Cross Cultural Theory of Conflict

A Cross-Cultural Theory of Political Conflict and Violence Author(s): Marc Howard Ross Reviewed work(s): Source: Political Psychology,
Vol. 7, No. 3 (Sep., 1986), pp. 427-469 Published by: International Society of Political Psychology Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3791250 . Accessed: 13/12/2012 02:09
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
International Society of Political Psychology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Political Psychology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Thu, 13 Dec 2012 02:09:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Vol. 7, No. 3, 1986 Political Psychology,
of Political A Cross-Cultural Theory Conflict and Violence

MarcHowardRoss' to conceive It is difficult where there is no community of a human or between and conflict amongthemembers personsin thecommunity to which At thesame time, thedegree outsiders. is overtvaries conflict This toacstructural andpsychocultural widely. paperexamines hypotheses count them with and then tests variation, forthis multiple regression using a worldwide datafrom societies studied sample of90preindustrial typically thestatistical While results somesupport byanthropologists. for provide bothexplanations and external more the forinternal conflict, interestingly, twoareintegrated toform behavior. Ourargua general theory ofconflict overall mentis thatpyschocultural a society's determine dispositions its while structural whether the level, conflict features shape targets ofaggression lie within the same society, in othersocieties, or both. The common roots of both internal and external are harsh psychocultural conflict low warmth and affection directed at children, socialization and patterns, Thestructural roots andexternal conhigh protest masculinity. ofinternal violence is associated withweakcross-cutting flictdiffer.Internal ties, and polygyny; localizedmale groups(in uncentralized strong societies), while external and warfare arefoundinsocieties which on arehigh conflict socioeconomic where is absent, and in uncentralized complexity, polygyny with societies martial and weak ties.Thetheoretical endogamy cross-cutting are elaborated on anthropological and on, drawing aspects of thistheory psychoanalytic theory.
relations. KEY WORDS:political conflict; violence; political cross-cultural; aggression; object
of Political MawrCollege, 19010. Science, Bryn 'Department Mawr, Bryn Pennsylvania 427
of Political @ 1986International 0162-895X/86/0900-0427$05.00/1 Society Psychology
428
Ross
INTRODUCTION It is difficult toconceive ofa human where there is noconcommunity in thecommunity flict and outsiders. or between members persons among thedegree to which conflict At thesametime, is physically violent varies Thereare cases suchas theYanomamo widely. (Chagnon,1967),where and warfare are an ongoing of dailylife, condition in contrast to feuding theForeofNewGuinea where is rare ofdifferences openphysical expression and strongly discouraged (Sorenson, 1978).How can we bestunderstand suchvariation? Theresearch here contrasts twobroadsocietal level reported explanations forinternal andexternal violence andconflict. Oneview is structural, for patterns in termsof social and economic of conflict accounting The other on psychocultural focuses organization. dispositions, explaining violent conflict as a result bothof culturally learned behaviors and of perin a society. are derived from sonality configurations typical Hypotheses eachperspective and aretested data from a worldwide of 90 using sample societies. Thesesocieties, studied preindustrial typically byanthropologists, shouldalso be of interest to political scientists concerned with thecomof violence and conflict. parative study The statistical results are consistent with bothexplanations forinternalandexternal conflict. Moreinteresting, theanalysis the integrates twoto forma generaltheoryof conflict behavior.Our argument is that in rooted and psychocultural dispositions, early learning experiences crucial increating heldimages oftheself andothers, determine a sociecommonly overall level ofconflict. Butifpsychocultural lead to a proty's dispositions to engage inopenconflict, do not determine who pensity they very precisely and fights with whom. Herethestructural features ofthe contests, argues, andpolitical determine thepeople with whom one social, economic, system and with whom one whether are within cooperates fights, meaning they in another or both. one'ssociety, society, A basic starting is thatanygeneral of pointforthisstudy theory violence must consider the of in societies which humans political experience havelivedduring almost all of ourevolutionary As Friedrich and history. Horwitz of needs to make argue, "Any broadly comparative theory politics all possible useofthekind ofdataconcerning societies which anprimitive is able to furnish" To date,however, occathropology (1968:545). despite sionalcalls forpolitical to include data on traditional societies analysis with this has occurred occa(Easton,1959;Friedrich Horwitz, 1968), only sionally (e.g., Scott,1972;Bates,1983;Masters, 1964;Barkun, 1968). Themost obvious resource canbring tothecomparative anthropology is foundin the richethnographic detailscollected studyof politics in
societiesin all cornersof the globe. While most ethnographers oftenhad
A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict
429
little interest in political lifeperse, anthropological concern with explicit detailand description oftenmakesit possibleto understand, at least basicaspects of theorganization of authority, decision generally, making, and inthecommunities inwhich selection, conflict worked. leadership they field datafrom a worldwide ofcultures, crossSystematically coding range culturalists called holoculturalists) offerempirically based (sometimes abouthuman behavior in a widenumber of areasranging generalizations from economic subsistence to childrearing and evengames(Murdock, Levinson and 1949;Naroll,1970; cross-cultural Malone,1980).Curiously, studies of politics are somewhat less common and Whiting, (Harrington work 1972;Tudenand Marshell, has mapped thestructure 1972).Existing of formal andhasexauthority arrangements (TudenandMarshall, 1972), amined thedynamics ofwarfare from several perspectives (Otterbein, 1968, andEmber 1970;Ember hasbeen, lit1971;Divale,1974).2There however, tlework themoreprocessual or behavioral to politics reflecting approach in both anthropology and politicalsciencein recent prominent years et (Swartz al., 1966;Swartz, 1968;Easton,1959,1965),or theperspective of Gluckman and his students in Africa, whohave furnished therichest ofpolitics wenowhave(Gluckman, ethnographic descriptions 1954,1963, 1965;Cohen,1968,1973,Turner, 1957). Political of international warfare and domestic strife offer analyses rich which tobe useful tothestudy ofconflict in analysis quantitative ought other as well(Gurr, 1980;Wilkenfeld, settings 1973a).Barkun (1968),for therelevance of theanalogy between theinternational example, suggests and stateless societies. Becauseoverarching is absent in system authority and conflict haveimportant in each. both,conflict management parallels Whilestudies of international warfare to attention generally payfarmore theinteractive ofrelevant actors andtothecharacter ofthe environaspects studieshave done to date, thereare more mentthan anthropological of contact between thetwoin consideration of domestic sources of points stress and violence thatshould be useful here. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL VIOLENCE AND CONFLICT: WHAT IS TO BE EXPLAINED? Conflict is an integral ofpolitical It involves life. efforts oftwo aspect or more to obtain scarce at eachother's resources mutually opposed parties
have beenmanyanthropological 20f coursethere treatments of warfare which havenot beencross-culturally For a review see Otterbein comparative. (1973,1977).The classicis etal. (1968), etal. (1975), Turney-High (1948).AlsoseeFried Nettleship Vayda (1976);a good
detailedc~ae -tndv ik Mparitt (10771
430
Ross
or otherwise expensethroughdestroying, controlling injuring, thwarting, in their otherparties(Mack and Snyder,1957). Societiescan differ greatly in the levelsof conflict which conflicts are behavior, ways playedout, and themechanisms or direct fordisputesettlement whichare utilizedto control conflicts when theyoccur. Our goal is to explain this variation.Why are in some societiesor betweenmembers conflicts of a societyand outsiders while in and difother where there are violent, cases, clearlydisagreements is rare? this violence Political from is ferences, violence, open perspective, in or not simply absent a Rather we need to think about a present society. At one end violenceis common,perhapsendemic;at the midcontinuum. is common,but it takes moreinstitutionalized forms;at the pointconflict low end conflict becomesphysically violent. rarely in conflictbehaviorare conHypothesesabout societal differences cernedwith the broad constraints under which more specificgroup, inwithina societycome into play. Our differences dividual,and contextual analysisdoes not seek to explain the outbreakof any particularcase of violenceor conflict;rather,it directsattention to forceswhichmake any societymore or less prone than anotherto certainlevels of conflictand violence. From this perspective, the same sortsof precipitating incidents such as livestocktheft, economic tension,or adultery occur in many setof violentcontings,but in some cases theyunleashan escalatingpattern whilein other Understandcases suchexpansion morelimited. is severely flict, in conflict behaviorinvolvesexplanations that are ing societaldifferences broad in scope, but not necessarily simple.Whilewe considertheindependentvariablesone at a timein developingour hypotheses, the subsequent of specifying a multivariate model analysissectionshows the importance whichlooks at the effects of the independent variablessimultaneously to understandtheir different contributionto an explanation of conflict behavior. The sourcesof our hypotheses are varied.Some come fromstatistical studies in anthropology and political science. Others grow out of comworkwhichis less quantitative butmoresensitive to contextual facparative tors withinone or two cultures.Some are taken fromtheoretical or emwhichhas clear relevancefor piricalresearchfromverydifferent settings our problem. In some cases, then we are replicating fromone findings in studywithanothersample; in otherswe are testing hypotheses a crossculturalsample whichhave not been examinedthisway before.To theextentthat older findings are repeatedhere, we can be more confident of we need to understand whether them;to the degreethatour results differ, thisis due to theirlack of generality or because of specificways in which theyare testedhere.
431
in politicalconflict, we beginwith To analyzesocietalleveldifferences ethnographicreports of anthropologists,missionaries,travellers,and societies - half of the othersfor a worldwidesample of 90 preindustrial Standard Cross-CulturalSample (Murdock and White, 1969), which is listed in Ross (1983). It was used for three major reasons: first,ancarefulsamplingof through recognizeits representativeness thropologists the major subregionsand culturalgroups in the preindustrial world; sedistinctand distantfromone cond, the sample societiesare sufficiently or Galton's Problem (Naroll, 1970; Ross and anotherso that diffusion, Homer, 1976), does not pose a plausiblerival explanationfor the results; available on a large codes forthesesocieties are readily and third, published and socializationvariables(Barry numberof economic,social structural, and Schlegel, 1980). Our own coding efforts focus on could, therefore, detailon thesample,coding politicalvariables.Ross (1983) containsgreater and questionsof reliability. procedures, MeasuringPolitical Violence This studyis part of a largercross-cultural of political investigation lifein preindustrial societies.To considerthe broad pattern of worldwide variation in politicallife44 variableswerecoded forthe 90 societiesin the Factor analysisof the politicalvariableswas thenused to develop sample. fivescales (Ross, 1983). Two of thesedescribetheorganization of political and one describespatterns of cross-cutting ties,and two, power authority, whichare the focus of attention internal here,group variablesmeasuring and external violenceand conflict. Table I shows the variables loading on the internaland external violence and conflictdimensionsin the factor analysis. The variables are used to form two scales whichare thesum of the loadingon each factor scoresof thevariableson each dimension after theyhave been standardized and weighted their factor by squared loadings. The raw scores foreach of thecomponent variablesas wellas thescoresforeach society on thesecomscales are found in Ross Table The in theinsix variables posite (1983: IV). ternalviolenceand conflict in order of are: scale, descending importance, the severity of conflictbetweenresidents in the of different communities same society,the acceptability of using violence against membersof the same societybut outside the local community, the frequency of internal theseverity of conflict within local communities in thesociety, the warfare, degreeto whichphysicalforceis used as a mechanismfor disputesettleof violenceagainstmembers of thecommunity, ment,theacceptability and
432
Ross
forInternal Violence Measures" TableI. Variables andFactor andExternal Loading Factor Variable Loading Internal andconflict violence 1. Theseverity ofconflict different communities ofthesamesociety betwen 0.94 (4-point measure) 2. Theacceptability directed members ofsamesociety of violence when against 0.90 outside thelocalcommunity (4-point measure) 3. Frequency ofinternal warfare 0.81 (4-point measure) within thelocalcommunity 0.68 4. Theseverity ofconflict (4-point measure) 5. Theextent is usedas a mechanism for settleto which force physical dispute 0.67 ment measure) (3-point when of thelocal 6. Theacceptability of violence directed members against 0.55 measure) (4-point community 7. Degree ofcompliance with norms anddecisions of community bymembers localcommunities 0.52 (3-point measure) External warfare andconflict 1. Frequency ofexternal warfare 0.86 measure) (4-point 2. Degree ofhostility-not toward other societies justwarfare-expressed 0.69 (4-point measure) 3. Acceptability of violence when inother directed toward societies persons 0.64 measure) (4-point inRoss(1983). definitions andrawdatafor these measures arepresented "Complete
the variability of compliance withnorms on the partof and decisions members of thelocal community. on thehigh Societies endof thisscale, suchas theJivaro or Somali,havefrequent violent and internal conflict within warfare both andbetween ofthesamesociety. communities Societies at themiddle of thescalesuchas theKikuyu or Comanche, haveregular butinternal warfare andtheuseofviolence inlocaldisputes is less conflict, At thelow point common. are societies where conflict itself is milder and violence The Mbuti andPapago fall physical infrequent. Pygmies, Semang here. Threevariables makeup theexternal warfare and conflict scale:the of external thedegree of hostility to other warfare, frequency expressed societies ofviolence to peodirected (notjustinwar),andtheacceptability societies. Societies suchas theBuganda, and Maori, Comanche, pleinother are high on thisdimension, Jivaro while lowexternal are conflict societies theKungBushmen, theLepcha,and theTrobriand Islanders. The scores in thesample foreachsociety on eachdimension in Ross(1983). aregiven
HYPOTHESES
In theextensive literature on violence and conflict there are at least three of in observed variations violence. Some internamajorexplanations
ofPolitical A Cross-Cultural Conflict andViolence Theory
433
theorists tional relations that nations which differ interms ofinternal argue or external arenotnecessarily conflict different interms oftheir intervery nal characteristics. For example, Rummel (1968)and Haas (1965),looking at national of theforeign correlates conflict behavior of nations, find few correlations between the two. Midlarsky significant (1975) got similar ina study He finds that thesizeofthereligious results ofhistorical empires. battlecasualities and thatthe size of the military bureaucracy predicts is involved in war.Buthe finds of years an empire thenumber an predicts of developmental absence effects on anyof hiswarfare and the measures, thrust of hisanalysis is that internal of external warfare general predictors arepoor. In Midlarsky's warfare is better understood as a view,international ofalliances, function in theinternational constraints and status insystem, thanin national characteristics. Zinnes that consistency (1980)contends
attribute makes a nation to war.However, a combination ...no single oftwo prone of variables-those that level general types change slowly (governmental structure, of development, of resources) amount and fast-changing ones(unemployment, civil - doesseem suicide to discriminate between nations that become heavistrife, rates) in warand those that do not... we must notbecome obsessed with atlyinvolved of nations tributes to theexclusion ofenvironmental factors. We must takeinto account thefact that nations to inputs react from an external environment (1980:359)
other,as a numberof authorshave suggested (Whitingand Child, 1953;
In contrast, thetwoother that there areinternal difexplanations agree ferences between and low on but aboutwhat polities high violence, disagree thedifferences are. Someexplain violence and warfare in terms of structural features ofsociety (e.g.,Hibbs,1973;Otterbein, 1968,1970), identifyofthesocial, or political with ofconingaspects economic, system patterns flict.Othersemphasize as key factors in psychocultural dispositions thebehavioral of aggression and violence understanding expression (e.g., Montagu,1978; Gurr,1970; Cantril, 1950; Durbinand Bowlby,1939). are culturally sharedresponse tendencies acPsychocultural dispositions from the earliest oflife mechanisms quired outinboth stages through spelled and social learning psychodynamic diftheory. Despiteidentifying very ferentmechanisms, the structural and psychocultural perspectives sometimes thesamepredictions, while in other casesthey do not. produce For example, structural theories see greater differences between thecauses of internal and external while theories see more conconflict, dispositional between thetwo. tinuity it is relatively While foreither easyto find highly partisan supporters thestructural or psychocultural it is a gooddealmore difficult to position, findclear-cut evidence for one side or the other.Of course, empirical another result is thediscovery of ways in which thepsychocultural possible and structural forconflict behavior are compatible with each explanations
434
Ross
and Whiting, 1967;Edgerton, 1972;Greenstein, 1971).In fact, Harrington warn B. Greenstein and either againstexpecting Whiting (1980) (1967) Whatwe hopeto deterto holdacrossall behaviors or situations. theory has an independent effect eachexplanation on conmineis waysin which flict and howtheexplanations interact.
SOCIAL STRUCTURAL HYPOTHESES
linkconflict Structural to forms of socialand economic hypotheses Muchhasbeenwritten aboutstructural conditions andtheinorganization. itiation or expansion of conflict (Coleman,1957;Beals and Siegel,1966; is also Evans-Pritchard, 1940;Gluckman, 1954;Colson,1953),butthere someattention to thequestion of thelevelof conflict with associated particular structural arrangements (e.g., Hibbs,1973).LeVineand Campbell review oftheliterature onethnocentrism, consider structural (1972),intheir theories of conflict and discuss a number of hypotheses relevant hereas well.Whatthese is theidentification theories havein common of waysin which thesocial structural divisions in a society create interests political around which linesof political and conflict are organized. cleavage
Ties Cross-Cutting
Thecross-cutting ormultiple is probably the ties, loyalties, hypothesis mostwidely citedstructural about conflict hypotheses 1955; (Guetzkow, 1972:Chapter Coleman, 1957;Gluckman, 1954;LeVineand Campbell, 4; tieslinkdifferent ofthesamecommembers Colson,1953). Cross-cutting" and different in thesamesociety. communities to this munity According these limit the ties or least at the of existence, hypothesis, severity, overt and settlement interests which conflict, promote dispute through groups and individuals share.Dividedor multiple connect diverse and loyalites often members of a society; thepresence of suchties dispersed conversely, itdifficult makes to organize coalitions ofpersons andfactions whowillbe at odds withothers forextended of for are primary periods time, there bondsacrosssocialunits, lesssuspicion, more andgreater producing trust, 1972:53). One good measure of low (LeVineand Campbell, cooperation tiesin modern nations is theexistence of separate ethnic and cross-cutting minorities within a country. Hibbs'sanalysis of internal conflict language of largenumbers finds thatexistence of such groupshas an effect on
435
internal when thesegroupsare in a context wherepolitical conflict, mobilization is occurring (1973:65-78). thelower 1: Thegreater thelevelofcross-cutting the ties, Hypothesis conflict. levelof internal a societheseverity ofconflict within While tiescanlimit cross-cutting overt between a society and outsiders. increase conflict By might ty,they a socialbasisforpolitical thebouncan emphasize they providing unity, of a society. daries haveroots The growth of solidarity, of course, might thesociety, or intheactions either within ofoutsiders, butforthemoment thepoint is that internal sociallinks, whatever their haveimportant origin, forthestance toward outsiders consequences adopted (LeVineand Campbell,1972). 2: Thegreater thelevel ofcross-cutting the the ties, Hypothesis greater levelof external conflict. ties? Anthropological Marriage.But what producescross-cutting as well)begins, notsurprisingly, theory (andsociobiological theory bylookand marriage alliances. bondscreate mutual ingat kinship Kinship obligationand solidarity, while theabsence of these tiesmakesforpotentiality hostile Fromthisview, a preference formarriage outrelationships. then, sidethelocalcommunity inhibits conflict different communities of among thesamesociety because will notwant to fight with with those whom people share andother affective bonds.Furthermore, thetheory they kinship sugthat thepresence of marriage willbe related to other forms gests exchange ofexchange localcommunities. theestablishment of trade among Through and other links severe conflict is inhibited inmuch thesamewaythat functionalists canbe achieved attheinternational level suggest integration (e.g., andSchiengold, internal Haas, 1965;Lindberg 1970).Ofcourse, peacemay havea price in terms ofexternal strife. Societies with bondsamong strong localcommunities more ethnocentric and brazen when maybecome facing outsiders. Whenallianceswithneighbors are easilymobilized, attacks outsiders An emphasis on theperceptual against maybe morecommon. features of preferred withinthe local community stresses marriage and distrust of outsiders as products or as suspiciousness alternatively
436
Ross
causesofin-group butineither casethepattern caneasily become marriage, the Here mechanism is that isolation and distrust of outkey reinforcing. siders makeit easyto takethenext with to conflict them. step open thelevel oflocalcommunity 3: Thegreater intramarriage, Hypothesis thelower thelevelofinternal, andthehigher thelevel ofexternal, violence and conflict. it has tiessounds viewofmarriage Whilethisfunctionalist plausible, with closekinis potentially as well.Just becausefighting someweakness and exchanges does not meanit won'toccur.Alliances disadvantageous clearowntensions, as themother-in-law havetheir jokesinwestern society showthat thevastmaAfter from ourownsociety all, statistics lyreveal. of violent crimes are committed closekinand good friends. jority among of theexchange viewof marriage as inhibiting violence Another criticism itis saidthat on societies where "wemarry is theliterature between groups inNewGuinea, Haano (1974) whowe fight" 1977).In onestudy (Meggitt, and marriage took place between foundthatfighting thesamevillages. to fighting, he suggests thatparticular Rather thanserving as a deterrent seenas a reaction towarfare maybe more usefully marriage patterns (1974: inwarfare seized canbe desirable because a marriage 289).Women partners in return. kin groupdoes not have to giveup any of its own females thispattern of taking women as wivesclearly occursin enemy Although someparts oftheworld, itremains to be determined howwidespread this is of marriage as a source on a worldwide basis. partners or not a society internal Residence. whether favors comKnowing to know us partof what we want aboutwhois munity marriage onlytells whom. Interms oftheimpact onviolence andconflict, several anmarrying havefocused attention on thedispersion orconcenthropologists particular tration of malesin a society since arealmost in dominant they universally overfighting andwarfare and 1972: (LeVine Campbell, 52). Murphy (1957) and LeVine(1965) arguethatmatrilocal or uxorilocal residence disperse conflict communities of thesamesociety males, thereby inhibiting among while external cross-cultural Ember and promoting fighting. Using samples, Ember(1971)and Divale (1974)also find thatmatrilocality is associated withexternal withpatrilocality morecommonwheninternal warfare, is the this is case is thesubject of disagreement, fightinghigh. Exactly why however. TheEmbers that warfare interestingly hypothesize patterns shape residence rules.Divale(1974),on theother roleon hand,placesa primary theeffects of migration: Patrilocal which intopreviously groups migrate areasadoptmatrilocal to increase residence internal populated peaceandto
437
be better in facing united enemies outside (Divale, 1974).WhenEmber the two she finds that Divale'sresults compares explanations, perhaps are as a function bestunderstood of societal and complexity sizeand are not withher theory inconsistent necessarily (1974). Van Velzen and van content there is less internal conflict in matrilocal societies Watering (1960) because are not while groups organized power present, Murphy's explanaof it, in contrast, tion,and LeVine'sapplication givea crucialrole to as well as in the choice factors oftargets for structural, psychodynamic, aggression. 4: Matrilocality will bepositively associated with and Hypothesis external, with internal violence and conflict. negatively If matrilocality inhibits internal is generally violence, patrilocality as enhancing it (Murdock, viewed Ember and 1949;Divale,1974; Ember, andOtterbein, 1971;Otterbein 1965;Otterbein, 1968).Bybringing together of related maleswith common thestructure groups of perceived interests, thesociety a the absence ofinhibitions encourages pugnaciousness through on fighting. While these same groupings external enemies may fight there willnotbe as much distinction between together, enemies inside and outsidethe society as thereis in matrilocal societies. this Apparently to mobilizelocal fighting capacity engroupsis offset by difficulties countered in forming alliances to fight outside so thatOtterbein enemies, no connection between and external (1968)finds conflict. patrilocality 5: Patrilocality willbe positively associated with internal Hypothesis violence and conflict, butunrelated to external warfare. Trade. The functionalist school ininternational Intercommunity relations advocates theexchange of persons and goodsas crucial to inhibiting warfare nations among (Haas, 1964).Developing interdependencies among communities inhibit overfighting will,in thisview, between them and enof peaceful mechanisms forresolving couragethe development disputes when do arise. While Deutsch and others that they areimagree exchanges intheintegrative tend toseethem portant as theresults, more process, they thanas causes,of integration (Deutsch, 1957;Merritt, 1966).Butwhether trade leadstopeaceful relations between orwhether itfollows communities, from the willbe positive in either them, relationship case.
438
Ross
6: The greater thelevel of intercommunity thelower trade, Hypothesis thelevelof internal and conflict. violence
Fraternal Interest GroupTheory Fraternal interest connects internal conflict to theacgrouptheory tionsof localized, malekinship common interests groups protecting (van Velzen and vanWetering, tests of thishypothesis, Otter1960).In several bein(1968) and Otterbein and Otterbein (1965) foundthatin politically uncentralized societies thelevelsof feuding and internal warfare (armed conflict between different communities of thesamesociety) are related to the presence of fraternal interest measured groups, operationally by the of patrilocality and polygyny. a presence Paige and Paige (1981)propose more refined version ofthis thefraternal interest theory, suggesting groups willbe particularly when theresources males aresignificant, strong protect nonmobile and stable.Strong fraternal interest are a structural argroups of related malesinto rangement making possibletherapidmobilization datashowing that fighting groups. Kang(1976),however, present contrary thelevelof feuding as blood revenge a homicide) was (defined following unrelated to the dispersal of malesthrough residence rules,and when Otterbein examined the relationship betweenfraternal interest group and external he found noneat all (1970). strength warfare, 7: Fraternal interest will bepositively associated Hypothesis group strength with internal violence andconflict in uncentralized butunrelated to societies, external violence and conflict. are commonly viewed as warlike and Polygyny. Polygynous systems conflict ridden for several reasons. Oneview is that is polygynyusually supandconflict is high because related males with comported bypatrilocality, moninterests aregrouped as spelled outinfraternal interest together, group Otterbein that is a better ofinternal theory. (1968)finds polygyny predictor warfare thanpatrilocality. Ember(1974),in a study of polygyny, argues that warfare andunbalanced sexratios leadto polygyny, nottheother way around.Polygyny is a response to high malemortality as thecommunity needsto replenish itsmembers (1976:204). Divaleand Harris (1976:524) describe a malesupremacist of which bothpolygyny and high incomplex ternal warfare are a part,although et note the serious Kang al. (1979)
439
in their flaws boththeir and theory presentation, leaving methodological in doubt. findings ofpolygynous thelevel thegreater 8: Thegreater marriage, Hypothesis and external violence and conflict. thelevelof internal Socioeconomic Complexity in the most Despitethe popularimageof violenceand anarchy available studies show that those societies at thesimplest societies, primitive leveloftechnolgocial areno more to violence than those complexity prone which arehigh on complexity. someargue that socialandeconomic Rather, differentiation fosters internal conflict as morediverse and competing interests in more producemorefrequent Furthermore, disputes. complex societies thereis morepotential conflict becausethereis more simply availableforallocation. It is notclear,however, thatgreater complexity conflict for after conflict is not produces levels, higher all,greater potential the same thing as actualconflict. For one thing, with the rise in along socioeconomic there is a rise in coordination complexity parallel political and control control should limit then or (Ross, 1981).The risein political channel conflict to maintain a stable socialorder those with the permitting shareof thevaluedgoods to maintain them largest (Fried,1967).Bates that more distribute more benefits to (1983)also suggests complex systems their themaintenance of order to them. members, making rewarding at societies which arevery lowin socioeconomic Looking complexity no clear Some of thewriting on hunters andgatherers provides expectation. stresses thewaysin which coordination and coperation of theentire comin activities such as areessential for andoutbreaks munity hunting survival, ofsevere conflict within thecommunity arerare 1961;Marshall, (Turnbull, At the same the 1961;Draper, ofsome 1978). time, enthnographic examples ofthemost conflict-ridden societies aregroups with a similarly lowlevel of suchas theYanomamo in SouthAfrica or various in complexity groups New Guinea(Chagnon, 1967;Meggitt, 1977;Koch, 1974).Heresocieties mechanisms of coordination and control also havefewmeansfor lacking conflicts oncethey break out. limiting open theliterature on modern Zimmerman Reviewing states, (1980)finds three is greater violence intheleastdeveloped competing hypotheses-that nations etal., 1969), that therelationship willbe 1959;Feierabend (Lipset, curvilinear andthat different forms ofconflict, for (Hibbs,1973), example, will be relatedto complexity vs. rebellion, protest in different ways.
440
Ross
finds Otterbein thesameuncertainty in hisreview of material from tradia very lowconnection Russell tionalsocieties (1972)finds (1973),whereas and complexity. between violence 9: It is uncertain howthelevel ofsocialandeconomic comHypothesis willbe related in a society to thelevel of internal conflict. plexity morestraightforward. The case of external conflict seems Discussing theories of ethnocentrism, LeVine and Campbellcontend evolutionary there for is goodsupport thehypothesis that societies which havebeenmore in warfare warlike and moresuccessful havedisplaced thosewhich lack suchtraits evolution overa longtime (1972: 72-77).Lookingat human that conflict has beenfunctional forhuman period, Bigelow (1973)argues evolution and thatgroups which in external conflict successfully engaged more means ofinternal alsoevolved coordination. Alsoadopsophisticated ting an evolutionary perspective, Wright (1942) findsthat increasing andcivilization areassociated with a parallel riseintheseverity technology ofwarfare. thesamedataBrock andGaltung a Reanalyzing (1966)also find correlation between and belligerence. at modern nacomplexity Looking Haas (1965)finds a modest formoredeveloped nations to tions, tendency havehigher levels ofexternal conflict. Data presented inTextor (1967)sugat leasta weaktendency for warfare and bellicosity gest (notdistinguishing between internal andexternal inmore societies. war)to be greater complex In contrast, Otterbein this In thepreface however. link, (1970)didnotfind to hisstudy, hesaysheplanned totest a number ofeconomic andecological aboutwarfare, butthesevariables weresuchpoor predictors hypotheses thatthey were from theanalysis. dropped thelevelof socioeconomic the 10: The higher Hypothesis complexity, thelevelof external violence and conflict. greater Political hasreceived more attention as a correlate ofconcomplexity flict and warfare thansocioeconomic complexity. Wright's (1942)analysis inthetype identifies a shift andseverity ofwarfare with political complexias a crucial ty,and Brockand Galtung (1966) see political organization of increased Swanson's warfare measure is positively shaper belligerence. correlated with in of centralization a 45 cultures political sample (Textor, andThomas' of65 preindustrial nations 1967).Midlarsky analysis suggests
thatpoliticalcomplexity has a clearerpositiveimpacton warfare thandoes
A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory
441
socioeconomic complexity war, (1975). In his studyof international found that is a crucial centralization variable. He sugMidlarsky political that onereason for this iscentralization's effect inincreasing a nation's gests achieved which its increases but not its inthe status, aspirations recognition international system (1975: 140). Other theories to thesameconnections with somewhat different point mechanisms. that thedevelopment of military underlying Spencer suggests leaders and subsequent centralization. Some leadership produces political intheother direction interputthecausalarrow (Service, 1975).Materialist of theriseof thestate that thedevelopment of stratificapretations argue tionand wealth theneed fora military creates to protect inprivileged terests internal andexternal ofthe against predators (Fried, 1967).Theories state as a mechanism of conquest seethegrowth of military sophistication as a wayto control and resources neighboring peoples (Adams,1966). thelevel ofpolitical thehigher Hypothesis complexity, l]a: Thegreater thelevelof external violence and conflict. A somewhat different that ifmore even centralizperspective suggests ed systems are more theconcentration of political militarily sophisticated, in a fewhandsplacesgreater control overtheoutbreak ofviolence. power Thisview theroleofthestate as a conflict inhibitor its emphasizes through control over theinstruments ofviolence is effec(Service, 1975).Ifthestate tivein controlling theoverall levelof violence as wellas itstargets, then centralization willbe associated with lower violence both political internally and externally. 11b:The higher thelevel of political thelower Hypothesis complexity, thelevelof internal and external conflict and violence. Someauthors that willhavean indirect, purpose political complexity rather than effect onconflict andviolence. Forexample, direct, while Otterbein(1968,1970)andOtterbein andOtterbein did not find direct ef(1965) of political fects centralization on internal or external their conflict, argument isthat centralization isa crucial variable. Itdoesnotaffect intervening thelevelofconflict, butthecorrelates ofconflict aredifferent at eachlevel of centralization. For example, in uncentralized societies theexistence of fraternal interest is associated with groups positively and internal feuding
war, but this is not the case in centralized societies,those were political
442
Ross
is exercised thelocalcommunity. In hisstudy ofexternal authority beyond societies war, Otterbein (1970) findsthatmorecentralized adopt more havehigher and engage in sophisticated rates, military strategies, casualty warmorefrequently, but whilethere is no direct effect of political centralization on the warfare the relationship between variables, military andwarfare ofcentralization. holdsat bothlevels sophistication Similarly, at modern Wilkenfeld and Zinnes nations, looking (1973b)andWilkenfeld that while thepolitical structure ofa state doesnotnecessari(1973)suggest to overall conflict itdoesseem to havean impact on patlydetermine level, terns acrosstime, and on thecorrelates of conflict. Thissuggests that different are needed forwhat call centrist, and explanations they personalist, states. LeVine andCampbell that different polyarchic (1972:57) also argue for violence are neededforuncentralized and centralized explanations societies. will centralization beindirectly, rather than direct11c:Political Hypothesis and external to internal conflict and violence. ly,related
PSYCHOCULTURAL HYPOTHESES
connections of political socialization bemany suggest Earlystudies ofwhat tween thecontent andmanner waslearned on childhood, the during one hand and adultpolitical on the other behavior, (Greenstein, 1965; Hess and Easton,1960).Laterworkhas beenmuch morecautious (e.g., Eastonand Dennis,1969),fordespite thetheoretical of thefirst promise some that to research date not has established the studies, argue empirically of socialization on adult behavior impact political experiences (Marsh, et al., 1973). 1971;Searing Thishardly meansthatsocialization are unrelated to adult practices however. For there are a largenumber of cross-cultural actions, example, studies of theeffect of childrearing on a variety of domains of behavior, with and Child(1953).Thisresearch considers theimbeginning Whiting on sexroledefinition etal., 1957;Burpactofsocialization practices (Barry tonandWhiting, crime economic sub1961), patterns (Baconetal., 1963), etal., 1959), sistence thepresence of initiation rituals for bothsexes (Barry et al., 1958; Paige and Paige, 1981),and play (Brown,1963; Whiting and (Roberts Sutton-Smith, 1962). In a review of thisfield,Harrington and Whiting (1972) identify as one area which has beenalmost and call for politics totally neglected to analyzesystematically researchers socialization in the same way that
443
other areas have been investigated and cross-culturally (Harrington 1972:497-98).LeVine(1960,1965)is one of thefewwho have Whiting, theimpact ofchild on political lifecross-culturally. considered His rearing not larger between studies are controlled comparisons pairsof societies, in his well-known of the worldwide comparison samples.For example, thegreater andtheNuer(Sudan)heexplains useofthe Gusii(Kenya) courts resort to thebloodfeud in dispute theGusiiand greater settlement among of Gusiisocialization theNuerin terms which inamong patterns punish dividual stress thehierarchical of thefamily, nature behavior, aggressive to bring to adults forsettlement and encourage children (1960). problems influences adult behavior thepersonalisocialization byshaping Early and Whiting, and Child,1953;Harrington tyof theindividual (Whiting as wellas deeper exmotivations, early 1972).Shaping learning cognition in individuals forpatterns of conflict and cooperation periences prepare LeVineand Campbell's their of the wide-ranging society. (1972) review intheareaofethnocentrism suchconnections theories makes andprovides several relevant to internal violence and external warfare. keyhypotheses forpolitical and warfare violence are Psychocultural explanations more common outside science thanwithin it.Freud, in of course, political andItsDiscontents between the Civilization (1930),seesa clearconnection inresponse individual tothe oforganized demands and sociallife repression theexpression ofaggression aimed atexternal Eventhough most of targets. hisfollowers of aggressive Freud's notion share his instances, rejected they view that intraandintersocietal inindividual conflict is rooted personality Fornari formation. wartopsychological identified (1975)links processes by MelanieKlein[seeSegal (1974)fora good summary of thisperspective]. ForFornari thepsychological roots areinthelossofloveobjects pro(felt as the to child differentiate him-or herself from its totypically begins Loss of the love can be when caretaker). object terrifying accompanied by of guilt and self-blame. As a defense terthisinner strong feelings against with identification their own group,and ror,individuals developstrong the hostile onto who outsiders then are blamed for the project guilt feelings loss. These maneuvers to both defend the love and avoid the original object are what Fornari calls the "paranoidelaborationof guilt feelings and his theoretical sources of socialand mourning," explication suggests cultural variation in outcomes. More social-psychological attribute a role to social, perspectives andpolitical conditions as well economic, (e.g.,Horkheimer, 1950).LeVine and Campbell (1972) point out ways in which the structural and offer and where psychocultural approaches complementary explanations, are divergent. In political Gurr's workon political violence they science, and Duvall,1973)offers a psychological in (1968,1970;Gurr explanation
444
Ross
and frustration-aggression of relative terms theory (also see depriviation Gurr's is psychological andFeierabend, Feierabend theory 1971).Butwhile of socialand economic conditions in a hisdata are not;he usesmeasures states ofnations as a basisfor inferring psychological (Zimmerman, sample Gurr'sexplanation forpolitical 1980: 211-212).Muller(1972) criticizes for level data. Muller as inadequate never individual violence providing any the that data for then offers survey showing support hypothesis propensity is morerelated to political forpolitical violence trust thanto relative In a more recent he finds that a "just desserts" of measure deprivation. study or political frustration is a better violence thanother relative predictor measures 1980:80-81). deprivation (Muller,
Harsh Socialization
Severalpsychological approaches -psychoanalytic theory (and the work authoritarian from derived and personality theory, it),sociallearning harshand severechildtraining theory-associate frustration-aggression each with later themechanisms practices underlying Although aggressivity. of thetheories aredifferent, thepredictions are similar and Child, (Zigler where andfrustration 1969).Forexample, psychoanalytic aggression theory connects severe with ofchildren later onphysical punishment displacement to outgroups, sociallearning looksmore to explaining a connection theory in termsof imitation, and reinforcement. In eithercase, modelling, harshsocialization moreaggressive adults however, experiences produce in overt whoengage conflict morereadily. A number of specific cross-cultural find studies a positive association between harsh socialization andphysical or practices aggression, bellicosity, warfare andMalone,1980:249).In a factor ofvariables (Levinson analysis on warfare and violence from Textor derives a warfare fac(1967),Russell toron which child also load. He argues that nonindulgent rearing practices to develop seems from severe internalized aggression punishment through to later behavioral forms ofviolence factor hostility (1972:290). In another ofcross-cultural a in finds factor which analysis data,Steward-Jones (1972) achievement and warfare load narcissism, bellicosity, emphasis, together. Eckhardt finds a connection between severe child discipline, frustrating and militarism Slater finds a connection rearing practices, (1975:59). (1968) between sexualrepression, Durbinand Bowlby sadism,and militarism. see the work as that of identification with mechanism at the state as (1939) key a consequence of individual of "War is due to repression private feelings. thetransformed ofindividuals" One obvious aggressiveness (1939:41). processatwork here isAnnaFreud's with "identification theaggressor" (Freud,
445
thetargets does not differentiate of aggression in 1937).The hypothesis areinside or outside one'sownsociety, of whether and LeVine terms they and Campbell thatavailability, social propositions suggesting (1972)offer andrelative all arerelevant here. Ourargument is similar, distance, strength nowweonly wish to suggest that while conflict butfor havea may political common is shapedby base, choiceof targets underlying psychocultural structural conditions. and more severe 12: The harsher thesocialization practices Hypothesis the the level of internal in a andexternal violence common society, higher and conflict. Warmth and Affection A different set of socialization variables the role of emphasize and love-oriented child rearing whose affection-, warmth-, practices is associated withlow violence and conflict. In severalfactor presence one we did whichis citedunderAppendix I later, analyses, including variables harsh socialization load on different factors measuring practices thanindicators of warmth and affection (Russell,1972;Steward-Jones, twodimensions these are notsimply 1972), meaning opposite poleson the samecontinuum. thedistinction is perhaps to thedifConceptually parallel ference between and in the socialization of agpermissiveness punishment which Searset al., (1958) findhave independent effects on aggression behavior. Greater of affection toward gressive expression children, greater on values such as and andcloser fatheremphasis trust, honesty, generosity, childties,forexample, can all be cited as practices which lead individuals toward rather than andaggressiveness. Thehealthy cooperation, animosity of the individual in terms of psychosocial development relations early object ofothers basedon early andsecure tiesto (internalized images experiences) the for later parental figures prepare way socially cooperative experiences in life(Winnicott, 1965;Guntrip, 1968,1971;Fairbairn, 1954). Theprofiles of seven small-scale all lowon internal conflict societies, and aggression in Montagu(1978) present some good ethnographic exIn thesesocieties, amplesof thispattern. is frequently greataffection directed toward thechild, whose overall ofsecurity arehigh. Overt feelings of is discouraged, butnotthrough expression aggression physical punishment. thesesocieties lack modelsof highaggressive Finally, whomthe persons child can imitate. As is thecase with andsocialization discussed aggression it seemsresponsible in socialization for high affection earlier, to be
446
Ross
with bothwithin one'ssociety and indealing lower conflict associated with and serve outsiders. Mutual to maintain expectations reinforcing sequences havebegun. oncethey patterns 13: Thegreater theuse of child Hypothesis training practices fostering affection andsecurity, the lower the level ofinternal andexternal violence and conflict.
Male GenderIdentity Conflict
TheWhitings usetheterm torefer tothepattern "protest masculinity" whichlinksuncertainty to overt concerning gender identity aggression andWhiting, 1965;Whiting cultures, (Whiting, 1975a).In male-dominated their where andalooffrom frustration fathers aredistant children, develops when bondsto their young boysgrowup with mothers, especially strong and yetthese bonds"need" to be severed forthem to meet thesocietal exofadultmalebehavior. Onewaythis is attempted is through inpectations itiation suchas circumcision etal., 1981:614-616). A second rites, (Munroe source of frustration is maternal ambivalence. Women in patrilocal, living societies have neither tiesto their natal families nor polygynous strong affective bonds withtheirhusbands. Slaterand Slatercall this strong "diluted Womenin thesesettings bonds marriage"(1965). developstrong with their butalso takeoutfrustration on them as "the malechild children, was alternatively seduced and rejected" and Slater, 1965:242). The (Slater is that insuchcultures result males ambivalent toward develop very feelings narcissistic which arepreoccupied with females; personalities early development and self-enhancement, and are proneto aggressive actasks,pride, are common and Slater,1965;also see Kernberg, tions, (Slater 1975;and to deal withmalegender amSpotnitz, 1976).Despitecultural attempts thesolutions are onlypartial so thatcompensatory behaviors bivalence, seenin bellicosity, and openfighting arecombehavior, aggressive display mon. several critics havesuggested thatthesamedata might be Although better theories explained by other (e.g., Young,1965;Paige and Paige, forthishypothesis is wideranging. It suggests thatdistant 1981),support father-child tiespromote whileclose,affectionate bondsare aggressivity, associated withlow overtconflict and (Ember,1980: 561-62;Whiting Adorno et contend 1975a;Westand Konner, Whiting, al., 1976). (1950) that distant fathers children in produce (particularly boys)whoareinsecure
447
andaremore inopenaggression toengage interpersonal relationships ready J. Whiting et al., (1958) showa linkbetween a long against outgroups. sex taboo between husband and wifeand exclusive motherpostpartum infant on theone hand,and malecircumsition rites sleeping arrangements on the other.B. Whiting detailed data from the Six (1965), reviewing Cultural shows that in lowadult malesalience marked wasmost study, early thetwocultures with thehighest ofphysical rates assault andhomicide. She also notesthe correlation foundbetween father absenceand frequently in western Koch(1974)argues that theprojuvenille delinquency settings. test modelprovides a good framework forunderstanding masculinity pervasive conflict andwarfare in NewGuinea, he saysis marked which bythe of third absence in disputes, an outgrowth of theearly parties intervening describes. and Whiting Whiting Whiting patterns personality (1975b) is associatedwith training boys to be reportthat distantfathering and Westand Konnerfinda clear relationship low between warriors, father-child closeness and highwarfare (Westand Konner,1976:203). andWhiting theresults ofdetailed observations Whiting (1975a),reporting of children in sixculturess, find thatwhatdifferentiates cultures on their sociable-intimative vs. authoritarian-aggressive behaviordimension is household therole of the father. In thesocieties structure, particularly where thechildren's behaviors are moreauthoritarian and aggressive, the extended is common, thefather hasa smaller roleinchild is family rearing, husband-wife is often conflict and child-father less,overt present higher, contactis lower(1975a: 120-23).Alcorta(1982) findssupport for the that closefather-child tiesareassociated with lower hypothesis aggressivity andconflict both human andnon-human Shesaysthere is among primates. lessstress infants and lower noticeably among (particularly among males) themore adultmalesareinvolved in child subsequent aggression, rearing. 14: Thehigher thelevel ofmalegender the Hypothesis conflict, identity thelevelof internal and external violence and conflict. greater
RESULTS Procedures
Thedatausedintesting these 14hypotheses were coded,as previously noted,from ethnographic reports on 90 societies locatedthroughout the
448
Ross
inMurdock which arehalf thesocieties andWhite's Standard Crossworld, Cultural world cultures. The codesforthe Sample(1969)of preindustrial politicalvariablesused below are found in Ross (1983), while the andchild socioeconomic variables arefound in Barry andSchlegel training in Ethnology. of codes originally These (1980), a collection published sources alsoconsider ofsampling andreliability that be ofinproblems may terest to certain readers. used in the data 1 liststhevariables Appendix belowandthewayinwhich eachis operationally defined. analysis Multiple is usedintheanalysis. moderate correlaBecause there aremany regression tionsamongtheindependent it is especially useful in showing variables, howeachoftheindependent is related tothedependent variables variables after theeffects oftheother variables areremoved.3 With this independent wearrive at results andmore which aredifferent from, procedure, straight forward wegetfrom those at thebivariate correlation than, simply looking matrix.4 Findings The regression results in Table II. It showsthatboth are presented structural and psychocultural variables are significantly related to internal andexternal conflict andincombination conflict better than either set explain of variables alone.A closer lookshows that lowaffection, harsh socializaconflict increase internal and external tion, and male gender indentity violence and conflict, but the specific structural factors are assowhich ciated with internaland externalconflict differ.To explain these results we proposethatthere is a dispositional basis foraggression and violence rootedin earlylearning and personality while the formation, of aggression are shapedbythestructural features targets of a society. In somecasesthetargets willbe outside one'ssociety, insomethey willbe inis not a problem here.First, the correlations 3Multicollinearity amongthe independent variables standard errors oftheregression coefficients. can,butdidnothere, produce large ofcourse, doesnotbiastheregression itonly increased Second, multicollinearity coefficient, thestandard errors. in Table II wereselected 4Theregressions from several different presented specifications. Becausea number of researchers have suggested differences between important politically anduncentralized centralized intheir societies ofconflict, inaddition tothe substantive handling earlier versions included setsof interaction terms foreach variable to testfor variables, different in uncentralized effects and centralized as proposed in systematically societies, Interaction terms were as the variable hypothesis specified original multiplied I11. bya dummy variable and0 = centralized). Iftheregression coefficient for an interac(1 = uncentralized, tive term is large, theoriginal variable hasa different in thetwogroups of societies. impact Societies were codedas centralized ifTudenandMarshall them as having only (1972)scored exercised thelevel of thelocalcommunity. In caseswhere political theinauthority beyond teraction terms smallregression thevariable was dropped from produced the coefficients, model here. presented
andViolence ofPolitical Conflict A Cross-Cultural Theory Internal and External TableII. Multiple conflict Regressions:
Standardized Regression Standard Error Coefficient of Beta (Beta) violenceand conflict Internal tiesscale of cross-cutting Strength in Fraternal interest groupstrength uncentralized societies Affectionate socializationpractices Harsh socializationpractices Politicalpowerconcentration Polygyny Male genderidentity conflict trade Intercommunity Socioeconomiccomplexity Matrilocalitye Marital endogamy MultipleR = 0.60 R2 = 0.36 Externalviolenceand conflict of cross cutting tiesin Strength societies uncentralized Fraternal interest group strength Affectionate socializationpractices Harsh socializationpractices Political powerconcentration Polygyny Male genderidentity conflict Socioeconomiccomplexity Matrilocality Maritalendogamyin uncentralized societies MultipleR = 0.69 R2 = 0.47 -0.29b 0.22c -0.31b 0.22c -0.11 0.12 0.13 0.04 0.09 -0.07 0.01 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.14 0.10 0.10
449
Pearson Corr."
-0.24b
(90)
0.26b (90) -0.35d (89) 0.33d (82)
-0.03
0.20c (90)
(90)
0.05 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.04
(68) (89) (90) (90) (90)
0.07 -0.39d 0. 19c -0.12 -0.12

0.32d
0.21c
0.27c 0.11
0.10 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.09 0.11
0.24b (87) -0.41d (89)
0.20c (90)
0.30b (82) 0.11 (90) 0.03 (90) 0.29b (68) 0.24b (90) 0.14 (90)
0.28b (90)
0.43d
Meanshavebeensubstituted for dataintheregressions. missing Samplesize = 90 intheregressions. Correlations are forall cases, notjust uncentralized societies. "Sample sizes in parentheses. at the .01 level. bStatistically significant at the .05 level. cStatistically significant at the .001 level. dStatistically significant eResultsare the same when matrilocality is substituted for patrilocality, but the sign is reversed.
sideit,while inmany situations both forms ofviolence will occur. Thequestionof therelationship between internal and external conflict is an important and interesting one. To treat ithere in a presentation which is already toolongis notpossible (seeRoss,1985).Before on thegeneral elaborating it is useful to first argument, examine thespecific results. Internal Violence and Conflict Twopsychocultural andtwostructural variables aresignificantly related to thelevelof violence and conflict within a society. The regression results showtheaffectionate and warm socialization on theone hand, practices,
450
Ross
arenotsimply andharsh, ontheother, severe ones, polesofa single opposite continuum andwarm andtheless affectionate (seeAppendix 1). The more harsh thesocialization in a society, thelower thelevelof political violence and conflict. we willelaborate thelinkage in thefinal our section, Though is that conflict behavior has an important argument projective component in become critical 1974;B. Whiting, (J. Whiting, 1980).Earlyexperiences an individual's to with others and a establishing capacity cooperate provide framework for their behavior. whohaveexperiencIndividuals interpreting ed early lackofaffection andharsh treatment willhavemuch more trouble in establishing warm bondswith others as adultsand willbe cooperative more to viewthebehavior ofothers Proas hostile and threatening. prone andaggression threat ontoothers then an easy jecting provides justification forone'sownaggressive actions. The results structural showthattheweaker the variables concerning tiesina society, andthestronger fraternal interest are cross-cutting groups inuncentralized thegreater thelevel ofinternal violence andconsocieties, flict. socialand political diflinks ties,byproviding Cross-cutting among ferent offer a brake on theexpansion ofconflict, limit groups, polarization, and lessen thepossibility of widespread violence. Fraternal interest groups do theopposite, related males itis easyfor where them to bringing together violent either their own interests or actions, defending perceived organize others. Otterbein thatthepresence of fraternal inattacking (1968)found terest internal war in his the uncentralized groups predicted sample among butnotthose which were centralized. Ourresults, societies, politically using different show the same Fraternal interest measures, thing. group strength is significantly related to internal conflict intheuncentralized casesin only the sample.Why?Otterbein is probably whenhe saysthatin the right absenceof authority at any level above the local community, strong, kin male will as localpower to defend their organized groups operate groups interests see and (also Paige Paige,1981). There are several variables which are worth as partof the discussing their coefficients are not because model,although statistically significant, are of theexpected Theoretical they signand are theoretically interesting. notstatistical is always thecriterion forincluding importance, significance, or excluding a variablefroma model(Achen,1982). However, in the absenceof definitive theoretical guides,we have been guidedby the of the standardized coefficient and its significance magnitude regression level.Our discussion identifies three kindsof variables: thosewhich are and are included,those which are not quite statistically significant and are leftin our exploratory and those statistically significant study, variables where thecoefficients seemso lowthat their contribution is trivial
and we mustrejectthe hypotheses thattheyhave any significant independenteffect on the dependent variable.
451
in a society, as measured The higher themalegender conflict identity ofthepostpartum sextaboofor thehigher thelevel of women, bythelength thegreater thepolygyny, thehigher thelevelof internal conflict. Similarly, the measures of socioeconomic and political internal conflict. Although andpositively related usedhere arestrongly to eachother (Ross, complexity in the regression theresults that suggest 1983),whenbothare included with roledifferentiation is negatively associated internal violence, political is positively while socioeconomic related to it. Perhaps complexity political differentiation associatedwithpolitical (whichis highly centralization) internal conflict of direct control-the function limits through peacemaking thestate-, while socioeconomic increases conflict as increasing complexity is more ofwhat there one'sneighbor andmore coveting possesses inequality in thedistribution of valuesobjects and positions. three indicators Finally, of cross-cutting ties the -matrilocality(substituting patrilocality produces same results, but the signis in the opposite direction), intercommunity and intercommunity suchlow coefficients thattheir trade, marriage-have effect on internal should conflict be viewed as negligible.
External Warfare and Hostility
The results forexternal warfare showthesamepsychocultural basis forexternal as forinternal conflict-lack of affectionate, and presence of - andthere socialization is strong for the male identiharsh, support gender as a predictor of external violence. Structural factors are imtyhypothesis here but are different from those in involved internal too, portant they violence. there are someimportant differences between centralized Finally, and uncentralized societies. The structural variablesrelatedto external violenceare higher socioeconomic in uncentralized a preference for and, complexity societies, and ties. While Otterbein intracommunity marriage strong cross-cutting that socioeconomic is associated with thegrowth of (1970)finds complexity he did notfind it had anydirect effect on warfare. military sophistication, Our results, different do. One explanation be that measures, using might more havegreater resources to mobilize inwarfare. Butof complex systems forthisto be validwe wouldneedto knowsomething aboutthe course, resources of potential and actualopponents, not just the standing of a on a worldwide scale.Perhaps a more useful here rests society explanation on three of occupational keyelements: (1) thedevelopment specialization, the riseof military of stratification, including specialists, (2) thegrowth and and (3) theproblem of socialand political order hierarchy inequality, and control warfare outof a combination (Fried,1967).External develops
of the increasedcapacityfor fighting, the need for scarce goods, and the
452
Ross
order. enemies areseenas threatening ofinternal External internal problem for frustration order and are acceptable cannot sometimes, which, targets within be expressed a society. At first theconnection between andexintracommunity high marriage with societies marital ternal for we links conflict us, expect strong suprised forces mobilize to local able to be better communities against fighting among thisis sometimes thecase, buttheresults external enemies. here Perhaps the showthatthosesocieties with thestrong have local marriage highest When we lookat thedatamore we find levelof external conflict. carefully in theuncentralized that of endogamy on warfare is only theeffect present thelocal community societies are thosewhere is also thehighest levelof links to outside means political organization. Intercommunity marriage limit which we to while would external war, groups, expect endogamy In addiboundaries between andmakes warmore strengthens groups likely. the between and external and conflict warfare tion, relationship endogamy It not be that a also have proendogamy aspect. may may psychological duces butrather both ofa particular that areproducts distrust warfare, high of outsiders and suspiciousness which makesovert and aggression conflict more likely. ties inuncentralized societies alsoincrease thelevel Strong cross-cutting ofexternal while arenegatively associated with internal conviolence, they flict. While ourmodel internal as having an effect on external regards unity others reverse thecausalsequence. International can be conflict, examples cited thepresence where ofan external internal and enemy promoted unity, Ember and Ember(1971)suggest thatexternal warfare causeschanges in residence rules. several additional variables are notstatistically Although significant, itis worth their to external conflict. to expecnoting relationship Contrary is related to external conflict once the effects of tations, polygynynegatively theother in themodelaretaken variables intoaccount that there is (note no at all at the bivariate There is an virtually relationship level). interesting contrast with thecase of internal conflict which is weakly butpositively associated with thisfinding is contrary to what Divale polygyny. Certainly and Harris of the male (1976)seeas an integral part supremacist complex, refer to internal war(where ourdata support thier although they pattern) more thanexternal war. Thefinding here is perhaps bestunderstood interms ofthedifficulties in societies have in internal them high polygyny achieving unity, making unableto opposeoutsiders as a cohesive unit.Alternatively, polygyny be seenas a structural which societies severe outside might "luxury" facing threats cannot afford. The effect of matrilocality is lessdifficult to evaluate. Whenwe run
the regression without the interaction term for cross-cuttingties,
A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical andViolence Conflict Theory
453
When weinclude this term itis not. is statistically significant. matrilocality that residence is one What this means is matrilocal mechanism theoretically between forachieving ties.(Thecorrelation and matrilocality cross-cutting is justsignificant thecross-cutting tiesscaleis 0.17 (N = 90), which at the ofmatrilocality is subsumed under this broader 0.05level.)Thus,theeffect in the communities and is one of linkages way achieving among process with Thepoint is that association low samesociety. conflict matrilocality's is through itscreation oflinkages butmatrilocality is communities, among ties one these be formed. way only might forthe As in thecase of internal there is a slight conflict, tendency ofpolitical concentration to be related to external conflict power negatively it is included in theregression when alongthesocioeconomic complexity. fraternal toward interest makes no realcontribution Finally, strength group external violence. explaining
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
The models of internal and external violenceand conflict just whichincludesboth psychocultural presented supportan explanation and structural variables. Socialization creates toward dispositions highor lowviolence ina society. Particular structural conditions then determine the extent to which theviolence is directed at others within thesociety, at outor in bothdirections. In this we first review in thefindings siders, section, terms ofthespecific wethen elaborate on the earlier; hypotheses presented theoretical structure ofthemodels; and finally, weconsider in briefly ways which themodels be useful inunderstanding violence andconmay political in political flict situations thesocieties in thissample. beyond
Structural Hypotheses
Theregression results to several structural conditions which are point in shaping crucial thelevelofpolitical violence. The first setofhypotheses involved theimpact ofcross-cutting tiesandsuggested that thestronger the thelower thelevelofinternal and thehigher thelevelofexternal conties, flict. Theregression results thegeneral Internal conflict support hypotheses. and centralized is lower as ties (in bothuncentralized increase, societies) whileexternal in uncentralized conflict societies increases whenthe ties within thecommunity arestronger. Theresults, areonly however, partially of the more supportive specific hypotheses concerning residence, marriage in and trade. Martial is associated with external warfare endogamy higher
uncentralized societies,but we did not find any connectionbetweenen-
454
Ross
whicha largenumber conflict. of dogamyand internal Matrilocality, studies as a crucial of external is only warfare, previous identify predictor related to external oncetheeffect conflict of theother variables in weakly themodelis taken intoaccount. is notparticularly Similarly, patrilocality tointernal inthemultivariate related violence andconflict model. Thepoint is notso much that these residence variables tounderstanding areirrelevant of violence and conflict, but rather thatthey do not operate in patterns isolation andtheir effects needto be considered within thecontext ofother structural andpsychocultural variables. Ourargument is notthat theearlier - our bivariate models are invalid correlations are moreor lessconsistent - butthatthey with their areincompletely and therefore findings specified biased. Fraternal interest formed thebasisfor thesecond group theory group of structural and theresults confirm Otterbein's that hypotheses, findings fraternal interest is associatedwithinternal in conflict groupstrength uncentralized societies. As he also found, there is no association between fraternal interest and external violence. which groupstrength Polygyny, wasoneoftheindirect indicators offraternal interest which group strength Otterbein to internal conflict. It (1968)used,has onlya weakrelationship also has a weak,butinverse, to external conflict. relationship Theliterature on complexity andviolence isconfused, butperhaps our results are lessso. Socioeconomic is positively with associated complexity both forms of conflict, but onlyin the case of external warfare is it Political measured as theconcentration statistically significant. complexity, ofpolitical is weakly associated with both internal andexpower, negatively ternal thefact that socioeconomic andpolitical conflict, despite complexity are themselves and positively related. The results also support the strongly contention thatan adequateexplanation forconflict willbe different in uncentralized andcentralized socieities 1977;DivaleandHarris: (Otterbein, 1976:531; LeVineand Campbell, is no authority ex1972).Becausethere erted thelocal levelin uncentralized the of beyond socieites, organization fraternal interest and ties groups,exogamousmarriage, cross-cutting local communities of thesamesociety areall important in shaping among inthese violence whereas these samevariables arenotimportant in societies, thecentralized cases. Psychocultural Hypotheses Allthree ofthepsychocultural aresupported hypotheses bytheregressionanalysis. Whenearly is harsh socialization and physically punishing, when itis lowinaffection andwarmth, andwhen malegender conidentity
455
violenceand conflict increase.While is high,bothinternal and external flict are relatedto internal and external the same dispositional factors violence, and local conditions are involvedin thechoice of targets structural factors thatwhile situation.It should be underlined forviolencein any particular of socializationare conceptually thesethreedimensions related,theresults contribution show thateach makesa statistically to explaining independent of each variablewhen fortheregression coefficient conflict, givestheeffect the othersare controlled. and violence relatedto conflict Identifying psychocultural dispositions of mechanisms also requiresthe specification linkingsocializationto performation and adultbehavior.Here we spellout whatsuchlinkages sonality be drawing thatthere heavilyon psychoanalytic might theory. Recognizing linksas well,Ross (1985) considers are othertheoretical connections which
are lessexplicitly Useful mechanisms are psychodynamic. psychodynamic inobject found relations and 1971;Greenberg particularly theory (Guntrip, in thisvieware themechanisms of attachment, Mitchell, 1983).Central anddisplacement. Attachment refers identification, repression, projection, to thewaysin which a young childdevelops or failsto develop bondsto others.Early depriviation and lack of nurturance severely impairthe to develop affective bondslater in lifein bothhuman and capacity strong non-human 1969;Harlowand Harlow,1962,Harlow, primates (Bowlby,
1965). Mahleret al. (1975) describethe processof separationand individuationin thesecondyearof life.The securechildis capable of differentiating itselffromits mother whenthe child'sinternalized (or father) imageof the is positive and sufficiently secureso thatseparation does notproduce parent tensionand anxiety(1975: 109). Winnicott overwhelming (1965) uses the term"good enoughmother" to refer to the caretaker who providesa child withearly experiences in a positivesense of self, and trustand resulting openness toward others. In contrast,if early relationshipsare highly and threatening, remainsfixated at an early negative psychological growth to developmental stage and bonds to otherscannot develop. Attachment othersis cruciallaterin lifewhether we are speakingabout theability of individualsto formintimate or to join withothersin socially relationships cooperativeventures. Most of the psychoanalytic literature makes the sexistand ethnocentricassumptions not only that child rearing is not only a femaletask but also that it is performed the mother. This view ignoresthe by biological in variation of child widespread organization rearing (Weisner and and the different that roles fathersplay in the Gallimore, 1977) very socializationprocesscross-culturally (Lamb, 1976). Freudiantheory givesa central role to fathersin the developmentalprocess, but Fisher and
456
Ross
that thisis probably theareawhere supGreenberg (1977)argue empirical of the is weakest. WhileFreud's theory exposition portfortheFreudian on a young oftheoedipal crisis resolution 1945)rests boy'siden(Fenichel, with a stern and alooffather basedon fear(castration tification anxiety), and Greenberg research on thisquesFisher (1977),summarizing existing with that thefathers whom identification is strongest arethose tion, argue notdistant whoarewarm and approachable, and threatening. This is particularly relevant to themalegender identity hypothesis with discussed the societies results above,and to the regression showing warmth and affection and lessdistant fathers violence havelower greater andconflict.5 Mostofthewriting aboutfathers andchildren doesnotdwell on the relationship betwenhusbands and wivesin the same context. itis worth that distant father-child tiesarefrequently However, suggesting and Whiting, withaloof husband-wife ties(Whiting associated 1975b)or what Slater andSlater In these a child, (1965)calldiluted marriage. settings a male,becomes theloveobject andobject for particularly alternatively agfor women who have few intimate and little congression may relationships trolovertheir lives(cf. Chodorow, 1978). Identification is the process of developing bondsto an objectand one's actions because of these attachments altering 1960; (Bronfenbrenner, hasemphasized in theways Schafer, 1968).Muchofpsychoanalytic theory which identification with in results destructive actions frustrating objects also wrote aboutanother form 1937;Freud, (e.g., Freud, 1922).ButFreud ofidentification which wasmore in and contrast to identification positive, as a function of fear oftheaggressor, involves identification as a function oflossoflove(Freud,1914;1917;Bronfenbrenner, 1960:16; Slater, 1977: When the of identification is Schafer the child not 20). object benign, says Thereis an atmosphere of precious these identificaintimacy surrounding tions -a glowofwell-being that is also seeninfond embraces" (1968:154). Thesetwo aspectsof identification are parallelto our results sugdifferent basesforlinking to adultactions. gesting early experiences Agformed outoftheinternalization ofdestructive obidentification, gressive an important basis forlaterconflict. It thwarts the injects, provides dividual's to develop affective tiesto others, capacity strong making trusting
thatthe variablemeasuring father-child closeness loaded on 51tshouldbe underlined thesamedimension as high children valuedin a culture and emphasis on affection, being and honesty as valuesstressed in childhood trust, generosity, (see Appendix 1). The male conflict measure wasthe ofpostpartum sextaboo,although some gender identity length may choose toseepolygyny as an indirect measure ofthis variable. In thefactor of analysis length maternal sextaboodidnotloadonthe samedimension as father-child postpartum closeness; thecorrelation between thetwois only 0.13 (N = 55).
a sense"... . of mastery, or independence... [but] onlyderives competence,
ofPolitical Conflict andViolence A Cross-Cultural Theory
457
lesslikely. between relationships (1965)connection cooperative Whiting's and aggressive with this behavioris consistent protestmasculinity witha fearprovoking, theoretical forit is theidentification perspective, theseedsfordestructive and later frustrating objectwhich plants impulses action. of a superego and the development which monitors Identification is a normal andfeelings ofthedevelopmental behaviors from aspect process a Freudian As partof psychological individuals maturation, perspective. cometo repress which aretoo frightening to admit holdat a impulses they level.Whilerepression is a normal conscious funcpartof psychological it is necessary to distinguish in terms of the tioning, amongindividuals of thesedifoccurs,and the consequences degreeto whichrepression Whena superego is overly is severe, ferences. and the harsh, repression can be highly destructive foreither theindividual or those pentup feelings himor her.Aggressive around identification and severe arethe repression rawmaterials fortheexpression ofviolence. In somecasesthey areturned inward while in others areprojected ontoothers and 1976), (Spotnitz, they own one's aredisplaced onto available aggressive feelings targets (Adorno, 1950). Fornari's Kleinian of war coincides Finally, psychodynamic theory withour argument in severalrespects. that while First,he suggests can mechanisms conflict an psychodynamics identify behavior, underlying of or historical circumstances is neededto analysis economic, political, understand war(1975:xxiv-xxvi). is histheory anyparticular Substantively, a rich of someofthelinkages articulation to which wehavepointed. Conin hisview, is a defense inner fears and persecutory fantasies flict, against outward. projeced
Themost of this would to be itsdesire seem to control the enigmatic aspect system uncontrollable internal anxieties intorealdanger. I have bytranslating psychotic calledparanoid elaboration of mourning that of maneuvers.. in group .emerging theform of a senseofguilt forthedeath of theloveobject... The experience of then becomes notsorrow for the death ofthe loved butthe mourning person, killing of theenemy whois falsely to be thedestroyer of thelovedobject. thought (xviii)
with theenvironment a template forresolving Earlyrelationships provide suchconflicts in life(101). Highhostility later cultures to create the ought level ofguilt, the level ofoutwardly and greatest greatest projected hostility, thehighest levelof violence, which ourdata haveshown. and Structures Psychocultural Dispositions In thelongdebate between andculturological for psychological explanation there socialbehavior, is always someone whowillcriticize a theory suchas
the one we are offering hereby arguingthatsince socializationis a social
458
Ross
we ought to understand itsroots all Harrington After and socially. process is bestviewedas a product of Whiting (1972) arguethatchildrearing societal maintenance social,and political systems (economic, organization), etal., (1959)haveshown differences inchild between andBarry difrearing of subsistence. forsocial ferent means Have we failed to lookhardenough to explain ourresults? variables that We do notsuggest socialization sui generis, for patterns develop of connections et al. (1959) thedatashowa pattern similar to whatBarry ofthese found. Butthemagnitude correlations is lowto modest, although are they statistically significant (Hendrix,1985). Our data also show, that thesocialization variables of conflict areas goodpredictors however, as thesocialoreconomic variables are.Forthis criticism to be correct there fit must be a closer between theneedsof socialand economic and systems than wefound. Instead ofthinking that different psychological functioning of socialsystems a particular of personality orientation types require type itsmembers, itis better to realize that different of socialstructures among thesametype canprobably function as well,ifnotbetter, from an equally of view, with different in itsmemberevolutionary point personality types ship. is a tendency forsedentary to be more obeYes,there agriculturalists dient and lessself-reliant, butthecorrelations here aremodest anda range of behavior can be tolerated so thatlowerobedience and higher selfother certain insomefarbe advantageous reliance, traits, alongwith might situations too. ming It is probably to think useful ofa range of personality configurations which all be adaptive in particular rather thantraits which might settings, are simply or absent.In addition, becauseof social,technical, present and political there are certainly situations where social economic, change, andsocialization indifferent haveevolved directions organization practices and rates so thata clearcorrespondence between thetwowhich oncemay haveexisted havegradually theforces Since for or may disappeared. change ineachdomain itis foolish to always continuity maybe quiteindependent, seeka correspondence between them based on a one-to-one relationship when thelinkages tenuous. maybe more from thisperspective it seems naiveto expect thatstructural Finally, or psychocultural willnecessarily variables be superior in explaining all social and political behaviors. Both Greenstein and B. (1967) Whiting situations where variables arelikely to (1980)havesuggested dispositional be particularly Matters of to in terms of important. great importance people their which are central to their lives,questions self-concept, ambiguous, unstructured situations are all likely to engage individuals' personality (or
projectivesystems)more than situationsswithoutthese characteristics.
459
and investment whileambiguity leaves Cruciality engagement produces inner roomforintepretation and theimposition of individual worlds on a but situation. hazy, important to be especially In suchsettings we wouldexpect improcesses group as individuals seekto answer difficult aboutthemeaning portant questions lives.Groups, of their after socialsupport all, provide telling peopleboth that arenotaloneand that answers areright. Because there they particular be certainty cannot suchmatters, socialconsensus and support concerning become ForWhiting crucial. andtheinterpreta(1980)areassuchas religion tionof illness areareasof human behavior behaviors producing projective which arebestunderstood as psychological We that conproducts. propose flict andviolence be should seen in this same framework as well. frequently Conflict situations areoften incruciality andambiguity. is great There high roomforindividuals to interpret them interms oftheir ownneeds.Group and socialdynamics within which with acsupport groups begin perhaps, but information a situation curate, scanty concerningsupposedly objective roomforprojective to manifest themselves provide great processes (e.g., Janis, 1972). Problems and Future Research The model developedhere is based on secondary coding of data. It has theadvantage of providing a very different data ethnographic baseforexamining aboutpolitical behavior than scienhypotheses political tists often use. It extends our understanding of politics to the kindsof in which societies humans havelivedformost of ourevolutionary history. In terms ofconflict these datado notpermit a very careful however, thoery, evaluation of propositions abouttheinterstate which international system relations theorists haveproved fruitful especially 1980;Midlar(Zinners, and Small,1972).Perhaps thebestwayto approach this sky,1975;Singer theavailable materials is through a comparative given ethnographic analysis of several smaller of theworld where there is sufficient material regions available to allowa reconstruction of system level variables. this Although was nothis goal, Meggitt's case study of (1977) showswhatcomponents suchan analysis looklike.Similarly, thebroadregional might perspective adopted byLeach(1954)is also helpful. The implicit causalsequences thevariables we havepresumed among view conflict as a product ofstructural andpsychocultural forces. There are some who viewthe pattern in theopposite withconflict and direction, violence as theindependent, notdependent, as Ember andEmber variables, havedone.While sucha formulation (1971,1974) is certainly plausible, itis
460
Ross
Thefirst nottheonewhich wehaveselected, for several theoretical reasons. of theory; we havechosen to consider is a product nature of thearbitrary inconflict andviolence, notthe for variations of explanations consequences variation. ourframework views conflict as a product such behavior Second, culture and interests romsocial structural bothof expressive ararising is certainly within ourformulathere even Third, goodreason, rangements. from behavior onto bothsocial feedback conflict tion,forconsidering andpsychocultural ouremphasis on mechanisms by organization practices; thelatter doesnotdeny thispossibility, itjustigwhich shapetheformer to makea clearer noresit. Finally, restatement aboutcausal sequences data on thesamesociety overlongtimeperiods we do not which quires haveat present. Ifthemodels here aretobe useful to be examined need they developed inother One areawhere contexts. be applied is that ofitergroup they might inmodern, relations industrial better societies. theimporBy understanding in tanceof bothpsychological and structural we conflict, processes group of a do better such within conflict less destructive job might keeping is an understanding bounds.Particularly of ways in which important and structural work reinforce each rather than other, psychological patterns inopposite directions. the model here to tested needs be Finally, developed insmall we andmodern If itis correct, nations. large organizations, groups, needto know more aboutthedispositions into situations participants bring areas they toconflict arerelevant situations. Arethesamevariables that the on a societal modelidentifies levelalso operating on theindividual level? howdo structural conditions direct and shapeaggressive tendenSimilarly, ciesin different units? political Ourevidence theargument that a full strongly supports understanding of theviolent and peaceful of intraand conflict reintersocietal aspects an of and social factors. This should not quires integration psychocultural be very forafter all conflict behavior is one ofthethings that is surprising in it we do a It is notsomething trivial human. way; involves distinctively and resources. and absorbsso muchof our emotional energy Perhaps, from at thebehavior of thosehuman whoseem however, looking groups from mostdifferent ourselves we can learnsomething abouttherange of humanbehavior as wellas gainbetter of the possibilities understanding roots of ourownbehaviors.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS dation(BNS82-03381).The authorwishesto thankMaria Cattell,Katherine
this for research wasprovided Science FounSupport bytheNational
461
ErikHoffmann, Jim ManusMidlarsky, JeanElshtain, Bennett, Conner, comments and suggestion fora number of helpful and Michael Weinstein of thispaper. on earlier drafts APPENDIX 1 fortheIndependent Measures and Sources Variables with data for In all casesthespecific measures usedbegin published in theStandard and thesocieties CrossCultural Sample(Murdock White, is explained inthe of thetwodependent variables 1969).Themeasurement foreachof theindependent text. The measures variables are as follows: from factor tiesis a scaledeveloped analysis Strength ofcross-cutting forthesocieties of 36 political variables in thesample as explained in the in Ross(1983).Scalescores ofwhich aregiven text and details arethesum scoreon eachvariables ithas beenstandardized of eachsociety's after and its factor The raw for each as scores variable by squared weighted loading. inRoss(1983).Thevariables wellas thescalescores arepresented usedwere theextent in parentheses): to which their factor individuals (with loading in the in communities of samesociety are linked living different together in or of group we feelings relevant ways(0.64), the strength politically towardthe widersociety-i.e., beyondthe local community directed of different areasof lifein which decision (0.62),thenumber community formal orinformal) occurs ofingroup or making (either (0.58),thestrength wefeelings directed toward thelocalcommunity to which (0.56),theextent communities are present and kinshiporganizations linkingdifferent to which ritual exist politically important 0.53), theextent groups linking different communities arepresent and politically important (0.50),andthe to which extent there is intervention in disputes as they and comdevelop work toward settlement munity pressures (0.42). is theextent oflocalexogamy vs.endogamy, Intercommunity Marriage a 5-point variable taken from Murdock and Wilson (1972). andpatrilocality are codedfrom and Wilson Murdock Matrilocality if Murdock are codedas patrilocal saidthey and Wilson (1972).Societies or virilocal, otherwise is absent;similarly were patrilocal patrilocality is scored ifthesociety is matrilocal as present or uxorilocal, matrilocality ifit is not. absent is a 7-point trade measure of theextent to which a Intercommunity in the trades for foodstuffs and Morrow, community society (Murdock 1970).
462
Ross
Fraternal interest istaken from strength PaigeandPaige(1981). group It is basedon thepresence or absence of brideprice, and a patrilineality, trichotomized measure of thesizeof effective kin-based subunits. political For66 ofthesocieties thePaiges'score is used.Fortheremaining 34,which arenotintheir andpatrilineality were codedfrom Mursample, brideprice dock(1967:column and Wilson thesizeof 12) and Murdock (1972),while kingroup effective is estimated a recorded version of Murdock and using Wilson's sizemeasure. Ourmeasure is highly correlated (1972)community with where bothare available. Paigeand Paige'sforthosesocieties is a 3-pointmeasure-monogamous, less than 20% Polygyny and morethan20% polygynous, derived from the polygynous marriage, Murdock and Wilson a family variable. (1972)form Socioeconomic is a scalemadeup of8 different measures complexity whichloaded on a singledimension whenfactoranalyzed, and were as explained above:importance ofagriculture as a contribution to weighted of animalhusbandry, low importance subsistence, of huntimportance of gathering, thedegree to which ing,low importance foodis stored, the sizeoftheaverage in the the of social stratificacommunity society, degree tionand cultural The first 5 measures are from Murdock and complexity. Morrow is from Murdock and Wilson (1970),thesizemeasure (1972),and thestratification andcomplexity measures arefrom Murdock andProvost, 1973). Political is measured scalecalledPolitical complexity bya 13-variable concentration based on factor power analysis (Ross, 1983).The crucial variables aretheextent to which leaders actindependently in a community, thepresence orabsence ofchecks onpolitical the ofpolitical leaders, degree roledifferentiation ina society, theimportance ofdecision-making bodies, andtheleveloftaxation. Raw scores on theindividual variables and scale are given in Ross (1983). For moredetailconcerning of political sources see Ross complexity, (1981). Harsh isa scalederived a factor from ofsocializasocialization analysis tionmeasure from and Paxson and et al. Barry Barry (1971) (1976;Barry, which were to measure either harshness ofsocialization, 1977), appropriate affectionate or malegender conflict. The variables socialization, identity and their on theharshsocialization dimension wereseverity of loadings to which is used(0.63), paininfliction (0.69),extent corporal punishment thedegree to which children are notindulged to which (0.57), theextent children are scolded(0.51), theimportance of caretakers other thanthe mother towhich fortitude is stressed as a value(0.37),and (0.44),thedegree thedegree to which is stressed as a value(0.28). aggressiveness is a secondscale derived socialization from thefactor Affectionate
analysis just cited.The variables are thedegreeto loadingon thisdimension
A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict Theory andViolence
463
trust which is emphasized as a valueduring childhood (0.74),thedegree to is stressed which as a valueduring childhood (0.67),thecloseness honesty of thefather inchildhood to which is stressed as a generosity (0.65),thedegree childhood valueduring to which affection is expressed (0.53), thedegree toward thechild(0.49),and theextent to which children arevalued bythe society (0.34). Male genderidentity is measured Whiting following conflict and others of abstinence from sexualintercourse bythemother bythelength after described as thecultural norm.The 7-point measure is from birth, andPaxson(1971)measure ofsleeping is notsufficientBarry arrangements Another measure which has also usedis polygyny Whiting lyprecise. (see earlier).
REFERENCES
and using regression, Achen, C. H. (1982). Interpreting Sage QuantitativeApplications
C. S. (1982).Paternal behavior Alcorta, and group Behav.Sci. Res. 17: 3-23. competition. Adorno,T. W., Frenkel-Brunswick, D. J., and Sanford, E., Levinson, R. N. (1950). H. III, and Child,I. L. (1983).A cross-cultural Bacon,M. K., Barry, of correlates study Yale University NewHaven. Community, Press, H. H. III, Bacon,M. K., andChild, Barry, ofsomesex I. L. (1957).A cross-cultural survey
differences in socialization.J. Abnorm. Social Psyhol. 55: 327-332. of crime.J. Abnorm.Social Psychol.66: 291-300. Barkun, M. (1968). Law WithoutSanctions: Order in PrimitiveSocieties and the World The Authoritarian Personality, Wiley,New York.
Adams, R. McC. (1966). The Evolutionof Urban Society,Aldine, Chicago.
in theSocialScience Series, 29, SagePublications, Hills. Beverely
of Pittsburgh versity Press, Pittsburgh. F. (1961).Nomads Barth, ofSouth Persia,Little Boston. Brown, Bates,R. H. (1983).The centraliztion of African in Bates,R. H., Essayson the societies, Political of Rural Economy Africa, Cambridge University Press, N.Y., pp. 21-58. Beals, A. R., and Siegel,B. J. (1966). Divisiveness and Social Conflict, Stanford UniStanford. versity Press, R. The evolution Bigelow, (1973). of cooperation, and self-control. in Cole, aggression,
Barry, H. III, and Schlegel, A. (eds). (1980). Cross-cultural Samples and Codes, Uni-
H. H. III, Child,I. L., and Bacon,M. K. (1959). Relations Barry, of childtraining to subsistence Am.Anthrpol. 61: 51-63. economy. H. III, Josephson, Barry, L., Lauer,E., and Marshall, C. (1976). Traitsinculcated in childhood: Cross-cultural codes5. Ethnology 15: 83-114. H. III, Josephson, Barry, C. (1977).Agents L., Lauer,E., and Marshall, and techniques child Cross-cultural codes6. Ethnology training: 16:191-230. H. III, and Paxson,L. M. (1971). Infancy Barry, and earlychildhood: Cross-cultural codes2. "Ethnology 10:466-508.
of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, pp. 1-57. J. (1969).Attachment andLoss, BasicBooks,NewYork. Bowlby, J.(1966).Belligerence Broch, T., andGaltung, theprimitives. J.PeaceRes. 3: 33-45. among U. (1960). Freudiantheories Bronfenbrenner, of identification and theirderivatives.
Child Dev. 31: 15-40.
J. K., and Jensen, D. D. (eds). Nebraska Symposium on Motivation,1972, University
464
Ross
J. K. (1963).A cross-cultural of female initiation rites. Am. Anthropologist Brown, study 65: 837-853. on middle-aged women. Curr. J. K. (1982).Cross-cultural Brown, Anthropol. perspectives 23: 143-156. R. V., and Whiting, J. M. W. (1961).The absent father and cross-sex Burton, identity H. (ed). (1950).Tensions that causewars, of Illinois Urbana. Press, Cantril, University N. (1967).Yanomamo socialorganization andwarfare. In Fried, M., Harris, M., Chagnon, Natural Garden Press, N.Y., pp. 109-159. History City,
Merrill-Palmer Quar. 7: 85-89.
and Murphy,R. (eds), War: The Anthropology of Armed Conflictand Aggression,
and the Sociology Chodorow, N. (1978). The Reproductionof Mothering:Psychoanalysis of California Press, Cohen, A. (1968). Custom and Politics in Urban Africa, University Man: An Essay on the Anthropology Cohen, A. (1973). Two-Dimensional of Power and Symbolism in Complex Society, University of California Press, Berkeley. Coleman, J. S. (1957). Community Conflict,Free Press, New York.
of California Los Angeles. Press, Berkeley of Gender, University Berkeley.
in PlateauTonga Society. and vengence Colson,E. (1953). Social control Africa,23: 199-211. K. W., Burell, S. A., Kann,R. A., Lee, Jr.M. Lichterman, R. E., Deutsch, M., Lindgren, F. L. and van Wagenen, R. W. (1957).Political and the Loewenheim, Community North Atlantic Princeton. Area, Princeton Press, University external warfare and matrilocal Behav.Sci. residence. Divale,W. T. (1974). Migration, Res. 9: 75-133. W. T., andHarris, M. (1976).Population, andthemalesupremacist warfare Divale, complex.
Am. Anthropologist 78: 521-538.
and War, Columbia Durbin, E. F. M. and Bowlby, J. (1939). Personal Aggressiveness
P. (1978).The learning foraggression environment andanti-social behavior Draper, among the!Kung.In Montagu, A. (ed),Learning Oxford Non-Aggression, Press, University NewYork, pp. 31-53. NewYork. Press, University In Siegel, B. J. (ed), Bienniel Rev.Anthropol. Easton,D. (1959).Political Anthropology. Stanford Press, Stanford, University pp. 210-262.
Easton, D. (1965). A Systems Analysisof Political Life, Wiley,New York. Easton, D., and Dennis, J. (1969). Childrenin the Political System:Originsof Political
NewYork. McGraw-Hill, Legitimacy, W. (1975).Primitive militarism. J. Peace Res. 12: 55-62. Eckhardt,
of California Edgerton, R. (1971). The Individual in Cultural Adaptation, University residence.Am. Anthropologist 73: 571-594.
Press, Berkeley. C. R. (1971).The conditions matrilocal versus Ember, M., and Ember, favoring patrilocal of alternative theories of matrilocal versuspatriEmber,C. R. (1974). An evaluation localresidence. Behav.Sci. Res. 9: 135-149. C. R. (1980). A cross-cultural on sex differences. In Munroe, R. H. Ember, perspective R. L., andWhiting, B. B.(eds.)(1981).Handbook Human Monroe, ofCross-Cultural Garland STPM Press, NewYork,pp. 531-580. Development. E. E. (1940).TheNeur.Oxford Oxford. Evans-Pritchard, Press, University
Fairbrain, W. R. D. (1954). An Object-RelationsTheory of Personality,Basic Books,
NewYork. R. L. (1971). The relationship of systemic frustraI. K., and Feierband, Feierabend, andpolitical In Gillespie, J. V., andNesvold, B. A. tion,political coercion, stability. Hills. Sage Publications, Beverly R. L., and Nesvold,B. A. (1969). Social changeand Feierabend, I. K., Feierabend, violence: Cross-national Patterns. In Graham, H. D., andGurr, T. R. (eds.), political
(eds), Macro-Quantitative Analysis: Conflict,Development,and Democratization,
Violencein America: Historicaland Comparative Perspectives,Praeger,New York. Fenichel,0. (1945). The Psychoanalytic Theoryof Neurosis,Norton,New York.
465
R. P. (1977). The Scientific Fisher,S., and Greenberg, Credibility of Freud's Theoriesand Therapy,Basic Books, New York. Fornari,F. (1975). The Psychoanalysis Press, Bloomington. of War, Indiana University Freud, A. (1937) [1966]. The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense, InternationalUniversities Press, New York. Freud, S. (1914) [1963]. On Narcissism: An introduction. Gen. Psychol. Theory, Macmillan,New York, pp. 56-82. Freud, S. (1917) [1963]. Mourning and melancholia. General Psychological Theory, Macmillan,New York, pp. 164-179. and theAnalysisof theEgo, Norton,New York. Freud, S. (1922) [1922]. Group Psychology and itsDiscontents, Norton,New York. Freud, S. (1930) [1962]. Civilization Fried,M.H. (1967). The Evolutionof Political Society,Random House, New York. Fried, M. H., Harris,M. and Murphy,R. (eds.) (1968). A War:Anthropological Approach Doubleday, NaturalHistoryPress, Garden City,New York. C. J., and Horwitz,M. (1968). The relationof politicaltheory to anthropology. Friedrich, Am. Pol. Sci. Rev, 52: 536-545. Gluckman,M. (1954) [1963]. Ritualsof rebellionin south-east Africa,Gluckman,M. (ed.), Orderand Rebellionin TribalAfrica,Free Press, New York, pp. 110-136. Gluckman,M. (1963). Orderand Rebellionin TribalAfrica,Free Press, New York. Gluckman,M. (1965). Politics,Law and Ritual in TribalSociety.Blackwell,Oxford. J. R., and Mitchell,S. A. (1983). Object Relations in Psychoanalytic Greenberg, Theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. F. I. (1965). Children and Politics,Yale University Greenstein, Press, New Haven. F. I. (1967). The impactof personality and politics:An attemptto clear away Greenstein, the underbrush. Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 61: 629-641. Guetzkow, H. (1955). Multiple Loyalties: Theoretical Approaches to a Problem in International CenterforResearchon WorldPoliticalInstituPrinceton, Organizations, tions. Guntrip, H. (1968). Schizoid Problems, Object-Relations,and the Self, International Universities Press, New York. Guntrip,H. (1971). PsychoanalyticTheory, Therapy,and the Self, Harper Torchbooks, New York. Gurr, T. R. (1968). A causal model of civil strife:A comparativeanalysis using new indices.Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 62: 1104-1124. Men Rebel, PrincetonUniversity Gurr,T. R. (1970). Why Press, Princeton. Gurr,T. R. (1980). Handbook of Political Conflict,Free Press, New York. Gurr, T. R., and Duvall, R. (1973). Civil conflictin the 1960's: A reciprocaltheoretical withparameter estimates.Comp. Pol. Studies6: 135-170. system Haas, M. (1965). Societal approachesto the studyof war. J. Peace Res. 4: 307-323. Am. Harlow, H., and Harlow, M. K. (1962). Social deprivationin monkeys,Scientific 207: 136-146. Harlow, H., and Harlow, M. K. (1965). The effectof rearingconditionson behavior. In Money, J. (ed), Sex Research: New Developments,Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York. C., and Whiting,J. W, M. (1972). Socialization processes and personality. Harrington, In Hsu, F.L.K. (ed.) PsychologicalAnthropology (second ed.), Schenkman,Cambridge,pp. 469-507. Hayano, D. M. (1974). Marriage, alliance, and warfare:A view from the New Guinea Highlands.Am. Ethnologist1: 243-253. reexamined. Ethos 13: 246-261. Hendrix,L. (1985). Economyand child training Hess, R. D., and Easton, D. (1960). The child's changingimage of the president.Pub. Opin. Quar. 24: 632-644. Hibbs, D. (1973). Mass Political Violence: Cross-National Causal Analysis, Wiley, New York. Horkheimer,M. (1950). The Lessons of Fascism. In Cantril, H. (ed), Tensions that Cause Wars,University of IllinoisPress, Urbana, pp. 209-242. New York. Janis,I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink, HoughtonMifflin,
466
Ross
Kang, E. G. (1976). Conflicting loyalties theory: A cross-culturaltest. Ethnology, 15: 201-210. Kang, G., Horan, S., and Reis, J. (1979). Commentson Divale and Harris' population, warfareand the male supremacist complex.Behav. Sci. Res. 14: 201-209. Kernberg, 0. (1975). Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, Jason Aronson,New York. Koch, K. F. (1974). War and Peace in Jalemo,Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Lamb, M. E. (ed). (1976). The Role of theFatherin Child Development,Wiley,New York. Lasswell, H. (1963). Politics: Who Gets, What, When,How, Meridian,New York. Leach, E. R. (1954). Political Systems of HighlandBurma, AthlonePress, London. of values in stateless societies. Human Org. LeVine, R. A. (1960). The internalization 19: 51-58. and intersocial LeVine, R. A. (1965). Socialization,social structure, images. In Kelman, H. Behavior: A Social PsychologicalAnalysis, Holt, Rinehardtand (ed), International Winston,New York, pp. 43-69. Theories of Conflict,Ethnic LeVine, R. A., and Campbell, D. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Attitudes and Group Behavior,Wiley,New York. Levinson, D., and Malone, M. J. (1980). Toward ExplainingHuman Culture:A Critique Cross-Cultural Research,HRAF Press, New Haven. of theFindingsof Worldwide Lindberg, L., and Scheingold, S. (1970). Europe's Would-Be Polity, Prentice-Hall, N.J. EnglewoodCliffs, Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some social requisitesof democracy: Economic developmentand Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 53: 69-105. politicallegitimacy. Lowie, R. H. (1948). Some aspects of political organization among the American Inst. 77-78: 11-24. aborigines.J. Royal Anthropological Toward an overview Mack, R. W., and Snyder,R. (1957). The analysisof social conflict: and synthesis. J. Conflict Res. 1: 212-248. Mahler, M. S., Pine, F., and Bergman, A. (1975). The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant:Symbiosisand Individuation, Basic Books, New York. Marshall, L. (1961). Sharing, talking, and giving: The relief of social tensions among the !Kung Bushmen.Africa31: 231-249. Marsh, D. (1971). Political socialization: The implicit assumptions questioned. Brit. J. Polit. Sci. 1: 453-465. Masters, R. (1964). World politics as a primitivepolitical system. World Polit. 16: 595-619. Meggitt,M. (1977). Blood is TheirArgument: Warfareamong the Mae Enga Tribesmen of theNew Guinea Highlands,Mayfield,Palo Alto. Merritt, R. (1966). Symbols of American Community: 1735-1775, Yale University Press, New Haven. Midlarsky, M. (1975). On War: Political Violence in the InternationalSystem, Free Press, New York. and International Midlarsky,M. I., and Thoma, S. T. (1975). Domestic social structure In Nettleship, warfare. M. A., Givens,R. D., and Nettleship, A. (eds.), War,Its Causes and Correlates, Mouton,The Hague. OxfordUniversity Montagu, A. (ed). (1978). LearningNon-Aggression, Press, New York. Muller, E. N. (1972). A test of a partial theory of potential for political violence. Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 66: 928-959. Muller, E. N. (1980). The psychologyof political protestand violence. In Gurr, T. R. Free Press, New York, pp. 69-99. (ed.), Handbook of Political Conflict, Munroe, R. L., Munroe, R. H., and Whiting,J. W. M. (1981). Male sex-roleresolutions. In Munroe, R. H., Munroe, R. L., and Whiting, B. B. (eds.), Handbook of CrossCultural Human Development, GarlandSTPM Press,New York/London,pp. 611-632. Free Press, New York. Murdock,G. P. (1949). Social Structure, of Pittsburgh Murdock,G. P. (1967). Ethnographic Atlas, University Press, Pittsburgh. Murdock, G. P. and Morrow, D. O. (1970). Subsistence economy and supportive codes 1. Ethnology9: 302-330. practices:Cross-cultural
ofPolitical andViolence Conflict A Cross-Cultural Theory
467
G. P., and Provost, C. (1973).Measurement of cultural Murdock, Ethnology complexity. 12: 379-392. G. P., and White, D. R. (1969). Standard cross-cultural Murdock, sample.Ethnology 8: 329-369. and community S. F. (1972).Settlement G. P., and Wilson, organizapatterns Murdock, 11: 254-295. codes3. Ethnology zation:Cross-cultural 59: and social cohesion.Am. Anthropol. R. F. (1957). Intergroup hostility Murphy, 1018-1035. In Naroll,R., and Cohen,R. (eds.), A Handbook Naroll,R. (1970). Galton's problem. A. (eds.), (1975): War,Its Causesand R. D., and Nettleship, M. A., Givens, Nettleship, Mouton: TheHague. Correlates, Am. Anthropologist war: A cross-cultural K. (1968). Internal comparison. Otterbein, 70: 277-289. K. (1970).TheEvolution HRAF,NewHaven. Otterbein, of War, of war. In Honigmann, K. (1973). The anthropology J. J. (ed.), Handbook Otterbein, Am. Behav. variable. critical K. (1977). Warfare as a hitherto unrecognized Otterbein, Sci. 20: 693-710. C. S. (1965). An eye foran eye,a toothfora tooth: K. F., and Otterbein, Otterbein, 67: 1470-1482. Am.Anthropologist of feuding. A cross-cultural study
Rand McNally,Chicago, pp. 923-958. of Social and CulturalAnthropology, Natural HistoryPress, New York. of Method in CulturalAnthropology,
Paige, K. E., and Paige, J. M. (1981). The Politics of ReproductiveRitual, University Ethnology1: 166-185.
of California Press, Berkeley. and game involvement. B. (1962). Child training J. M., and Sutton-Smith, Roberts, differentiaand political socialization, complexity, Ross, M. H. (1981). Socioeconomic Ethos9: 217-247. tion:A cross-cultural study. cross-cultural Additional and conflict: Ross, M. H. (1983). Politicaldecisionmaking 22: 169-192. codesandscales.Ethnology evidence Cross-cultural and conflict: violence and external Ross, M. H., (1985). Internal Res. 29: 547-579. J. Conflict anda newanalysis. in cross-national research. Ross, M. H., and Homer,E. L. (1976). Galton'sproblem behavior. In Singer, conflict and foreign R. J. (1968).National attributes J. D., Rummel, NewYork. andEvidence. FreePress, Insights (ed.), Quan.Int.Politics: of A cross-cultural factor analysis E. W. (1972). Factorsof humanaggression: Russell, Behav.Sci. Res. 7: 275-312. to warfare andcrimes, characteristics related NewYork. Universities International R. (1968).Aspects Press, Schafer, ofInternalization, Asia. Am. Scott, J. (1972). Patron-client politicsand politicalchangein Southeast Political principle: J., and Lind, A. F. (1973). The structuring D., Schwartz, Searing, Am. Polit.Sci. Rev.67: 415-432. and belief socialization systems. In of aggression. E. E., and Levin,H. (1958).The socialization Sears,R. R., Maccoby, inSocialPsychology T. and Hartley, E. L. (eds.).Readings E., Newcomb, Maccoby, NewYork, andWinston, pp. 350-358. ed.),Holt,Rinehart, (second
Segal, H. (1974). Introductionto the Work of Melanie Klein (Second Ed.), Harper Norton,New York. Service,E. R. (1975). Originsof the State and Civilization, Singer,J. D., and Small, M. (1972). The Wages of War, 1816-1965:A StatisticalHand75: 64-86. Am. Anthropologist Polit. Sci. Rev. 64: 91-113. WorldPolit. 29: 1-28.
NewYork. Colophon,
NewYork. book,Wiley, testof two rivaltheories An empirical and aggression: Sipes,R. G. (1973). War,sports Boston. P. E. (1968).TheGlory Slater, ofHera,Beacon, NewYork. P. E. (1977).Footholds, Dutton, Slater, A crossand Narcissism: Ambivalence D. A. (1965). Maternal P. E., and Slater, Slater,
culturalstudy.Merrill-Palmer Quar. 11: 241-259.
468
Ross
A factor dimensions: R. A. C., and Jones, K. J. (1972). Cultural of analysis Steward, Behav.Sci. Res. 7: 37-81. Textor's "A cross-cultural summary." M. J. (1968). Introduction. in Swartz, M. J. (ed.), Local-Level Swartz, Politics, Aldine, Chicago, pp. 1-46. M. J., Turner, V. T., and Tuden,A. (1966). Introduction. In Swartz, M. J., Swartz, A. (eds.).Political Turner, V., andTuden, Aldine, Anthropology, Chicago, pp. 1-41. R. (1967).A Cross-Cultural HRAF Press, NewHaven. Textor, Summary, Cross-cultural codes 4. Tuden, A., and Marshall,C. (1972). Politicalorganization: V. (1957). Schismand Continuity in an AfricanSociety,Manchester UniTurner, Manchester. Press, versity C. (1961).TheForest NewYork. Anchor Turnbull, Press, People,Doubleday H. H. (1949).Primitive of SouthCarolina Columbia. War, Turney-High, Press, University van Velzen,H. U. E., Thoden,and van Wetering, W. (1960). Residence, powergroups and Intra-societal 49: 169-200. Int.Arch. aggression. Ethnogr. T. S., and Gallimore, R. (1977). My brother's Childand sibling careWeisner, keeper: M. J. (1976).The roleof thefather: An anthropological West,M. M., and Konner, perspective.In Lamb, M. E. (ed.), The Role of theFatherin Child Development,WileyAm. Anthropol.67 (part 2): 123-140. taking.Cur. Anthropol. 18: 169-190. Vayda, A. P. (1976). War in Ecological Perspective, Plenum,New York. Ethnology11: 436-464.
Spotnitz,H. (1976). Psychotherapy of Preoedipal Conditions,JasonAronson,New York.
R. E. (1978). Cooperation and freedom Sorenson, amongthe Fore of New Guinea. In Montagu, A. (ed.),Learning NewYork. Oxford, Non-Aggression,
Interscience, New-York, pp. 185-216. B. B. (1965).Sexidentity conflict andphysical violence: A comparative Whiting, study.
Whiting,B. B., and Whiting,J. W. M. (1975a). Childrenof Six Cultures: A PsychoWhiting,J. W. M., and Child, I. L. (1953). Child Trainingand Personality,Yale Uni-
B. B. (1980). Culture and social behavior: A modelfor the development of Whiting, socialbehavior. Ethos8: 95-116. J. (1974). A Model for Psycho-Cultural Research. AnnualReport, American Whiting, D.C. Association, Anthropological Washington, Cultural Harvard Press, Analysis, University Cambridge.
NewHaven. Press, versity J. W. M., Kluckhohn, A. S. (1958). The function of male Whiting, R., and Anthony, initiation at puberty. In Maccoby, ceremonies E. E., Newcomb, T. M., andHartle, E. L. (eds.),Readings inSocialPsychology andWinston, New (Third Ed.), Holt,Rinehart York, pp. 359-370. J. W. M., and Whiting, B. B. (1975b). Aloofness and intimacy between Whiting, husbands and wives. Ethos3: 183-207. NewYork. J. (1972). Modelsforthe analysis of foreign conflict behavior of statesin Wilkenfeld, B. M. (ed.), Peace, War andNumbers, Hills. Russett, Sage,Beverly In Wilkenfeld, J. (1973b). Domestic and foreign conflict. J. (ed.), Conflict Wilkenfeld, D. A. (1973).A linkage modelof domestic conflict behavior Wilkenfeld, J., and Zinnes,
In Wilkenfeld, J. (ed.), ConflictBehaviorand Linkage Polittics,David McKay, New Winnicott,D. W. (1965). The Maturational Process and the FacilitatingEnvironment, Young, F. (1965). Initiation Ceremonies: A Cross-CulturalStudy of Status DramatizaBehavior and Linkage Politics, David McKay, New York, pp. 107-123. Wilkenfeld,J. (ed). (1973a). Conflict Behavior and Linkage Politics, David McKay,
York.
International Universities NewYork. Press, 2 Vols.University of Chicago Wright, Q. (1942).A Study of War, Press, Chicago. NewYork. tion, Bobbs-Merrill,
469
in Lindzey, E. (eds.), E., and Child,I. L. (1969).Socialization Zigler, G., and Aronson, Handbookof Social Psychology, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley, Mass., pp. Reading, 450-589. E. (1980).Macro-Comparative on Political T. R., Research Protest. In Gurr, Zimmerman, FreePress, NewYork,pp. 167-237. (ed.), Handbook ofPolitical Conflict, on the outbreak of international in conflict Zinnes,D. A. (1980). Whywar? Evidence T. R. (ed.), Handbook FreePress, NewYork. Gurr, ofPolitical Conflict,

Cross Cultural Theory of Conflict

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cross Cultural Theory of Conflict

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Cross-Cultural Theory of Political Conflict and Violence Author(s): Marc Howard Ross Reviewed work(s): Source: Political Psychology,

Vol. 7, No. 3, 1986 Political Psychology,

of Political A Cross-Cultural Theory Conflict and Violence

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

ofPolitical A Cross-Cultural Conflict andViolence Theory

other,as a numberof authorshave suggested (Whitingand Child, 1953;

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

thatpoliticalcomplexity has a clearerpositiveimpacton warfare thandoes

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory

Male GenderIdentity Conflict

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

0.26b (90) -0.35d (89) 0.33d (82)

0.05 0.03 0.08 0.05 0.04

(68) (89) (90) (90) (90)

0.07 -0.39d 0. 19c -0.12 -0.12

0.24b (87) -0.41d (89)

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical andViolence Conflict Theory

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

a sense"... . of mastery, or independence... [but] onlyderives competence,

ofPolitical Conflict andViolence A Cross-Cultural Theory

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS dation(BNS82-03381).The authorwishesto thankMaria Cattell,Katherine

this for research wasprovided Science FounSupport bytheNational

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict Theory andViolence

Adams, R. McC. (1966). The Evolutionof Urban Society,Aldine, Chicago.

in theSocialScience Series, 29, SagePublications, Hills. Beverely

J. K., and Jensen, D. D. (eds). Nebraska Symposium on Motivation,1972, University

and Murphy,R. (eds), War: The Anthropology of Armed Conflictand Aggression,

of California Los Angeles. Press, Berkeley of Gender, University Berkeley.

and War, Columbia Durbin, E. F. M. and Bowlby, J. (1939). Personal Aggressiveness

A Cross-Cultural and Violence Theoryof PoliticalConflict

ofPolitical andViolence Conflict A Cross-Cultural Theory

Spotnitz,H. (1976). Psychotherapy of Preoedipal Conditions,JasonAronson,New York.

A Cross-Cultural ofPolitical Conflict andViolence Theory

You might also like