This essay demonstrates that the study of world politics should be situated in a cognitive approach, along with the study of foreign policymaking. As I will show, the so-called “rationality-cognitive debate” has become a pseudo-debate. Theories of both foreign policy and world politics must be realistically grounded in the assumptions and knowledge of cognitive actors to advance our grasp of practice as well as theory. The basic assumptions of the approach are described and the accumulated knowledge is reviewed in five critical areas: 1) the content of policymaker beliefs (from general images to specific preferences); 2) the organization and structure of policymaker beliefs (resulting in coherent versus fragmented images); 3) the common patterns of perception and misperception (such as the tendency to categorize and stereotype, simplify causal inferences, and use historical analogies); 4) the likelihood of cognitive rigidity to limit change and learning; and 5) the impact on policymaking (agenda-setting and framing, and formulation and choice). Although sensitivity to variation in cognition across individuals and cultures is increasingly important, international relations scholars cannot ignore the insights about human cognition if their theories are to reflect international realities.
Jerel A. Rosati (2000) studied this question.