-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Eldad Davidov, Nationalism and Constructive Patriotism: A Longitudinal Test of Comparability in 22 Countries with the ISSP, International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Volume 23, Issue 1, Spring 2011, Pages 88–103, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq031
Close - Share Icon Share
Extract
Scholars of political psychology have paid considerable attention to the study of national attachment as an individual group association (Ashmore, Jussim, & Wilder, 2001; Knight, 1997). Some of these studies have focused on the interrelationship between national attachment and different theoretical constructs of interests such as religious or ethnic identities (e.g., Davis, 1999; Knight, 1997; Muldoon, Trew, Todd, Rougier, & McLaughlin, 2007; Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, Halevy, & Eidelson, 2008; Sidanius, Feshbach, Levin, & Pratto, 1997), authoritarianism, anomie, and general self-esteem (Blank, 2003) or attitudes toward foreigners and tolerance for cultural diversity (Billiet, Maddens, & Beerten, 2003; Blank & Schmidt, 2003; Hjerm, 1998; Li & Brewer, 2004; Raijman, Davidov, Schmidt, & Hochman, 2008). Many of these studies largely differentiate between two types of national attachment: one blind, militaristic, ignorant and obedient (often called nationalism or chauvinism), and another which is genuine, constructive, critical, civic, and reasonable (often called constructive patriotism [CP]; see e.g., Blank, 2003; Blank & Schmidt, 2003; Coenders & Scheepers 1999, 2003; Rothi, Lyons, & Chryssochoou, 2005; Smith & Kim, 2006).
