
7.
ButterfieldH., Psychological warfare in 1776; the Jefferson–Franklin plan to cause Hessian desertions. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society XCIV233–241 (1950).
8.
DaughertyW. E., US psychological warfare organizations in World War II. Ref. 6a, p. 126.
9.
(a) C. I. Hovland, I. L, Janis and H. H. Kelley, Communication and Persuasion, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut (1953); (b) C. W. Sherif, M. Sherif and R. E. Nevergall, Attitude and Attitude Change, W. B. Saunder, Philadelphia (1965); (c) C. I. Hovland and I. L. Janis Personality and Persuasibility, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut (1959); (d) R. L Rosnow and E. J. Robinson, (eds.), Experiments in Persuasion. Academic Press, New York (1967).
10.
HovlandC. I., The Order of Presentation in Persuasion, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut (1957).
11.
HovtandC, I. and JanisI. L., Personality and Persuasibility, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut (1959).
12.
GehlenR., The Service: The Memoirs of General Reinhard Gehlen, p. 84, The World Publishing Company, New York (1972).
13.
AgencyUS Information, Office of Policy and Research. Proceedings of the Seminar on Effectiveness, R-121–66, Washington, D.C. (1966).
14.
(a) A major source on USIA is J. Henderson, The United States Information Agency. Praeger, New York (1969); (b) M. G. Lawson et al., The United States Information Agency During the Administration of Lyndon B. Johnson November 1963–January 1969, Washington, D.C. (1968), is an administration history of some value in understanding USIA; (c) T. Sorenson, The Word War, Harper & Brothers, New York (1968), gives an excellent overview of the problems and competing principles with which such an agency must deal; (d) A more critical, briefer, but equally stimulating presentation is K. R. Sparks, Selling Uncle Sam in the Seventies. The Annals of the American Academy of Policital and Social Science, CCCXCVIII, 113–123 (November 1971).
15.
KlapperJ. T., The Effects of Mass Communication. Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois (1960).
16.
In The Art and Science of Psychological Operations, ed. by R. D. McLaurin et al, (a) B. H. Cooper Jr., The undenounced intervention, pp. 241–246. (1976). (b) B. H. Cooper Jr. Accentuating the positive. pp. 280–286.
17.
NathanR., Cuba: strategic dilemma. Ref. 16, pp. 259–261; B. H. Cooper, Jr. Effective diplomacy: an exit from Armageddon. Ref. 16, pp. 386–391.
18.
CooperB. H.Jr., Teamwork in Santo Domingo. Ref. 16, 229–232; Divided counsels. Ref. 16, pp. 262–266.
19.
(a) R. T. Holt, Radio Free Europe, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis (1958); (b) A. A. Mitchie, Voices through the Iron Curtain: The Radio Free Europe Story, Dodd, Mean, and Company, New York (1963); (c) J. R. Price, Radio Free Europe—A Survey and Analysis. US Library of Congress, Congressional Research Services, Washington, D.C. (1971).
20.
WhelanJ. G., Radio Liberty–A Study of Its Origins, Structure, Policy, Programming and Effectiveness, USLibrary of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C. (1972).
21.
TaylorE., RIAS: The voice East Germany believes. The Reporter28–32(10 November1953).
22.
R. L, Heilbroner, Counterrevolutionary America. Commentary, XLIII, 31–38 (April 1967).
23.
AllenG. V., What the US information program cannot do. In Propaganda and the Cold War, ed. by J. B. Whitton, Public Affairs Press, Washington, D.C. (1963).
24.
KochJ. A., The Chieu Hoi program in South Vietnam (1963–1971). USDepartment of Defense, Advanced Research Projects Agency, Washington, D.C., R-1172-ARPA (January 1973).
25.
KatzSee P. P., Communicating with the Vietnamese through Leaflets, Joint US Public Affairs Office, Saigon (1968).
26.
Ref. 25, p. 66.
27.
Ref. 25.
28.
Ref. 25.
29.
KatzP. P., A Systematic Approach to PSYOP Information, American Institutes for Research, Kensington, (1970).
30.
Joint US Public Affairs Office. PSYOP in Vietnam: Indications of Effectiveness, pp. 120–121, JUSPAO Planning Office, Saigon (1967).
31.
FreeSee L. A., VOA Language Priority Study, USInformation Agency, Washington, D.C. (1969).
32.
LernerD., Is international persuasion sociologically feasible? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCCXCVIII, 41–49 (1971).
33.
SmithD. D., Some effects of radio Moscow's North American broadcasts. Public Opinion Quarterly XXXIV, 539–551(1370–1971).
34.
MartinL. J., Effectiveness of international propaganda. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science CCCXCVIII, 61–70 (1971).
35.
Martin, RefL. J.. 34, pp. 69–70.
36.
RobinsonD. D., A Brief Review Study of the Problem of Criteria in Psychological Warfare, Battel le Memorial Institute, Remote Area Conflict Information Center, Columbus, Ohio (1967).
37.
DaughertyW. E. and JanowitzM., (eds.), A Psychological Warfare Casebook, pp. 681–684.
WhelanJ. G., Radio Liberty: A Study of Its Origins, Structure, Policy, Programming and Effectiveness, Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (1972).
40.
KatzP. P., A Survey of PSYOP intelligence. Ref. 16. pp. 478–494.
41.
Ref. 19, Chapters 8 and 9.
42.
KatzP. P., PSYOP Automated Management Information System(PAMIS); Foreign Media Analysis, American Institute for Research, Kensington, Maryland (1972).
43.
KatzP. P., PSYOP Automated Management Information System (PAMIS): PSYOP Foreign Area Data Subsystem (PFADS), American Institutes for Research, Kensington, Maryland (1973).
44.
KatzP. P., PSYOP Automated Management Information System: PSYOP Effects Analysis System, American Institutes for Research, Kensington, Maryland (1976).
