Aggressiveness, Involvement, and Commitment in Foreign Policy Attitudes

Public opinion on a range of policy matters can rarely be characterized adequately along a single dimension. Most observers recognize that a multi-dimensional schema, rather than a simple left-right or liberal-conservative spectrum, is necessary for any satisfactory description of attitudes on a variety of domestic policy issues. Some domestic policy dimensions are correlated with attitudes on foreign policy, but only moderately so, and in any case foreign policy attitudes are themselves multidimensional. The linkage between concepts and the empirical structure of these dimensions, however, is unclear. Terms like "hawk/dove" or "aggressive/pacific" are commonly used, but only hint at the underlying complexity of foreign policy attitudes. In the United States, various studies over the past two decades have documented the need to use at least two, and perhaps three, dimensions to provide a reasonably complete description; this applies both to mass opinions and to those discernible among "elite" or "leadership" samples. A similar pattern of complexity seems typical of foreign policy attitudes in Western Europe. ¹