Aleksejs Ruzha
INTRODUCTION
The individual concepts often derive from the social representations that prevail in the
society. Very often it is the only way to receive the information on the required subject. Social
representations based on information from mass media, knowledge received from the other people's
experience, including rumours, gossips, beliefs, etc, provide a good ground for the individual
concept of the phenomena. By means of the processes of anchoring and objectifying, the socially
generated experience becomes the common property of each individual in the society. As soon as
each person belongs to the different social groups of the society, he shares the social representations
typical for these groups in developing his own concepts.
The implementation of external and internal politics, and the economic strategy of Latvia,
cannot be considered without taking into account socially psychological challenges, which are
constantly taking place in the social reality of all Latvian inhabitants. A transformation of cognitive,
attitude-related, motivational components of the psychological space of every Latvian inhabitant, in
accordance with the cardinal changes of geographical and political determinants, has not been
studied well enough in Latvia. This feet does not allow, from the scientific point of view, reforming
the educational, political and emigrational strategies of our state.
The objective of the given research is to investigate the content of social representations of European
Union countries in modern Latvian society, which is qualitatively new for each Latvian inhabitant
Therefore, a basic category of this research is not a 'meaning' of the idea of the European Union, but
'meaning' of its countries for Latvian inhabitants as it is reflected in their social representations.
The complicated image of the European Union is implemented with social representations of
Europe and its states through a transaction of its geographical and economic space into the space of
emotions of individuals and their selective behaviour towards EU. The results of the research can be
used for the process of social-psychological adaptation of Latvian inhabitants to life in the EU.
The competence about Europe determines the degree of comfort or discomfort among
Latvian inhabitants; their adaptation - or inability to adapt - to new geographical, economic and
psychological environments; acceptance or non-acceptance of European values, norms and ways of
life; attitudes to the idea of the European Union; and future perspectiv es for living in that
community. Of course, many of the concepts that people have about Europe are non -verbal, spatial
ideas. They are not easily translated into words. In this case, it is important to investigate the
people's subjective attitudes converting it to the scale of "positive" or "negative". The research is
going to focus on peculiarities of the social representations of European countries among people of
various age, region, education and ethnic groups in Latvia.
The aim of the research:
To study social representations of European Union countries among the different social
groups of Latvian inhabitants.
The tasks of the research:
1.
2.
3.
4.
To make a theoretical analysis of the researched problem by means of studying the theoretical
and practical issues on social representations;
To develop methodology of the research of social representations of European countries;
To carry out the research with a group of people fully representing modern Latvian society;
To summarize and process the data obtained in the research, and to analyze and evaluate the
obtained results;
34
5.
6.
To study the content and structure of social representations about EU countries among
different social groups of Latvian inhabitants;
To determine factors influencing the social representations about EU countries among
different social groups of Latvian inhabitants
The questions of the research:
1.
What is a content and structure of social representations about EU countries among different
social groups of Latvian inhabitants?
2.
What forms of social anchoring most influence the social representations of Latvian
inhabitants about EU countries?
3.
If there are any differences in social representations about EU countries between different
social groups of Latvian inhabitants?
The methods and instruments of the research:
• poll;
• an outline black-and-white map;
• G.Kelly's modified REP-test;
• analysis of association on EU countries;
• methods of mathematical statistics.
The basis of the research:
2329 Latvian inhabitants (1256 females and 1073 males) aged between 18 and 65 living all
over the country.
The novelty of the research:
The present research is topical and innovative both for the science of social psychology in
general and for Latvian science of social psychology in particular. The issue of social
representations has not been much studied in Latvia. This is a one of the latest studies on social
representations about EU countries in Europe. And this is the only study in Latvia dealing with
social representations about EU states among the Latvian inhabitants, representing the Latvian
society. The study attempts to study social representations of the different social groups representing
modem Latvian society. It primarily focuses on people's thinking - not about the idea of European
Union as a political and economical unity, but as a community of national states that have their own
independent meaning for Latvian inhabitants and influence upon their life in European Union. The
four components were distinguished in the content of social representations of EU st ates. They are
as follows: mental representations of EU geography, associations on EU countries and their capitals,
knowledge and beliefs about EU states.
The methodology developed within this study provides several possibilities for further
analysis of the researched problem. It is supposed to continue the series of research in order to be
able to follow the dynamics of changes in the social representations of EU countries among different
groups of European inhabitants. The results of the study as well as organisation of the research
aroused a big interest among professionals during the 9 th European Congress of Psychology in Spain
(July 2005).
The structure of the thesis:
1) Introduction, 2) two parts: a) theoretical analysis of the researched problem, inc luding three
theoretical chapters and b) empirical research organisation and data analysis, including participants,
method, results and discussion as well as comparative analysis of social representations about EU
states prevailed in the modem Latvian society; 3) conclusions; 4) list of references; 5) appendices.
Thesis consists of: 148 pages, 61 figures, 6 tables, 10 charts, 180 references, 5 appendices.
1.Theory of Social Representations
Moscovici's theory of social representations starts from the diversity of individuals, attitudes
and phenomena, in all their strangeness and unpredictability. Its aim is to discover how individuals
and groups can construct a stable, predictable world out of such diversity (Moscovici, 1984). This
diversity becomes organized by social representations that carry with them constructed meanings of
the past, and make these available for new applications. Social representing is a process of selective
construction of a meaningful view of the world, followed by its continuous verifi cation. Social
representations are values, ideas, and collectively practiced forms of cognition shared within society,
which facilitate the understanding and communication of the world (Moscovici 1984). They are
cognitive systems with their own language an d logic. They do not represent 'beliefs about',
'images', or "attitudes', instead, they are 'theories', and 'knowledge systems' ready to organize
reality (Moscovici, 1981). The aim of every (social) representation is 'to make something
unfamiliar, or unfamiliar itself, familiar' (Moscovici, 1984, p.24).
Moscovici (1998) defines two kinds of social representations that can be distinguished in
relation to their genesis: social representations, which are predominantly belief-based and those,
which are predominantly knowledge-based.
Beliefs are usually rooted in culture, traditions and language and they are characterised by
firmness and rigidity of conviction. The believer neither searches for proof, nor for evidence relating
to object. They may be unconsciously transmitted through collective memory, implicit
communication and traditions. (Moscovici & Markova 2000). But all beliefs are different in
durability, strength and the degree of engagement. Some beliefs are more easily changed than
others.
Other kinds of social representations are predominantly knowledge-based. Common
knowledge involves different kinds of knowing. It can involve transformed scientific knowledge or
knowledge based on the experience of interpersonal relations, conversations, daily routines a nd so
on. To know, just like to believe, means to hold something true. To know is to examine, as far as
possible independently of others, the nature of the phenomena in question. Of course, the notion
'independently' has a relative meaning because we can hardly totally ignore knowledge circulating in
public discourse. Knowledge in social representations is always social, however, the relation
between the knower and the object of knowledge is not fixed but is open (Markova, 2003).
The difference between knowledge and beliefs does not concern the content of propositions
expressing one or the other (Moscovici, 1998). Propositions expressing knowledge and beliefs can
have the same content. However, whether such propositions are ascribed the status of beliefs or
knowledge rests in the style of thinking and the method of searching for 'truth'. If individual or
groups search for evidence of the truth concerning that object, the resulting social representations
are knowledge based. If. on the other hand, representations are formed and maintained through the
consensus with others, representations are belief-based.
Farr (1995) proposes that in reality, social representations always involve both knowledge
and beliefs' and it is unlikely that we could find a system of thought that would be based purely on
one or the other, whether it is science or religion. The question as to whether social representations
are based predominantly on knowledge or on beliefs could have important applications for social
36
practices. For example, belief-based social representations may inspire social categorization and
exclusion of groups and individuals. That is why self -help, just groups like governmental
campaigns, attempt to change belief-based representations and thus reduce or eliminate exclusion
and discrimination.
Philogene (2001) notes, that after Moscovici laid down the framework of social
representation theory in 1961, the first generation of scholars to work with him on the theory
expanded on its various components. Three scholars in particular contributed to the theory by
developing specific theoretical foundations for the empirical application of the theory. Abric (1976)
elaborated a theory of central core that gives a structure to the representation and endows it with
meaning. The second extension of Moscovici's original social representation framework was
provided by Doise (1985), who focused on the anchoring process by which the representation is
rendered familiar. The third extension of original approach to social representation was carried out
by Jodelet (1989) who argued that a representation always originates from a previous one, having
altered mental and social configurations in the process. He emphasizes that the dynamic nature of
social representations, which is to be capable of continuous change, is rooted in its genesis, that is,
in its linkage to pre-existing representations.
The structural approach based on the concepts of core and periphery continues to develop
(Abric, 2002; Flament, 2002). This showed, that social rep resentation could be described as an
organized set of basic elements of two kinds, with a hierarchy. Nowadays it is concerned with
different functions of the core and periphery, between different social representations (see figure 1).
Figure 1. The general structure of social representation.
The school of social representations in Aix-en-Province has developed the original structural
approach to the study of social representations. According to that approach, social representations
are organised into a structured body of information, beliefs, opinions, and attitudes, which consists
of the central core and peripheral elements. These elements are organized and structured so as to
constitute a particular type of social cognitive system (Abric, J.C, 1976, 1994, 2001, 2002; Flament,
1994a, 1994b, 2000; Guimelli, 1993, 1994, 1998).
There are two processes anchoring and objectification, which play central roles in the
construction of any social representation, that is, the ways social representations are generated,
maintained and changed (Flick, 1995).
The central idea of anchoring is to integrate new phenomena - objects, experiences,
relations, practices, etc. - into existing worldviews and categories, to take away their unfamiliar and
frightening, in short, their strange aspects. 'To anchor is, thus, to classify and to name something'
(Moscovici, 1984, p. 32).
Objectification is much more active, than anchoring. It refers to the process of transforming
abstract information into concrete knowledge through communication (see Flick, 1995; Jodelet,
1989; Wagner, Elejabarrieta, & Lahnsteiner, 1995). The process ends in figurative, metaphorical, or
symbolic meanings, which become shared during debating process on a specific topic or issue. At
this stage, a social representation is a lexicon of meanings drawing from the objectification of the
abstract object.
With the two processes of anchoring and objectification, the theory of social representations
offers a model for the genesis and transformation of knowledge and its function in communication
and interaction. Thus, social representations are the result of interactive processes. In these
interactions, social representations are generated, changed and exchanged, and spread through social
groups.
The symbolic nature of social representations embraces the social, cultural and historic
aspects of social representations. It refers to the social significance of objects and events that is
dependent upon the common meanings in verbal and non -verbal gestures by members of a
community. These common meanings are, in turn, dependent upon a community's social norms and
values and their common history (Puckhardt, 1993).
Thus, social representations are complex wholes of signification that provide the direction
for constructive interpretations of life events by individuals. These interpretations entail processes of
dialogical kind, where different suggestions are in opposition with one another (Valsner, 2002).
Markova (2003) considers, that dialogical nature of social representations is an important
concept of the theory. When individuals or groups share the same social representations, actions are
understood in the same way.
Jodelet (1993) describes the relations between representations and social communications as:
'forms of social thinking used to communicate, understand and master the social and intellectual
environment.
A social representation would simply be an individual's representation of a social object. For
instance, Breakwell (2001) consider the individual's relationship to any social representation, which
can be described along a number of dimensions. In fact, the process whereby the social
representation is generated and sustained is a continuing exchange between personal representation
and social influence mediated through communities. However, the nature and scope for individual,
impact upon social representation concerned and upon the structure of the social representation
itself.
Burr (2002) suggests that our perceptions of the world are mediated by social
representations, but through our social interactions with others we also contribute to their continuing
change and reformulation. We are therefore active agents in the production and reproduction of our
social environments. We play a substantional role in the process of genesis of social representations.
We are not passive products of society, and through our cognitive processes of anchoring and
objectification our psychology puts its own spin on the representations that emerge from our social
interactions.
Rogers (2003) notes, that the social representation available to a person enables them to
make sense of their experiences and their life-world, and they use them to choose different courses
of action in different situations. But crucially, a person's social representation s are not seen as
locked in their individual mind. Rather they are culturally available and mediated resources, arising,
for example, from the messages of the mass media, and in their interactions with experts (such as
scientists, teachers or doctors).
Sommer (1998) considers, that a theory of social representations conceptualises the cognitive
structure and social dynamic of popular knowledge. Social representations are more or less popular
cognitive representations of relevant social phenomena. These phenomena include scientific theories
(e.g. psychoanalysis, physics), social roles (woman, child) or such phenomena as 'illness' or
'culture' or whatever else.
Because of the fast spread of Moscovici's theory, a great number of studies have been
developed of social representations covered the different areas of social psychology. As soon as the
development of the theory of social representations started with the research of the socially shared
knowledge of psychoanalysis in French society in the late 1950s (Moscovici, 1961/1976), further
research was oriented to understand the social nature of health and illness representations (Herzlich,
1976; Jodelet, 1991; de Rosa, 1987).
The range of studies on social representations has been widened both in content and
methodology for the last decade (Renge & Austers, 2003). The most interesting recent studies
focusing on social representations cover a wide variety of topics and social aspects of human
society.
All these studies carried out within the bounds of theory of social representations have
established a rich connection between that theory and empirical application, both quantitative and
qualitative, that has made social representation theory so effective in its efforts to trace the dynamics
of change in modern societies. Therefore, the social representations approach is considered to be one
of the most reliable in attempts to carry researches in the context of changes in the modern Europe.
2. Cultural geography concepts
The concept of Europe is so multidimensional and complicated that there is always much to
do for any researcher of the different fields of the science. That is why it is very important to
investigate this concept from the different positions. One of them is a conception of Europe as a
'space'.
The idea of "the world as a picture" implies a distance between the world and us, a
transformation of participation and dwelling into observation and representation. The fundamental
methodological problem is to determine the nature of the relationship between "spa ce" and
"representation".
Lefebvre (1991) distinguishes Representations of space and Representational spaces. For
him, a representation of space is a conceptualized form (the space of scientists, urbanists and other
rationales) and these are the dominant modalities of space in any society. These spaces tend also to
be worked out in verbal signs. Representational spaces are "directly lived" through associated
images and symbols, which overlay physical space, making symbolic use of their objects.
Representational spaces have an affective kernel. For Lefebvre, these two elements are part of a
triangle, which also includes spatial practice, and is relevant through the deciphering of a society's
spaces. He links spatial practice to the perceived, representations of space to the conceived, and
representational spaces to the lived.
Using the expression "representation of space" it's important to distinguish the correct level
otherwise it could describe absolutely different subjects. Zamyatina (Замятина, 2001) defined levels
and types of representation of space accordingly their learning methods:
•
Psychological space: representations that are used for orientation in space (for example,
perception of distance, volume, etc).
•
•
•
Menial space: relations between concept about space (Latvia, Riga, territory, region), their
characteristics as well as the meaning and how people imagine the "space in their heads".
Usually this type of space is used for geographical research
Cultural space: relations between concepts about space, their characteristics and how they show
up during the study of cultures (subcultures). This type of space mostly exists in the
incorporation of representations (texts, ceremonies, artifacts)
Linguistic space: relations between concepts related to space, their characteristics and how they
appear in language (representations reflected in the languages and pictures of the world)
Distinguishing between these spaces is a problem in itself. Perceptions of some of the
peculiarities of the world (for example, "left" and "right") are filled with cultural traditions. This
washes away the borders between psychological and mental spaces. Another difficulty is that
studying cultural and mental spaces normally by using linguistic sources is the difficulty in
distinguishing peculiarities of linguistic determinants. The problem of distinguishing cultural and
mental spaces is much wider than the problem of volume of choice, as it may seem at the beginning.
Representations of cultural space are reflected in mental space as certain knowledge, but at the same
time the cultural space is included in people's subconscious thinking through certain types of
thoughts and speech.
Summarily, the mental space is what a person is thinking and the cultural space i s what
makes him think that way. Representation of the cultural layer is normally a study in a certain
context as a whole set of texts, or "text body". A big choice here would give a poor result and could
even ruin the research. The research of cultural space via questionnaires and other types of work
with people is possible, but it becomes very difficult to observe the context. On the other hand,
generalized mental presentations need to be studied according to psychological than cultural context.
Besides psychological conclusions, there is one more aspect to the study of the mental level
of spatial representations: the study of spatial stereotypes. These are the representations that
actualize the answer to question such as "What do you associate America wit h?". Like all
stereotypes, spatial stereotypes represent generalized judgments - more like consciousness "marks"
than full images. At the same time geographical images are more cultural than mental.
Representations fixed in mental space determine work methods, which aim to fix the representations
actualized in our consciousness at a particular moment (for example, to draw a map of a town). It is
clear that consciousness consists not only of stereotypes, but also of whole "contexts" of its
representations and it could be as big as representation of cultural space.
However, in general these representations are cryptic and the actualization of "all that we
know" about the space and certain places has to mean an excess of all possible contexts (something
that you can't remember after a direct question, but you might remember after few leading questions
- in reality, a new context of remembrance). Specific text (speech, picture, etc.) reflects space
representations of all levels and to "open" the right level you need the right instruments.
Therefore representations of mental levels need to be studied according to their content
(directly), but representations of cultural levels are more like using a particular combination of one
representation with another. It is easy to draw a border between the two ways of researching
sources: research of mental reality interested in "what did author want to say?" with further
generalized analysis, and research of cultural reality seen as more like a way of presentation and
organization of text than context.
Representation of geographical space is one of the most traditional subjects of research for
many branches of modern science. For Singer (2000), the cognitive processes of the brain are not
optimal for "presenting an objective rate of the world". In contrast, our consciousness chooses from
all spectrums of signals that are coming from the outside world, only a few of which would be
useful for surviving in this difficult world. From these few signals are constructed connected
pictures of the world.
Cognitive psychologists agree that the knowledge in people's minds has structural shape. At
the same time there are discussions about what shape, and according to which rules, the knowledge
is represented. Authorized territory of representation of space knowledge in people's minds is the
concept of a mental map. Tallman (1948) first used the expression "mental map", but the main
works regarding this subject belong to Downs & Stea in the 1970s.
Downs & Stea (1977) define the mental map as "an abstract term that includes all mental and
spiritual abilities, which give us the possibility to capture, put in order, save, memorize and process
information about the surrounding space. Hence, the mental map is "a reflection of certain parts of
the surrounding space created by man". It reflects the world the way we imagine it and could be
wrong. A subjective factor in mental cartography leads us to the following: "mental maps and
mental cartography could be verified according to the angle we see the world". An important
contribution in methodology of mental cartography was done by Milgram (1972) in his attempts to
study out the mental maps of New York, Paris and London.
Cognitive psychology explains the mental map as an internally subjective represent ation
about apart of our surrounding space (Redtenbacher, 1996). It deals not so much with representation
of a space's information, but the processing of geographical maps in consciousness - the space
knowledge of a second grade (Montello, 1998).
With time the term "mental map" started developing and was used in different kinds of research
including history and geography. Different types of "mental map" are one of the most important
parts of our mind. The same important part of the "mental maps" or differen t principals of
organization of geographical, political and civil space are their subjective and political implications
(Miller, 1999). An expansion of that term is based on the understanding that not only individuals
create their own internal subjective picture of the surrounding space.
Groups of people, units and collectives also create very specific historical and cultural
representations of the space structure of the surrounding world, which they see or can imagine.
Different areas of knowledge have used this process of collective mental cartography over time. In
that interdisciplinary area of research, geographers, historians, ethnologists, cartographers,
sociologists and psychologists meet together. In contrast to the research of the mental maps
according to cognitive psychology, sociologists and culturologists concentrate not as much on the
forms of the representation of spatial knowledge in a person's mind, as on a fixed text or image of a
whole society's representation of space.
Psychologists deal first of all with people's orientations in spatial microstructures - like
house, street and town - while sociologists and culturologists study only the imagined articulation of
territories, which we are familiar with because of our private observations - the Balkans, Asia,
Central Europe or Western Europe. As well as the study of the international world of images and
symbols, analysis of collective mental maps could be added to the social imagination and collective
representation areas of research. Even from the existence of a "realist" point of view (for example,
geographical, cultural, linguistic, confessional), the borders of the researched areas do exist and the
subject of the research first of all is represented in texts, maps and pictures - the sketches and plans
of a territory. Therefore research of the mental map often based on analysis of discourse. In close
contact with the historical-cultural study of specific representations about space are the areas of
research as study of the border and geopolitics.
In geography discussions about construction of space in the mind is quite popular. As
geographical representations of space traditionally are shown in maps, so first of all in cartography it
is possible to find interesting facts regarding the creation of mental maps. It is important that maps
never show the reality, especially those that relate to postmodernism. The historian of cartography
Harley (1988) regretted that neither geographers nor historians saw geographical maps as a structure
of social mind.
For him, geographical maps are very difficult semiotic constructions, which, like texts,
require interpretation and of which it is necessary to read them as portraits of authority. For Harley a
41
map is never neutral. He formulates three new points of view of cartography, which are focused on a
new epistemology. Geographical maps, like "synoptic means", became an object of research for
semiotics as well (Schmauks & Noth, 1998).
Referring to geographical images as cultural spaces brings certain interpret ations. Firstly, in
this case geographical images represent some kind of substance contained in certain texts, not in our
heads. Secondly, this set of representations should be complicated and include different
connotations and associations, otherwise an i mage becomes stereotyped. Finally, the set of
geographical representations should be completed and internally consistent.
Formulated features of geographical images make its study very difficult: the image is only
accessible indirectly. Every new kind of representation (broadcast, transmission) of the image
transforms the image itself (3aMimiHa, 2001). It is typical that many geographical images can be
completely understood only together with other geographical images. For example, images of
Europe often appears like an extended image of Asia; images of the USA include images of New
York, Washington, Texas and California; and some images appear in pairs, like the United Kingdom
(islands). In this way, sets of geographical images form certain systems of meani ngs. Sets of images
about the space, its content, structure and quality appropriated to the context is called geographical
context. Geographical context is a spectrum of interconnected spatial representations, which are
guided by thinking within the limits of one or the other cultural traditions in certain situations
(spatial situational pictures of the world).
A steady combination of geographical images where one image is important for the understanding
of another are called cognitively spatial combinations.
In such a way, the geographical image is a complex net of representations that are
inaccessible for direct observation. Therefore the basis of comparative study of spatial
representations is seen as a structure of similar geographical contexts 'taken' from different cultures.
Geographical contexts are understood as combinations of all possible spatial representations, which
could be used in thoughts of motion in certain cultural traditions in certain situations (situational
spatial pictures of the world in certain cultures).
Representations of the geographical space of Europe are well connected with the
representation of its inhabitants. Neumann (1999) showed that the regions are imagined in
cooperation with the same mechanisms, which according to Anderso n (1983) were used for
imagining nations.
Representations of European geographical space take place from conception of parts of the world.
Cao (1990) focused on the parts of the world - the names of the countries, or continents, normally
don't show the geographical location of a place relative to people. The first part of the world under a
non-systematic point of view was the East.
Said (1998) interprets the East as an element of a mental map which could be explained with
a special feeling of superiority over their countries. Orientalism created the East, which is
completely different from the West, and its essence had constant linguistic, cultural and later
religious features. Many travelers proved that many Western representations of the East rely on
geographical maps and nothing else. But because of the idea of the homogeneous East it seems even
more attractive. The East continues living like a tautological conception, which could be explained
that the East is a house of an Eastern person, where he spends his life in Eastern comfort and in
Eastern despotism and sensuality conditioned by Eastern fatalism (Said, 1998). Wolff (1995)
analyses, first of all, French and English literature, travel descriptions, histories, diaries, letters
and geographical notes from the 17th century and finds there 'the invention of Eastern Europe".
Traditional, or classical, divisions into the "wild North" and "civil South" according to Wolff
gave place to new dividers of the continent - East and West - at the end of the 17th century. Every
country belongs to one of these regions based on central criterion, which is also a level of progress
and a place of a certain society on a certain level of historical development postulated by the West.
42
Lemberg (1985) dates the invention of "Eastern Europe" only by the 19 th centuiy. He
emphasizes that up until the First World War, the term "Eastern Europe" was mostly used as a
synonym for Russia. This usage of the term reflected the fact that a big part of Poland was under
Russia. In the 18 01 century, according to German, English and French sources, Russia was seen as
Northern Europe, not Eastern. That was from the antique map of the world, where the "civil South"
and "wild North" existed. It wasn't just a change of the terminology - the whole process showed
changes of political and ideological worldviews across big parts of Europe.
This change of the European mental map had included a change of the term "Northern
Europe", The name of the territory called "Northern" slowly obtained positive meaning and became
synonymous with Scandinavia. At the same time, "the East" became wider and the term "wild"
became more useful for "The East/Orient". Because of that, Russia had been called "half Asia". This
term was used during the period of anti-Bolshevik propaganda of the 'Third Reich' and afterwards
turned into the Western ideology of the Cold War (Schenk, 2001).
Variations of the meaning of the western term "Eastern Europe" began when the location of
new countries in Europe had changed after the First and Second World Wars (new independent
countries had appeared between Germany and Russia). The change of the European mental map
after 1918 showed in discussions about the term "Eastern Europe", which was published in German
magazines and was connected to discussions about the history of Eastern Europe (Torke, 1998). The
definition of Eastern Europe, which dominated during the Cold War, first of all was focused on
political rallies and cut Western territory with the Iron Curtain. It was only when the Iron C urtain
came down that this definition was shown to be contrary to reality. These variations of European
mental maps were reflected in discussion, which during the last few years was named the History of
Eastern Europe (Creuzberger, 2000).
In this way, spatial concepts of Eastern Europe were found like an early idea of the East
being a romantic (sometimes negative) contrast to the stable icon of the West. The East incarnated
something different, foreign and scary. The history and essence connected to this image of positive
representations of the homogenous West became a subject of study as well. For example Carrier
(1992), in spite of how Western societies see themselves, concentrates on the role of the collective
self-conscious in non-Western societies.
The author's main task was to show "how images of the West form representations of
Eastern and Western people about themselves and how these images are formed by Eastern and
Western people" (Carrier, 1992). Many researchers (Federici, 1995; Muller, 1998) deal not only
with mental constructions of the West, but also pay attention to the practice of Occidentalism based
on tins concept. As a result, the image of the West in many (non -Western) societies has a very
different function than the image of the East in the West. For example, in Russia and Turkey it is
possible to observe a strengthening dislike of the West, but at the same time they admit that this
concept for wide groups of inhabitants still incarnates a positive example for them (Makrides, 2000).
Thus the idea that the West is a kind of historical and cultural space is connected to representations
of Europe as more than just a geographical territory. Together with East and West, the study of
mental maps in the last few years also applied to the North as a construction of the identity
(Henningsen, 1999). Before 1810 the common picture of the world the Northern Europe contained
the countries that are situated north of the Black Sea - Dunai, Elba and Visla.
This territory had a name - "Septembrio" - which means "midnight countries" and later
"Northern countries". This term was equally used in German, French and English -speaking
territories. Territories of the northern countries were contrasted to the southern countries. Even the
fight between Russia and France in Napoleonic times was seen as a conflict between the North and
the South. At the time, when Sweden was a great power, the base of northern ideology was founded.
All of Scandinavia was under Sweden and therefore Sweden was the only northern country to be in
the European hierarchy.
This ideological political structure lasted until the 19th century, when Sweden lost its
position and its ideology had changed to the "northern ideology of general nature". Typical northern
stereotypes of its own moral superiority are still visible today in the regional partnerships and mental
limitations of Scandinavian countries compared to the rest of the European Union (Henningsen,
1999).
Southern Europe couldn't develop its own image or attractive force as in some of its pa rts
(for example, Italy or Greece). In historical research the territory of today's southern Europe is seen
as "Mediterranean" (Braudel, 1990; 1999). This doesn't mean that on the mental map of Europe the
South is neutral and without value as part of the world and spatial category. During ancient times the
South was considered as the shelter of civilization, an opposition to the wild transalpine North.
Over the centuries this representation has changed. The South had its lowest reputation after
the Second World War, when a label of economic backwardness was stuck on this part of the world.
This undertaking from the economic geography model of systematization is encountered as in the
mental map of the world ("the conflict of the north and south") (Keller, 1991), so in the mental maps
of individual European countries (for example, the intra-Italian political motion "league of the
north' as a local political project with respect to the poor south of Italy (Carello, 1989; DiLeo,
1998).
Connections of the south and east - southeastern Europe, or the Balkans - holds a special
space on the mental map of Europe, which has been constructed again and again over recent
centuries. Todorova (1997) defines Balkanism - similar to Orientalism - as a Western European
delimiting discourse, which in contrast to Orientalism is turned inside the European context. Its
basic characteristic features a concept the "Balkans" acquired in the first two decades of the 20th
century, and up to the present day this concept keeps its content practically constant.
Concepts of "Central Europe" arose in connection with the attempts of geographers to
develop a differentiated system of the organization of geographical knowledge, in which the "real
countries" would be united into constant groups. At the end of the 1980s, the eastern part of Central
Europe was seen as a "mental space, existing in the imagination and being the object of desire
"(Shultz, 1997). It prevents the discrimination potential, which possess the three -dimensional
concepts generally and the concept of "central Europe" in particular, since "to be central European
at the same time means not to be Eastern European or inhabit the Balkans.
Judt (1995) thinks the idea of Central Europe became famous because of political changes in
Western countries in the 1980s. At the same time in Western discussions an ideology of Central
Europe could be observed: Central European fantasizes about an elusive Europe where patience,
freedom and pluralisms of cultures exist. Central Europe is always at risk of becoming someone's
imagination. It became ideological Europe incarnating our cultural nostalgia.
In such a way historical, sociological and social-psychological research about the mental
map showed that the majority of common names of spacious territories in our dictionary are not
neutral but the terms, which have clear political history. In future, people's needs of orientation in
space as well as influences of geopolitical disputes about people's representations of the spatial
world and mental maps will always stay as a factor of historical process.
Therefore when studying social representations of the European Union it is important to
include mental maps of the geographical space of modern Europe in our research. This will help to
understand the nature of social representations and to connect mental maps of the European Union
with the social representations of its inhabitants.
3. The Social Psychological perspective of European Studies
Representations of Europe are an important part of multi-disciplined European studies
covering the different areas of the research. European studies in general include knowledge acquired
from research in psychology, sociology, economics, politics, anthropology, law, philosophy and
philology, as well as many other integrative disciplines.
The most distinguished of the latest regional studies of the European Union are presented in
the works of Spohn (2003) concerning Austria in the European context; Ichijo (2003) - Britain;
Kubis, Kubisova, Ruzickova & Vorisek (2003) - Czech Republic; Spohn, Minkenberg & Becker
(2003) - Germany; Kokosalaks & Psimmenos (2003) - Greece; Hunyady & Kiss (2003) - Hungary;
Triandafyllidou (2003) - Italy; Romaniniszyn, Nowak (2003) - Poland; Jauregui (2003) - Spain;
etc.
All of these studies were developed under the EURONAT project and provide a deep
analysis of relationships between national identity and representations of Europe and the EU. They
show the latest tendencies of changes in the economy, politics, attitudes and identity of nine
European countries. The comparative analysis starts from the theoretical premise that the formation
of national identity is related both to the historical heritage of state formation and nation building in
each country, as well as to the geopolitical position of that country and its links with the European
integration process. National identities are constituted by domestic and European components.
In the countries studied, national identity and relations with the EU and Europe have
developed in historical contexts. Special attention is given to the role of the mass media in the
transformation of social representations of Europe. Studies provide for the historical, geopolitical
and theoretical background against which to analyse the representations in the discourse of the
media, elite and lay-people.
Because of the different historical backgrounds, geopolitical positions, etc. there are a lot of
differences between European countries in their national identity and attitudes to Europe and the
EU. The complicated political and economic relations, and the different social experiences of
relations between European countries, is a result of the rich and interesting history of Europe, which
makes unique and interesting each European country in the context of a united Europ e.
The unification of Germany has brought a lot of changes to the national identity of Germans,
as well as in relations with Europe. Spohn et al. (2003) suggests that the German concept of a nation
is generally regarded as the prototype of an ethnically defined cultural nation, which is neither
associated with a (national) state, nor an originally democratic legitimating, but which relates to the
German people as a community.
However, German national identity after German unification is not only internally divided
into West German and East German identities, but also externally in its European components. After
the Second World War, most Germans have a comparatively weak national identity because of low
national pride and self-esteem. That is why the growing European component became a particular
weight in the West German identity. Regarding the weight of Europe in relation to the nation, the
region and the home town, West German national identity is more European and less ethnic than its
East German counterpart.
But this relates to the dimension of European integration or a European integrating identity
in German national identity. At the same time, the support for the Eastern enlargement of the
European Union is, to date, slightly higher in East Germany than in West Germany.
In Austria, like in Germany, the collapse of the Nazi Third Reich in 1945 formed the crucial
turning point in the reconstruction of national identity (Spohn, 2003). Austria and its major political
and cultural forces identified itself as small nation in Europe and as a neutral state between East and
West. This neutrality doctrine was one of the fundamental principles of Austria's 'national rebirth'.
However, if Germany has been one of the early core members of European integration, Austria
joined this project very late and with differing national definitions.
The Austrian population (as well as German population) has shown its negative attitude to
the Eastern enlargement. According to Eurobarometer surveys in 1999 and 2000, only 29% of
Austrians support the Eastern Enlargement, whereas 59% were against it. The core reason for fears
45
related to the enlargement are not economic per se, however, but are related to rising immigration
and xenophobia in connection with rising economic challenges.
The negative attitude of the Austrian population, however, is clearly more marked than that
of the German one. Here the different German and Austrian national identities play a major role in
shaping different European attitudes. This relates to the different levels in national pride and the
differences in the composition of national identities, as well as differing attitudes towards national
and immigrant ethnic minorities.
Italy as a nation and as an EU member presents a number of particularities. Nation formation
has remained incomplete, unifying national symbols are even nowadays hard to find and the nation
appears fragmented and even divided within. The EU, in this context, acts both as a source of
national identity providing for the civic dimension that the former is lacking, and, by contrast, as a
centrifugal force because it opens new levels of governance accessible for regions, independently
from the nation state. Italians view the EU as compatible with their national affiliation.
Nearly 50 per cent of Poles believe that integration brings more benefits for the EU than for
Poland (Romaniniszyn, Nowak, 2003).
In the case of Britain, its relationship with the EU is best described as 'half -detachment', which is
not characterised by clear hostility, but a still widely found indifference and ignorance. (Ichijo,
2003). For instance, the Eurobarometer often reports that the British are one of the least informed
nations of the EU. For example, according to the Eurobarometer 49, (conducted in spring 1998), 36
per cent of British respondents said they knew (almost) nothing, compared to 9 per cent of Danish
respondents. Britain's self-professed ignorance of the EU is only surpassed by Spain (32 per cent)
and Portugal (42 per cent). The relationship between Briti sh national identity and European
integration is dealt with, at most, in a cursory, or, at best, polemic manner.
Marcussen et al. (1999) offered a broad comparison of French, German and British cases in
their relation to European identity. It shows that the most common observation in this regard is that
Europe is seen as 'the Other' by British people. In the context of European integration, a European
Identity has largely remained an elite's concern, not really a concern of the public. However, as
noticed by Inchijo (2003), Europe is a significant other for the contemporary British. Thus, the
recognition that as Europe is going to play a more prominent role in people's daily life is growing,
public perception of Europe may take a much sharper form in the nea rest future. However it seems
different in every European country and therefore this problem becomes more and more topical.
A big number of studies concerning Europe have been developed in the field of social
science. The most important topics for psychological research in this area are studies on social
representations within the context of national identity, attitudes and values, providing a narrow
national and subnational as well as cross-cultural studies.
The most remarkable studies on national identity in European context are marked by the
work of Cinnirella, 1996; de Rosa, 1996; Chryssochoou, 1996; etc.
Cinnirella (1996) in his study: A Social Identity Perspective on European Integration,
considers that the study of European integration holds much promise for the development of new,
integrative methodological and theoretical approaches in social psychology. The perspective
suggested is that questions of social identity and social representations are often inseparable. He
emphasizes the role of mass media as a primary source of social representations concerning
European issues, especially in promoting the perception of coexistence between both European and
national identities.
De Rosa (1996) in her study: Reality Changes Faster than Research: National and
Supranational Identity in Social Representations of the European Community (EC) in the Context of
Changes in International Relations, aims to investigate European identity in adults and students (the
adults of tomorrow). She shows the identity as a synthesis of values, feelings of belonging and
social representations, which together with cognitive/informative factors contribute to the
46
structuring of identification processes with an object (the EC) is particularly salient at a time
characterized by wide-ranging and profound changes in international East-West relations.
The comparative analysis of Greek and French identity and the perspective to construct a
European identity in these countries is a main objective of the study of Chryssochoou (1996). She
concludes that European identity (in 1996) is far from being constructed. However, over the course
of interviews it was shown that intergroup relations form the sphere of consensus in which group
beliefs and social representations concerning Europe are generated.
There are few studies concerning social representations of Europe and the European Union
(eg. Hilton et al, 1996; Rutland, 1998: Licata, 2003; Menendez-Alarcon. 2004; Hortacsu, & CemErsoy, 2005).
Hilton, Erb, Dermot, & Molan (1996) in their study: Social representations of history and
attitudes to European unification in Britain, France and Germany, examine the extent to which
different social representations of history lead to different attitudes towards European integration.
They draw parallels between history and group identity and biography to individual identities. The
results allow us to make many interesting conclusions. A utilitarian analysis of the economic and
political costs and benefits of the Maastrich Treaty affects attitudes to the treaty in all three samples.
Rutland (1996) in his study: Social Representation of Europe amongst 10-16 year old British
Children, focuses on how different social anchors indicating a belonging to specific social groups
(for example, social class, travel experience and parental attitudes), in addition to age, affect British
children's social representations of Europe. The knowledge and beliefs components of the children's
social representations were assessed using five different methods, includin g two map interpretation
tasks, a naming task, a photograph evaluation task and informal interviewing.
The results show that the children's social class group helps mediate development of both the
knowledge and belief components of children's social representations of Europe. However, the other
potential forms of social anchoring, namely parental attitude and travel experience, had an
insignificant effect on the children's social representations. Age differences were apparent in the
children's knowledge of Europe, but not in relation to the content of the children's beliefs regarding
Europe.
Licata (2003) in her study: Representing the future of the European Union: Consequences on
national and European identifications, investigates the relevance of social representations and social
identity theories for understanding geopolitical identity-building processes. Results of the three
correlational studies with French-speaking Belgian psychology students addressing their national
and European identifications and their anticipatory representations of the European integration
process show that participants were generally euro-enthusiastic, but those potential losses of cultural
distinctiveness and of national sovereignty were perceived as threatening.
Menendez-Alarcon (2004) in his study: The Cultural Realm of European Integration: Social
Representations of France, Spain, and the United Kingdom, makes a comparative analysis between
social representations of the European Union between different social groups in France, Spain and
the United Kingdom. He takes into account not only data from questionnaires on people's attitudes
to EU, but also analyzes its description in the media of the assertions of the elites and, above all, the
national context.
His investigation develops key questions for the future of the European Union: What is the
interaction between economic and political integration and people's attachments to Europe as a
common social organization? How do individuals' experiences and their symbolic realm connect
with European orientation? In what way is national identity constructed in juxtaposition to Europe?
Are Europeans really ready to redefine their symbolic boundaries?, etc. The results of the research
show that, concerning identity, in all three countries studied there is a strong identification with
national symbols, with their own history and institutions.
However, the use of these symbols and institutions in opposition to the EU is far greater in
the United Kingdom than in France and Spain. The concerns over a possible loss of national identity
as a result of European integration are stronger in the United Kingdom than in France, and more in
France than in Spain. Furthermore, in Spain there is not a social belief in the exceptional status of
Spanish society as marked as in France and the United Kingdom. However, while French
exceptionalism comes mostly in European colors, in the UK exceptionalism is more isolationist and
profoundly marked by its alliance with the United States and its special relation with the
Commonwealth countries.
The idea of national identity has no clearly defined meaning in the population. Concepts such
nation, commonwealth, ethnic group, culture, language and geopolitical space overlap lay citizens'
thoughts and also in the practice and discourse of politicians. Moreover, identity, citizenship, and
nationality are mixed in people's minds, as well as political belonging and national boundaries.
Many people also consider the concept of nationality as being synonymous with race, particula rly in
the United Kingdom. Race is often conceived as a natural difference that influences a given
behavior and the development of a given society and civilization.
But whatever the understanding, national identity remains a strong feeling linked to the
nation-state and often used to oppose further integration in the three countries. The process of
integration has not yet produced an emotional attachment with the European Union. Although there
is some consciousness about generally shared values, this feelin g is rather vague and distant. It is
easier to feel French, Spanish, or British than European because people have a sense of knowing
what their nationality is, or at least they have a positive representation that they learned in school,
through media and in their everyday relationship.
A comparative analysis of social groups in all three member countries showed that the
similar features most open to the process of integration are: the young, the upper -middle class and
university graduates. In the political arena, the far-right and the far-left parties oppose the EU, while
the so-called mainstream conservative parties, the centrists and the social democratic parties tend to
be rather divided. There are also some common wishes expressed regarding the level of EU
integration: (1) to limit Europe to a certain number of agreements between independent countries;
(2) that Europe is fine as it is now, with a common currency and a relatively integrated market there is no need for further integration; (3) more unity i n certain aspects such as foreign relations
and more intervention at the European level on immigration, and/or environment; and (4) that
Europe should strive to become a federal model similar to Switzerland or the United States.
The decision to delay discussion of Turkey's entry to the EU caused several debates about
the EU in Turkish society. Hortacsu & Cem-Ersoy (2005) in their study: Values, identities and
social constructions of the European Union among Turkish university youth, aim to investigate
Turkish university youth's constructions concerning the EU. Three identities: Nationalist -Islam,
Kemalist, and Western; three constructions of EU: Europeans Different, Impermeable Boundaries,
and Different but Advantageous, and two perceived causes for decision: Differences-Conflict and
Justification emerged from factor analysis.
So, as we see, the national identity and emotional attachment to the nation -state in all
European countries is much stronger than the weak sense of European identity and emotional
attachment to the Europe. It is evident that forming an identity takes time. The idea of European
identity is much younger than idea of national identity and it has a lot of possibilities for
development. The theoretical basis of Social Representations provides a good possibility for
empirical researches in this field.
Identification with Europe and Europeans requires not only formal membership in the European
Union, but also an understanding of the 'meaning' of Europe. The European Union at the moment
consists of 25 different states. All of them have their particular influence upon united Europe by means
of their national culture, politics and values, which determine the European identity and European way
of life. Identification with Europeans supposes accepting European values, which, in its turn, supposes
to have some kind of knowledge about the European Union and its states.
As shown above, the conception of modern Europe is full of meaning, which is supposed to
be acquired by all Europeans. In spite of the idea of a united Europe, as it was shown in many
studies, national identities still prevail in each EU country and, therefore, each country still has its
unique particular 'meaning'. Therefore, living in a united Europe, participating in European
activities also requires representations of every single EU country. One of the possible ways for
Latvian people to discover this meaning is investigating the social representations about EU
countries shared by the different groups of modern Latvian society. In accordance with Moscovici's
theory, we suppose the different social groups to have their own social representations. But we also
hope that the results of our research will allow us to see the whole picture of the European Union
and its countries as it is in the opinion of Latvian inhabitants.
METHOD
Participants
A total of 2329 (1256 females and 1073 males) aged between 18 and 65 (Mean = 33.82: SD
= 10.70) participated in the study. The research has covered all four regions of Latvia (Latgale,
Zemgale, Vidzeme, Kurzeme) and major cities (Riga, Jurmala, Liepaja, Ventspils, Kuldiga, Talsi,
Tukums, Jelgava, Bauska, Dobele, Aizkraukle, Jekabpils, Valmiera, Madona, Sigulda, Cesis,
Limbazi, Aluksne, Daugavpils, Rezekne, Kraslava, Preili and Balvi
Calculation of the number of participants and their individual peculiarities is based on the
statement that experimental selection has to be statistically representable. Four major factors were
taken into consideration in order to implement a proportional spread and number of people: a)
living in different regions (statistical regions); b) ratio of male/female population; c) ratio of
Latvian/Russian speaking inhabitants; d) ratio of rural/urban inhabitants.
Quantitative calculation of representative sample is based on the analysis of statistical data
taken from 2003 Population Census (see Table 1).
Table 1. Quantitative calculation of representative sample.
The geographical spread of respondents was as follows: 940 respondents (40,36%) live in
Riga: 374 respondents (16%) live in Latgale; 346 respondents (14,86%) live in Zemgale; 315
respondents (13,53%) live in Kurzeme and 354 respondents (15,2%) live in Vidzeme. Besides, 1795
49
respondents (75,5%) live in cities and 534 respondents (24,5%) live in the countryside. By doing s o,
we aim to manage geographical representation of the results.
Taking into consideration a fact of multiculturality of Latvian inhabitants, representatives of
the two major communities were taken part in the research: 1261 respondents (54,14%) are Latvian
speaking, 1032 respondents (44,31%) are Russian speaking, 19 respondents (0,86%) identified
themselves as bilingual and 17 respondents (0,73%) pointed other languages.
As it is shown in the table 1, the number of people in the research corresponds to a nu mber
of people representing the population of the whole country. However, the ethnicity factor in the
sample does not correspond to 2003 Population Census. As we see, the number of Russians
participated in the research is bigger than it is shown in 2003 Population Census, but the number of
people representing other ethnic groups is smaller. It occurs because in real situation, there is a quite
a big number of people, who are Latvian or Polish or Ukrainian, etc. by passport, but Russian by
mothertongue. (In our research they were asked to name their mothertongue). 36 participated in the
research included 19 bilingual respondents and 17 people are whose mothertongue is neither Latvian
nor Russian.
As it is shown in the table 2, the number of urban people participated in the research is a
little bit bigger, but the number of rural people tend to be smaller, but we consider these differences
to be not so important.
The respondents were also subdivided in accordance with their education: compulsory
(21,7%), secondary (32,4%), professional (18,3%), secondary professional (16%) or higher (13,6%)
and occupation: students (15,9%), employed in the state sector (34,4%), employed in the private
sector (41,6%), unemployed (9%) and retired (0,1%).
The ratio of people with different education was also planned in accordance with 2003
Population Census; however, the figures shown there correspond to the whole population. Only 18 61 year old participants were invited for our research. That is why some figures can be a little bit
different. Thus, every thousandth Latvian inhabitant has participated in this research.
Procedure
The procedure of the research included three stages and normally took about 90 minutes for
each respondent. Therefore most of the data was collected in groups of 15-40 people invited for the
research, but sometimes participants completed the forms individually or in pairs under the control
of our assistants. All participants were asked to fulfil the tasks independently without any help from
others.
In order to be able to collect so much data all around the country we trained (instructed) 15
assistants (our psychology students and colleagues) who live in different regions of Latvia. They
were informed about the objective of our research, procedure and number, an d major characteristics
of respondents we needed. The data collection took twelve months (May 2004 - May 2005).
The objective of the/in* stage was to investigate the general competence about geography
of European Union countries by examining awareness of relatively simple facts about the EU. It
consisted of two tasks.
Participants were given a blank in which they were asked to provide information about their
age, gender, town, education, occupation, mother tongue, etc. They did not write their names.
Instead, they were asked to write an index, which was given to each participant. They were asked to
remember this index and write it on each blank, which they received (see appendix A).
Task 1. The respondents were supplied with a contour map of Europe and a bla nk with a
table. The table has 2 columns named "EU country" and "capital", and 25 rows numbered from 1 to
25. The task was processed under the following instruction:
"Using this European contour map, please mark the state borders of European Union
countries and put the numbers on each country. In your blank, please name the countries of the EU
and their capitals corresponding to the numbers pointed on the counter map".
All participants were limited in time. Only 25 minutes was given to complete this task. All
filled blanks and contour maps were collected right after the time of the task was over.
Task 2. The respondents were supplied with a contour map of Europe, in which all borders of
EU countries are shown and all EU countries are numbered from 1 to 25. In the blank, attached to
the map there was a table that looked identical to the one used in the first task. The task was
processed under the following instruction:
"In this contour map of Europe, all EU countries are numbered from 1 to 25 and all borders
of the European Union countries are shown. Your task is to put down in the table all the EU
countries and their capitals corresponding to the numbers shown on your map. Please make sure that
a country number in the table corresponds to the country number on your counter map. If you do not
know the country or its capital, just leave the space in the table and proceed with the other
countries."
The time was also limited to 15 minutes. All respondents were asked to check the index on
the top of their blanks before collection.
The second stage of the research also included 2 tasks. They were aimed to investigate the
peculiarities of social representations of countries and capital cities of the EU.
Task 3. Respondents received tasks with two tables on both sides of the blank. On the first
side of the blank there was a table with two columns. In the first column named "EU Country", all
25 EU countries were placed in alphabetical order. The following instruction was given to
participants:
"Using fee list of 25 EU countries, please rank these countries according to the level of your
knowledge about them. Number 1 corresponds to a country that you are most informed on. number
2 — less informed, number 3 — even less, etc. The EU country that you are least informed about
should be number 25. Each country should have its own number corresponding to the level of your
knowledge about it. There can not be two countries in the list with the same number".
This task was normally completed in 5 minutes. After that they were allow ed to start the
second task, which was on the other side of the blank.
Task 4. This was a table with four columns. In the first column named "EU country", all 25
EU countries were placed in alphabetical order as in in task 1. The second and fourth columns were
named "Associations". 25 EU capitals were placed in the third column named "EU Capitals"
corresponding to their countries. The task was processed under the following instruction:
"Please describe briefly those key associations (symbols, peculiarities of traditions, food,
nature, culture), which you have in relation with every EU country and its capital."
Before the blanks were collected the respondents were asked (as during the previous tasks) to
check the index on the top. This task normally took 25-30 minutes.
The third stage consisted of just one task and supposed the assessment of some
characteristics describing EU countries based on comparisons between them. Two months before we
started this research, we offered a group of respondents of different ages (N=100, Mean=36,5) a
modified G.Kelly's REP-test, where they were asked to find similarities (constructs) and differences
(contrasts) between 25 European countries (see appendix A). Analyzing this data we have
distinguished 10 most frequently used constructs as shown in table 2.
These results show that economy is the dominant theme (31,78% of cases included
'industrial potential' and ''fast developing'). The outer attributes such as 'nice nature', 'nice,
interesting people', 'nice cities and towns' follows (27,5%); the theme of personal attitudes related
to EU countries takes 21,5%, including 'where I would like to live' and 'where I would feel safe and
secure'.
Table 2. REP-test results: the most frequently used constructs between EU countries (N=100).
Similarities (constructs) / differences (contrasts)
Number of cas es
Between EU countries _______________________________________________________ (Nmax.=100)_______
Economically rich countries
Countries that have nice nature
Countries where I would like to live
Nice, interesting people
Nice cities and towns
Powerful EU states
Countries with big industrial potential
Fast-developing countries
Countries where I would feel safe and secure
Countries with big military power
46
33
31
30
27
26
19
17
11
9
In our opinion, the theme of relations across European borders was not represented in fall
measure. That is why we decided to add 2 more possible constructs referring to relations within the
European Union: 'countries that have a cultural influence (spreading its culture)' and 'countries
helping my country' and transferred them into 12 statements (see appendix A, task 5).
In this task the respondents were asked to rate all 25 EU countries with these 12 statements
along a 5-point scale.
The task was processed under the following instruction:
"Please assess all 25 EU states along the 5-point scale shown above with 12 statements shown
horizontally in the right column of the table."
The respondents were not limited in time for this task, but normally it took about 30 -40
minutes to complete.
When all tasks had been finished, the blanks were collected and pinned together. The data
was processed with the help of MS Excel and SPSS for Windows 10.0.
Results and discussion
As it was shown above, there were several measurements of social representations on EU
countries of Latvian inhabitants: first - the mental representation of EU map: identification of
location and borders of EU countries in the contour map; second - the number of EU countries and
their capitals mentioned in the naming task; third - rating of respondents' knowledge of EU
countries; fourth - associations for EU countries and their capitals; and fifth - rating of EU countries
with 12 statements along the 5-point scale.
It was also taken into consideration the main sources from which provided for respondents
the most information about EU states. Several variants of choice were offered (see appendix A,
page 1 of the Test Blank). They are as follows:
1) School; 2) TV/Radio; 3) Press; 4) Special issues; 5) Travel; 6) Bus iness trips; 7) EU
lectures/activities; 8) Friends.
The respondents could choose one or more of offered variants at the same time.
The results (see figure 5.) show that most Latvian inhabitants (38%) receive information
about the EU from TV/Radio.
Figure 5. The main sources from which the respondents receive information about EU states (N=2329).
The second important source of information about the EU is the press (35%). As we can
see, the leading role in the process of social representations of Europe takes mass media. That is
approved also by the theory of social representations. Friends are ranked in third position (11%).
Travel experience is ranked fourth (10%). The rest of the sources like special issues, business trips
and EU lectures and activities take only 2% each.
Analysing the results of the first task, the following data was taken into consideration: 1) the
ability of respondents to correctly locate as many EU states as they can; 2) the ability of respondents
to draw the boundaries of EU states corresponding to their size and proportion; 3) the ability of
respondents to name as many EU states and their capitals as they can; 4) the most correctly shown
countries; 5) countries that are less shown; and 6) typical mistakes and errors.
/. The ability of respondents to locate EU states on Europe's map
The results of the first task (see figure 6) showed that 26 respondents (more than 1% of
whole sample) failed to identify any EU states in a contour map of Europe (including Latvia). Most
of these (17 respondents) live in the countryside (9 of them live in the cities). All have a compulsory
education. 15 of them are women and 11 are men. Most (10 respondents) are aged 18 -25 years old, 5
respondents are 26-35 years old and 8 are people of 36-50 and 3 are people of 51-60 years old.
Figure 6. The ability of respondents to locate EU states on the counter map of Europe (N-2329).
13% of respondents were able to correctly show the location and draw the boundaries for
only for 1-5 EU states. 31% of respondents correctly showed 6-10 states. Most respondents (42%)
correctly showed more than 11 but less than 15 EU countries. 17% of respondents correctly showed
the location and boundaries of 16-20 EU states. And 6% of respondents successfully located 21 -24
EU countries. Only 1 respondent was able to correctly locate all 25 EU states on a contour map of
Europe. He was a person with higher education - a geography teacher.
2) The ability to draw the boundaries of EU states corresponding to their size and
proportion.
Most respondents tended to enlarge the size of Latvia (23%) and neighbour states: Lithuania
(19%) and Estonia (18%) as well as some other big EU countries like Germany (17%), France
(15%) Spain (14%) and Poland (11%). Some participants tended to reduce the size of big European
countries like France (22%), Germany (19%), Poland (13%), Spain (11%) and Sweden (6%).
5) The ability to name the EU states and their capitals
The results of task 1 shows that most Latvian inhabitants can name more EU countries and
their capitals than they can locate them on a contour map: (the mean for located EU countries on a
contour map of Europe is 11.64; the mean for named EU countries is 15,14).
4) EU countries that are most correctly shown on a contour map of Europe
The most correctly shown countries on a contour map of Europe are Latvia (96%), and those
having distinctive sea borders like the UK (88%) and Denmark (56%), and those with distinctive
shapes like Italy (72%). The exception was Greece (13%).
Second and third place for the most correctly located countries were neighbour states
Lithuania (83%) and Estonia (81%). After them followed big EU countries Germany (64%), France
(62%), Spain (46%) and Poland (48%). Then followed Scandinavian states Finland (38%) and
Sweden (39%). A large number of respondents correctly identified Ireland (34%). This fact can be
explained that this state provides a good opportunity for many Latvians to find a job. This
suggestion is also proved in the fifth task.
5) Countries that are less shown
The less shown countries on a counter map are the small countries of Benelux: Belgium
(6%), the Netherlands (11%) and Luxembourg (6%). Then follow the island countries of Malta (3%)
and Cyprus (5?/o), and the countries of central Europe: Czech Republic (8%), Au stria (7%), Slovak
Republic (3%) and Slovenia (2%).
6) Typical mistakes and errors
The most typical errors are that respondents: 1) located the EU countries in incorrect places,
for instance Portugal (8%), countries of central Europe: Czech Republic (9%), Austria (6%),
Slovakia (4%) and Slovenia (5%), island countries like Cyprus (3%) and Malta (4%); 2) named the
states incorrectly, for example, Liechtenstein instead of Luxembourg (0,1%); and 3) identified states
which are not EU members, for example Norway (13%), Romania (11%), Bulgaria (7%)
Switzerland (18%) and Russia (0,1%).
In general, the results of the first task refer to the fact that there are many Latvian inhabitants
who have rather (weak) incomplete mental representations of EU geography. It is also possible to
conclude that there are quite a lot of gaps in the mental maps of Europe of most Latvian inhabitants.
In the second task, which aimed to measure the general competence of EU countries, if a
country and its capital was shown (named) correctly the respondent could get 2 points, if only
country or only capital - just 1 point. Thus, the maximum score for this task was 50. The results
showed (see the table 3.) that the most informed people in Latvia about EU geography live in cities
(the highest score was in Riga), people who have a higher education and males in the 25-35 year-old
age group.
The Analysis of Variance (One-way ANOVA) showed that there is the list of forms of the
social anchoring, which have a great influence upon awareness about geog raphy and simple facts
about the EU (see appendix D, tables 1-15). Thus, the most powerful factors are: attachment to
urban/rural group, F(l ,2327)=383.830, p<.000; travel experience, F(l, 2327)=147.59l, p<.000;
education F(4, 2324)=67.046, p<.000; press, F(l, 2327)=51.701, p<.000; male/female-group
attachment F(l, 2327)=42.645, p<.000; attachment to a region, F(4, 2324)=34.761, p<.000;
TV/Radio, F(l, 2327)= 34.356, p<.000; attachment to an age-group, F(3, 2325)=32.723. p<.000;
54
language, F(3, 2325)=15.562, p<.000; attachment to a profession related to EU F(5. 2323>=15.279,
p<.000; knowledge, received in school F(l, 2327)=8.279, p<004.
Table 3. The results of the second task showing the general competence of Latvian respondent about EU
geography (N=2329).
There are also some factors that have little or no influence upon awareness about geography
and simple facts about the EU. They are as follows: business trip, F(l, 2327)=1.488, n.s.; EU
lectures/activities organized by EU information centres, F(l, 2327)=.992, n.s.; information received
from friends. F(l, 2327)=.194, n.s.; and special issues and literature about the EU, F(l, 2327)=,192,
n.s.
The level of awareness about each country was very different. That is why we provided a
possibility for each respondent to assess their level of knowledge independently corresponding to
each country of EU in the task 3.
Figure 7. The level of awareness of Latvian inhabitants about EU countries.
The third task was aimed at ranking all 25 EU countries in accordance with respondents'
awareness about these countries. The results show (see figure 7.) that Latvian inhabitants consider
that they are most informed about Latvia (motherland), than their neighbouring states: Lithuania and
Estonia, and after that the big European countries the UK, France, Italy, Germany and Spain.
Latvians are less informed about Greece, Poland, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Denmark,
Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Austria. They are not informed enough about Belgium
Luxembourg, Hungary, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta.
Thus, it is possible to suggest that on the map of the European Union (see figure 8.) there are
several geographical regions that Latvian inhabitants are most informed about, less informed about
and almost not informed about.
The same positions were proved by the number of associations found for each country in the
fourth task: the high-ranked countries in the third task have more associations than low-ranked
countries. Besides, associations of the high-ranked countries are much more manifold in compare
with low-ranked countries. Associations found for the low-ranked countries are mostly related to its
outer attributes such as geography or climate. More seldom associations are related to inner
attributes like history of that country or its culture. The analysis of the content of associations with
EU countries is represented within the bounds of the fourth task.
The aim of the fourth task was to investigate the content and meaning of major associations
with EU countries, which are typical for different groups of Latvian inhabitants. A total of 28 720
associations were received on 25 EU countries and in the process of the research. In order to make a
qualitative analysis of all this data, the associations were classified and subdivided into 20 categories
(see table 4).
Analysis of the content of associations on each EU country allowed us to see in colours the
peripheral elements (such as stereotypes, attitudes, etc.) of the social representations typical for
different social groups of Latvian society. The quantitative analysis of associations on each EU state
and each social group is represented in Appendix E (1-25).
Comparison in associations between groups on each EU country was done independently and
showed in general the significant differences between all the groups of participants in associations
for all 25 countries Cf2 = p<.000).
Table 4. Twenty categories of associations.
Categories
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Geography and climate
National history
National heroes and personalities
Peculiarities of economy and industry
National products
National food
Arts, humanities and music
Traditions and customs
Cultural objects
National politics and religion
The way of living
Sports and games
Personal positive attitude
Personal negative attitude
Personal features of residents
Important events
Related to a person
Other unindentified
Mistakes
0. None
Examples
Mountains; sea; fog; wind; etc.
Fascism; Waterloo; Former Soviet Union; etc.
Columbus; Napoleon, Princess Diana; etc.
Farming; low-taxes; goods-transit; etc.
Cars; perfume; olive-oil; etc.
Spaghetti; zeppelins; paella; etc.
Polka; Don Khihot; Myths; etc.
Oktoberfest; Ligo; Corrida; etc.
Acropolis; Coliseum; Eiffel Tower; etc.
IRA; Basques; Catholicism; etc.
Perfect order, high standards, liberalism in everything.
Sports clubs and teams; Sportsmen; Tour de France; etc.
Nice; beautiful; outstanding; etc.
Dirty, stinky, ugly, etc.
Impulsive; vigorous; calm; etc.
Eurovision; EU Summit; acts of terrorism; etc.
Latvian - guest workers; family members live there; etc.
Big house; oak tree; language; etc.
Leaning Tower of Pisa in France instead of Italy; Balaton lake
in Slovakia instead of Hungary; etc.
If there is no any associations for EU country ______________
At first, we began the analysis of the similarity ratings of the associations on 25 EU countries
along 20 categories by running repeated measures MANOVA with participants' group membership
as a between-subjects factor, and associations on all 25 EU countries as a within-subject factor (see
appendix E-26, table 1. and 2.). The results show that there was a significant effect of within -subject
factor {/ - p<,000). Respectively, it means that all EU countries have different ratios of
associations for ail 20 categories.
The following between-subjects factors have no significant effect: urban/rural, F(l,
299)=.36O, n.s. (see chart 1.); region, F(4, 299)=.8O2, n.s. (see chart 2.); males/females, F(l,
299)=1.724, n.s. (see chart 3.); age-groups, F(3, 299)=2.177, n.s. (see chart 4.).
Chart 1. Ratio of associations in urban/rural groups (%).
As is shown on chart 1, the largest differences in ratio of associations between urban/rural
groups are in the following categories: 'Geography & climate'; 'National products' (the percent of
associations in these categories is significantly bigger for the urban group than for the rural group);
"National politics & religion'; "Sports & games'; 'Personal attitude (+)', and 'Related to
respondent' (the percent of associations in these categories is significantly bigger for rural group
than for urban group). However, the rest of categories have no significant differences in percent
ratio between these groups.
Chart 2. Ratio of associations in region groups (%).
As is shown on chart 2, the largest differences in the ratio of associations between region
groups are in the following categories: 'Geography & climate'; 'National food'; and 'Related to
respondent'. However, the rest of categories have no significant differences in percent ratio between
these groups.
Chart 3. Ratio of associations in males/females groups (%).
As is shown on chart 3, the largest differences in the ratio of associations between
male/female groups are in the following categories: 'Geography & climate'; 'National products';
'National food' (the percentage of associations in these categories is significantly bigger for the
male group than for the female group); 'Cultural & tourist places'; and 'Related to respondent' (the
percentage of associations in these categories is significantly bigger for the female g roup than for
the males group). However, the rest of the categories have no significant differences in percentage
ratio between these groups.
Chart 4. Ratio of associations in age-groups (%).
As is shown on chart 4, the largest differences in the ratio of associations between agegroups are in the following categories: 'Geography & climate' (the percent of associations in these
categories is significantly bigger for senior groups than for junior groups); 'National products'; and
'Traditions and culture' (the percentage of associations in these categories is significantly bigger for
junior groups than for senior groups).
There is a slightly bigger percentage of associations for the group of 56 -65 year-old people in
the following categories: 'National history'; and 'National heroes and personalities'. There is a
significantly bigger percentage in the 'National food' category for the group of 25 -35 year-old
people. The rest of the categories have no significant differences in percentage ratio between these
groups.
However, significant between-subjects effect have education, F(4, 299)=8.360, p<.000 (see
chart 5.); and language, F(4, 299)= 11.256, p<.000 (see chart 6.).
As is shown on chart 5, there are significant differences in most categories of associations
between education groups.
Chart 5. Ratio of associations in education groups (%).
As is shown on chart 6, there are significant differences in most of the categories of
associations between language groups.
Chart 6. Ratio in associations in language groups (%)
There is also a significant interaction between factors: urban/rural*age -groups, F(3.
299)=19.982, p<.000; males/females*age-groups F(4, 299)=16.997, p<.000; urban/rural*
males/females, F(l, 299)=13.660, p<.000; region*males/females, F(4, 299)=6 .376. p<.000; agegroups*education, F(11, 299)=4.526, p<.000; region*age-group, F(12, 299)=4,481, p<000;
region*education, F(16, 299)=3.396, p<000; urban/rural*region, F(4, 299)=4.522, p<.001;
language*age-group, F(8, 299)=2.807, p<.004 and males/females*education, F(4, 299)=3.726,
The fifth task aimed to assess the basic characteristics of all 25 EU states distinguished
during the pre-experimental stage.
Table S. Correlations between mean values of the 12 statements representing EU countries
As it was mentioned above, the procedure supposes the assessment of 12 statements
(covering the major aspects of any country such as economy, its relations with other states and
subjective attributes of its nature, cities and towns and people) along a 5-point scale. A consequence
of this assessment is that we now have mean values describing the 12 major aspects for each EU
country. AH these aspects and relations between them form the major components of peripheral
elements of the social representations of EU states.
In order to investigate these interrelations in an attempt to measure the importance and
influence of each aspect, there were determined correlations between mean values of the offered 12
statements (see Table 5).
As we can see in table 6, most of the statements are closely related to each other (55 of 66)
on a high significance level p<.01. There are also several values (4 of 66) related to each other on
p<.05 significance level. Only a few values (7 of 66) show insignificant correlations (n.s.). This
allowed us to create 66 two-dimensional fields representing all EU countries in the opinion of
Latvian inhabitants (see appendix C, charts 1 - 66).
Comparative analysis of social representations about EU states prevailed in the modern
Latvian society
In order to be able to figure out social representations of each EU country independently,
several measurements were taken into consideration. They were as follows: 1) country rank given in
the third task in accordance with Latvian inhabitants' awareness about EU countries; 2) Analysis of
associations for this country in the fourth task; and 3) Country rating with 12 statements along 5 point scale in the fifth task.
We also aim to measure the influence of each social group upon results on each country.
All these measurements combined allowed us to understand the content of social
representations that Latvian inhabitants have about the states of the EU. In an attempt to research
this topical problem we have developed a tool suitable for studying the social representa tions of the
different groups of people, which provide a lot of possibilities for contemporary analysis of the data.
It is evident that within the limits of this paper it is not possible to discover the problem in
full detail, but it is definitely possible to shape the most important aspects typical for all the
countries within the context of social representations of EU countries among Latvian inhabitants.
Therefore, the data collected in this research provides wide possibilities for further research
and deeper analysis of the problem. For the sake of readability, in this chapter we can get in touch
with only the most interesting aspects representing 25 EU countries in the opinion of Latvian
inhabitants.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The study on social representations about EU states among the Latvian inhabitants
allowed to determine the content of social representations and distinguish four components in their
structure: the general knowledge about EU states and their capitals; mental geography (maps) of EU
countries; associations on EU states and their capitals; and beliefs (participants' opinions) about
major qualitative characteristics about EU country such as economy, politics, international relations,
subjective attitudes towards people and nature, cities and towns, emi gration and welfare.
2. The results suggest that there are several forms of social anchoring influencing social
representations about EU states.
• The most important forms of social anchoring of Latvian inhabitants influencing upon
awareness about EU countries are: attachment to urban/rural group, F(l ,2327)=383.830, p<.000;
travel experience, F(l, 2327)=I47.591, p<.000; education F(4, 2324)=67.046, p<.000; press, F(l,
2327)=51,701, p<000; male/female-group attachment, F(l, 2327)=42,645, p<.000; attachment to a
region, F(4, 2324)=34.761, p<.000; TV/Radio, F(l, 2327)= 34.356, p<.000; attachment to age group, F(3. 2325)=32.723, p<.000; language, F(3, 2325)=15.562, p<.000; attachment to profession
related to EU F(5.2323)=15.279, p<.000; knowledge, received in school F(l, 2327>=8.279, p<.004.
• The following forms of social anchoring of Latvian inhabitants, such as business trips,
F(l, 2327)=1.488, n.s.; EU lectures/activities organized by EU information centres F(l, 2327)=992,
n.s.; information received from friends F(l, 2327)=. 194, n.s.; and special issues and literature about
the EU, F(l, 2327)=. 192, n.s. have little or no influence at all upon awareness about geography and
simple facts about the EU.
3. The attachment to the definite social group of the Latvian in habitants (particularly
urban/rural, education, male/female, region, language and age-groups) regulates social
representations about EU countries.
• There was a significant effect of within-subject factor in ratio of associations found for 25
EU countries (jf = p<.000). Respectively, it means that all EU countries have a different ratio of
associations for of all 20 categories.
• Countries that are well known for Latvian inhabitants have more associations than
countries that are less known.
• Associations of the well-known countries are much more manifold compared with less
known countries. Associations found for the less known countries are mostly related to outer
attributes such as geography or climate.
• The following between-subjects factors have no significant effect on associations:
urban/rural, F(l, 299)=.36O. n.s.; region, F(4, 299)=.8O2, n.s.; male/female, F(1, 299)=1.724, n.s.;
age-groups, F(3, 299)=2.177, n.s. Respectively, it means that all these groups of respondents have
similar associations with EU countries.
62
• However, significant between-subjects effect on associations are education, F(4,
299)=8.360, p<.000; and language, F(4, 299)= 11.256, p<.000. All these groups are different in their
associations with EU states.
• Comparative analysis of the content of associations used by social groups of Latvian
inhabitants about each EU country showed the significant differences between all groups of
participants in associations for all 25 countries (2 = p<.000).
• The largest effect on associations for EU states in most of cases belongs to age-group, but
the smallest effect belongs to the urban/rural group.
• There was a non-significant effect on beliefs about most EU countries for the following
groups of participants: urban/rural; region; male/female; age-groups; education. Respectively, it
means that these groups of respondents have close beliefs about EU states. However, in the most of
cases language has a significant effect on beliefs about most EU countries.
• Thus, the largest differences in social representations about EU countries between
different social groups of Latvian inhabitants are determined in associative component and in
knowledge component of social representations, but non-significant differences are determined in
mental geography component and beliefs component of social representations.
References
Abric, J.-C. (1976). Jeux, Conflicts et Representations Sociales. These d'Etat, Aix -en-Provence,
Universite de Provence.
Abric, J.-C. (2002). L'approche structurale des representations sociales: developpments recents.
Psychologie & Societe, 4, 81 - 103.
Breakwell, G. M. (2001). Social Representational Constraints upon Identity Processes. In K. Deaux
and G. Philogene (Eds.) Representations of the Social. Bringing Theoretical Traditions. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers, pp.271-284.
Doise, W. (1985). Les representations sociales: Definition d'un concept. In W. Doise & A
Palmonari (Eds.) (1986), L'etude des representations sociaie.Textes de base en Psychologie.
Neuchatel, Paris: delachaux et Niestle. pp. 81 - 94.
Hopkins, N. & Moore, C. (2001). Categorizing the neighbours: Identity, distance, and stereotyping.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 64(3), 239-252.
Farr, R. M. (1995). Representation of health, illness and handicap in the mass media of
communication: a theoretical overview. In I. Markova and R.M. Farr (Eds.). Representations of
Health, Illness and Handicap, New York: Harwood. pp. 3-30.
Flament, C. (1994a). Aspects peripheriques des representations sociales. In C. Guim elli (Ed).
Structures et Transformations des Representations Sociales, Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle.
pp. 73-84.
Flament, C. (1994b). Structure, dynamique et transformation des representations sociales. In J -A
Abric (Ed.) Pratiques Sociales et Representations, Paris Presses Universitaires de France, pp.
37-57.
Flament, C. (2002). L'aproche structurale et aspects normatife des representations sociales.
Psychologie & Societe, 4, 51 - 80.
Flick, U. (1995). Social representations. In J. Smith, R. Harre & L. Langenbore (Eds.) Rethinking
Psychology. London: Sage.
Guimelli, C. (1993). Locating the central core of social representations: towards a method.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 23-5, 555-59.
Guimelli, C. (1994). Transformation des representations sociales, pratiques et schemes cognitifs de
base. In C. Guimelli (Ed). Structures et Transformations des Representations Sociales, pp.73-84.
Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle.
Guimelli, C. (1998). Differentiation between the central core elements of so cial representations.
Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57, 209-24.
Hortacsu, H., Cem-Ersoy, N (2005). Values, identities and social constructions of the European
Union among Turkish university youth. European Journal of Social Psychology, (35), pp. 107121.
Hunyady, G., & Kiss, P. (2003). Nation, State and National Identity in Modem Hungary. In B.
Strath & A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and
Prospective Member States: Media, Elites and Civil Society, pp. 166-197.
Ichijo, A. (2003). Britain: State and Nation Formation, and Europe. In B. Strath & A.
Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and Prospective
Member States: Media, Elites and Civil Society, pp. 30-56.
Jauregui, P. (2003). Spain: 'Europe' as a Symbol of Modernity, Democracy and Renewed
International Prestige. In B. Strath & A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and
the Nation in Current and Prospective Member States: Media, Elites and Civil Society, pp. 274306.
Jodelet, D. (1989). Folies et representations sociales. Paris: Presses Univeritaires de France.
Jodelet, D. (1991). Madness and social representations. Berkeley: University of California Press.
64
Jodelet, D. (1993). Indigenous psychologies and social representations of the body and self. In U.
Kim & J. W. Berry (Eds.). Indigenous Psychologies. Research and Experience in Cultural
Context. Newbury Park, London: Sage.
Kokosalakis, N., & Psimmenos, I. (2003). Modern Greece: A profile of identity and nationalism. In
B. Strath & A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and
Prospective Member States: Media, Elites and Civil Society, pp. 127-162.
Kubis, K., Kubisova, V., Ruzickova, K., Vorisek, M. (2003). Czech Republich: Nation Formation,
Czech Republic and Europe. In B. Strath & A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of
Europe and the Nation in Current and Prospective Member States: Media. Elites and Civil
Society, pp. 57-82.
Lasticova, B. (2003). Identities & social representations of the integrating Europe in young people
from 10 European regions.
ECSR Summer school "European values and identities".
http://www.ed.ak.uk.so.ciol/vouth
Licata, L. (2003). Representing the future of the European Union: Consequences on national and
European identifications. Papers on social representations. Vol. 12. pp.5.1 - 5.22.
Liu, J.H., Lawrence, B., Ward, C, & Abraham, S. (2002). Social representations of history in
Malaysia and Singapore: On the relationship between national and ethnic identity. Asian Journal
of Social Psychology, 5,3-20
Markova, I. (2003). Dialogicality and Social Representations: The Dynamics of Mind. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Menendez-Alarcon, A. V. (2004). The Cultural Realm of European Integration. Social
representations in France, Spain, and the United kingdom. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger
Publishers.
Moscovici, S. (1976). Social Influence and Social Change. London: Academic Press, pp. 181-209
Moscovici, S. (1981). On social representations. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Social cognition. London:
Academic Press, pp. 181-209
Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. M. Farr and S. Moscovici
(Eds.), Social representations (pp. 3-69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moscovici, S. and Markova, I. (2000). Ideas and their development; a dialogue between Serge
Moscovici and Ivana Markova. In S. Moscovici, Social representations, pp. 224-86. (Ed.) O.
Duveen. London. Polity Press.
Moscovici, S. (1998). The history and actuality of social representations. In U.Flick (Ed.) The
Psychology of the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.209-47.
Philogene, O. (2001). A theory of Methods. In K. Deaux and G. Philogene (Eds.) Representations of
the Social. Bringing Theoretical Traditions Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 39-41.
Renge, V., & Austers, I. (2003). Social Representations of Science among University Students and
Teachers in Latvia. Baltic Journal of Social Psychology. Vol.4, No.2.
Rogers, W. S. (2003). Social Psychology. Experimental and Critical Approaches. Maidenhead Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Romaniszyn, K., & Nowak, J. (2003). Poland: State, Nation Formation and Europe. In B. Strath &
A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and Prospective
Member States: Media, Elites and Civil Society, pp. 244-272.
Rutland, A. (1998). Social representation of Europe amongst 10-16 year old British children. Papers
on social representations. Vol. 7. pp. 61-75.
Sommer, C. M. (1998). Social representations and media communication. In U. Flick (Ed.), The
Psychology of the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 186-195.
Spohn, W., Minkenberg, M. (2003). Germany. In B. Strath & A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.).
Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and Prospective Member Stales: Media.
Elites and Civil Society, pp. 86-22.
Spohn, W. (2003). Austria: Europe and the Nation in Austrian National Identity. In B. Strath & A.
Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and Prospective
Member States: Media. Elites and Civil Society, pp. 3-29.
Staerkle, C, Clemence, A., & Doise W. (1998). Representation of Human Rights Acr oss Different
National Context: The Role of Democratic and Non-Democratic Populations and Goverments.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 207-226.
Strath, B., Triandafyllidou, A. (2003). Representations of Europe and the nation in current and
prospective member-states: media, elites and. civil society. The collective State of the art and
historical reports. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European Communities.
Triandafyllidou. A. (2003). Italy: Nation Formation, the Southern Quest ion and Europe. In B. Strath
& A. Triandafyllidou (Eds.). Representations of Europe and the Nation in Current and
Prospective Member States: Media. Elites and Civil Society, pp. 199-239.
Valsiner, J (2002.) Beyond social representations: a theory of enablement. Invited Lecture presented
at the 6th International Conference on Social Representations. General Theme: Thinking
Societies: Common Sense and Communication, Stirling, August, 31, 2002.
Wagner, W., Elejabarrieta, F., & Lahnsteiner, I. (1995). How the sperm dominates the ovum:
Objectification by metaphor in the social representation of conception. European Journal of
Social Psychology. 25, 671-688.