Citation

Holmes M. J. Glob. Secur. Stud. 2016; 1(4): 285-302.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016, International Studies Association, Publisher Oxford University Press)

DOI

10.1093/jogss/ogw015

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A common assumption in international relations (IR) theory is that threat perception involves the very deliberate and painstaking task of processing information. Costly signals, movements toward rapprochement, conciliatory gestures, speech acts, intentioned behavior, and other actions are interpreted and consciously analyzed in order to answer the simple question: Does the relevant actor pose a threat? Yet, a wealth of evidence from psychology and neuroscience suggests that rather than consciously evaluating others, we tend to make quick judgments within milliseconds of meeting. First impressions, it turns out, are critical to judgments of threat as well as trustworthiness. And crucially, first impressions are sticky in that they last long into a relationship and color future interactions. This article elaborates this cognitive bias in IR threat perception, posits a theory of first impressions at the individual level of analysis, and outlines its importance in diplomacy. In particular, I connect the literature on first impressions to the problem of first encounters in constructivist theorizing, suggest links to the proliferation of symbolic violence, and find an antidote to symbolic violence in the practice of digital diplomacy.

Language: en