The Place of Poliheuristic Theory in Foreign Policy Analysis Linking the paths of Integration between Rationalism and Cognitiveism

Abstract

Foreign policy researchers have sought to dismantle the traditional black box of the state. Through these efforts, two opposing schools of thought have emerged regarding decision-making. The rationalist model argues that theories should be judged based on the validity of their predictions, while the cognitive viewpoint argues that greater emphasis should be placed on the validity of the process. Seeking to bridge the gap between these two approaches, the Poliheuristic theory emerged, questioning the dimensions leaders rely on when sorting through available alternatives.

Based on a central hypothesis emphasizing the importance of the political aspects of decision-making in the context of foreign policy, numerous foreign policy and international relations researchers have produced distinguished research that has contributed to providing the academic field with a rich empirical record of achievements in applying Poliheuristic theory to a wide variety of actors in decision-making and its various contexts.

The majority of research on this theory has reached a fundamental conclusion: leaders are often self-interested and seek to ensure their domestic political survival. The decision-making process involves two stages: Leaders initially use simple heuristics to eliminate alternatives based on the principle of avoiding major political losses, and then use more analytical calculations to choose an alternative from a subset of remaining alternatives.