Professor James Liu's presentation titled 'Developing Social Representations of History'.

1. Developing Social Representations
of History: Theory, Methods,
Measurement and Application
Professor James H. Liu
Centre for Applied Cross Cultural Research
School of Psychology
Victoria University of Wellington
New Zealand
Email: James.Liu@vuw.ac.nz

2. Societal
Content inflects
I think, therefore I am Psychological
Process
We communicate, therein
We are created

3. Why History?
• History is an important symbolic resource because:
(1) Human Consciousness is historically contingent on
technology, mentalities, and temporal powers.
(2) It encompasses the accumulated wisdom and
knowledge from our ancestors that can be applied to
new situations. History provides traditions, values, and
symbols that are vital to the culture-specific functioning
of societies. STABILITY
(3) History is appealing as a tool for political
communications because it offers concrete events and
people with emotional resonance whose relevance to
the current situation is open to interpretation and public
debate. CHANGE
Liu & Hilton (2005) British Journal of Social Psychology

4. METHODOLOGICAL OVERVIEW:
From Simplicity to Complexity
1) The Power of Simple Description: Using Open-
Ended Nominations as a content-rich tool for
describing social representations.
2) The Power of (bottom-up) Inductive Reasoning to
explore psychological phenomena that are content-
based and may vary across cultures
3) The Power of Cross-Cultural Statistics in
determining the universality vs. culture specificity
of historical representations.
4) Latent Class Analysis as a tool for ascertaining
Representational Profiles for individuals

5. Open Ended Questions used
• Write down the names of the 5 people born in the
last 1,000 years whom you consider to have had
the most impact, good or bad, on World History.
• Imagine that you were giving a seminar on world
history. What 7 events would you teach as the
most important in World History?
• Open-ended answers written in by participants and
coded.
Liu et al. 2005 Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology

6. METHOD (Liu et al., 2005, Journal of
Cross Cultural Psychology)
• Student Samples from 6 Western nations:
Australia, N=102; France, N=102; Germany,
N=81; Great Britain, N=39; New Zealand,
N=112; USA, N=86 (only post Sept 11
sample)
• 6 Asian Samples: Hong Kong, N=123; Japan,
N=91; Malaysia, N=180 ; Philippines,
N=302; Singapore, N=201, Taiwan, N= 663
(half students, half adults)

11. Summary – Representations of World History
(1) History is projected backwards from the present
with sample averages of 63% of events and 72% of
persons from the last 100 years
(2) A Story about politics and war (esp. WWII & Hitler,
most nominated person), accounting for 67% of
events and persons.
(3) More Eurocentric than ethnocentric.
(4) Under-estimates the importance of economics and
technology (& science).
Liu et al. (2005, 2009) Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

12. How general is this representation?
• Education dependent
• How about the great ancients of China and
India? Present focused as well?

13. Most Important Events in World History
China and India
Rank China (N=115) Pct Eval India (N=100) Eval
1 WW II 81% 2.0 WW II 61% 2.8
2 Found PR China 48% 5.3 9-11 WTC 49% 3.1
3 WW I 40% 2.2 Indian Independence 42% 6.3
4 Industrial Rev 36% 5.2 WW I 37% 2.8
5 Technological Dev 33% 5.5 Cold War 20% 4.0
6 Fall of Communism 24% 3.2 India-Pakistan War 18% 3.7
7 Man on Moon 20% 5.5 both World Wars 15% 2.5
8 Colonization 20% 4.3 Partition India-Pak 15% 2.6
9 Sino-Japanese War 17% 4.2 Iraq War 14% 2.7
10 Atomic Bomb 16% 3.0 Asian Tsunami 14% 2.4
10= Opium War 16% 2.2
Most Important People in Last 1000 Years
Rank China Pct Eval India Pct Eval
1 Mao 64% 4.7 Gandhi 75% 4.9
2 Hitler 58% 3.0 Hitler 61% 3.6
3 Einstein 42% 5.5 Osama bin Laden 25% 5.6
4 Marx 40% 4.7 Mother Teresa 22% 5.8
5 Deng Xiaoping 36% 5.6 Bhagat Singh 19% 6.2
6 Napoleon 28% 4.6 Shivaji Bhonsle 18% 5.8
7 Zhou Enlai 21% 5.8 Einstein 16% 5.8
8 Newton 16% 4.9 Subhas C. Bose 11% 6.8
9 Sun Yatsen 10% 5.3 Lincoln 16% 5.6
10 Confucius 10% 5.0 George Bush Jr 11% 2.0

14. A Clash of Civilizations with Islam?
Turkey and Indonesia

15. Turkey and Indonesia
Most Important Events in World History
Rank Turkey (N=227) Pct Indonesia (N=104) Pct Eval
1 WW I 44% 3.2 WW II 79% 2.8
2 Turkish War of Indep 42% 6.7 9-11 WTC 60% 2.6
3 WW II 41% 3.2 Asian Tsunami 43% 2.4
4 Conquest of Istanbul 35% 6.5 WW I 24% 2.5
5 9-11 WTC 26% 2.5 Iraq War 32% 1.9
6 French Revolution 22% 5.5 Crusades 24% 3.8
7 Found. Turkish Rep. 19% 6.8 Industrial Revolution 22% 4.9
8 Iraq War 20% 2.0 Bali Bombing 21% 1.5
9 Discovery of Americas 13% 4.8 Israel-Palest. Conflict 21% 3.0
10 Industrial Revolution 12% 6.1 Atomic Bomb 20% 2.8
Most Important People in the Last 1000 Years
Rank Turkey Pct Indonesia Pct Eval
1 Kemal Ataturk 94% 6.8 Hitler 58% 2.7
2 Hitler 60% 3.0 George Bush Jr 30% 1.9
3 Sultan Mahmed II 29% 6.3 Sukarno 30% 4.8
4 Einstein 25% 5.8 Mohammed 28% 6.6
5 George Bush Jr 24% 1.2 Einstein 23% 5.4
6 Bill Gates 10% 5.9 Mother Teresa 20% 6.0
7 Ismet Inonu 8% 5.5 Gandhi 18% 5.8
8 Thomas Edison 7% 5.9 Princess Diana 16% 6.0
9 Turgut Ozal 7% 5.5 Thomas Edison 14% 6.2
10 Che Guevara 6% 4.7 Marx 12% 3.7

16. Summary of Muslim Nations of Turkey
and Indonesia
• No evidence of a pan-Islamic history. Turkish world
history is secular and focused on the creation of the
Republic of Turkey in the 20th century. Indonesia more
Islamic in narrative, but in hard fight vs. Islamic terrorism.
• In so far as representations of history is an indicator, the
“clash of civilizations” is the product of Western
imagination. Turkey and Indonesia admire Western
ideals of progress but their secular societies are corrupt.
• Loss of prestige for American Presidency: Bush’s rating
was significantly worse than Hitler in 4 societies, equal to
Hitler as perfectly negative in Spain, and higher than
Hitler in 2 societies.

17. Table 1. Most Important Events in World History
Rank China Pct Eval (Std) India Eval (Std) East Timor Pct Eval (Std) Indonesia Pct Eval (Std)
(N=115) (N=100) (N=98) (N=104)
1 WW II 81% 2.0 (1.7) WW II 61% 2.8 (1.7) Iraq War 56% 2.1 (1.6) WW II 79% 2.8 (1.9)
2 Found PR China 48% 5.3 (1.1) 9-11 WTC 49% 3.1 (2.3) WW II 39% 1.5 (1.3) 9-11 WTC 60% 2.6 (1.8)
3 WW I 40% 2.2 (1.1) Indian Independence 42% 6.3 (1.1) 9-11 WTC 36% 1.4 (1.0) Asian Tsunami 43% 2.4 (1.7)
4 Industrial Rev 36% 5.2 (1.0) WW I 37% 2.8 (1.9) Terrorism 28% 1.3 (1.0) WW I 24% 2.5 (1.9)
5 Technological Dev 33% 5.5 (0.8) Cold War 20% 4.0 (2.1) Bali Bombing 20% 1.4 (0.68) Iraq War 32% 1.9 (1.5)
6 Fall of Communism 24% 3.2 (1.3) India-Pakistan War 18% 3.7 (2.5) Dili Massacre 19% 1.4 (0.99) Crusades 24% 3.8 (1.9)
7 Man on Moon 20% 5.5 (0.95) both World Wars 15% 2.5 (1.9) Timorese Indepen. 15% 7.0 (0.0) Industrial Revolution 22% 4.9 (1.5)
8 Colonization 20% 4.3 (1.2) Partition India-Pak 15% 2.6 (1.7) Israel-Palest. Conflict 12% 2.7 (1.8) Bali Bombing 21% 1.5 (0.80)
9 Sino-Japanese War 17% 4.2 (2.3) Iraq War 14% 2.7 (2.0) Timor Invasion by Indo8%8% 1.5 (2.1) Israel-Palest. Conflict 21% 3.0 (1.7)
10 Atomic Bomb 16% 3.0 (1.5) Asian Tsunami 14% 2.4 (1.9) HIV 8% 1.7 (2.1) Atomic Bomb 20% 2.8 (2.1)
10= Opium War 16% 2.2 (1.3) Human Rights Decl. 8% 6.6 (1.1)
Rank Russia Ukraine Poland Turkey
(N=60) (N=84) (N=102) (N=227)
1 WW II 57% 4.0 (2.5) WW II 100% 1.4 (0.2) WW II 73% 1.3 (0.34) WW I 44% 3.2 (2.0)
2 WW I 46% 4.1 (2.0) WW I 71% 1.8 (0.87) WW I 54% 1.4 (0.75) Turkish War of Indep 42% 6.7 (0.7)
3 Great Patriotic War 45% 4.1 (1.9) Chernobyl Meltdown 69% 1.6 (1.3) 9-11 WTC 29% 1.3 (1.2) WW II 41% 3.2 (2.1)
4 Christian. Of Russia 33% 4.2 (2.1) Orange Revolution 52% 5.6 (1.6) Fall of Communism 26% 6.3 (0.5) Conquest of Istanbul 35% 6.5 (1.0)
5 Chechnya War 32% 3.7 (2.3) Great Hunger 1932-3 47% 1.1 (0.3) Discovery of Americas21% 5.8 (1.4) 9-11 WTC 26% 2.5 (1.8)
6 Kulikovo Battle 28% 4.2 (2.0) Iraq War 33% 2.4 (1.0) Polish Pope 14% 7.0 (0.0) French Revolution 22% 5.5 (1.3)
7 Fall of Soviet Union 27% 4.4 (2.1) Fall of Soviet Union 33% 6.7 (0.8) Creation of EU 14% 5.5 (1.1) Found. Turkish Rep. 19% 6.8 (0.5)
8 Russian Revolution 23% 4.0 (2.2) Atomic Bombing 31% 2.1 (0.59) Death of Polish Pope 12% 4.2 (0.41) Iraq War 20% 2.0 (2.1)
9 Atomic Bomb 18% 2.7 (2.4) Ukaine Independence 23% 6.3 (0.2) Beginning Commun. 12% 2.2 (1.7) Discovery of Americas13% 4.8 (1.9)
10 Afganistan War 18% 4.0 (2.3) 9-11 WTC 22% 1.8 (1.1) Birth of Christ 12% 6.6 (0.43) Industrial Revolution 12% 6.1 (1.1)
Rank Hungary Brazil Portugal Spain
(N=57) (N=367) (N=118) (N=142)
1 WW II 88% 2.0 (1.4) WW II 40% 2.0 (1.6) WW II 72% 1.6 (1.1) WW II 45% 1.5 (0.2)
2 WW I 75% 2.1 (1.4) WW I 32% 2.1 (1.7) WW I 51% 1.6 (1.1) WW I 34% 1.5 (0.5)
3 Discov. Of America 52% 5.3 (1.4) German Reunific. 22% 6.0 (1.7) 9-11 WTC 30% 1.1 (0.3) 9-11 WTC 30% 2.0 (0.7)
4 Conquest of Hungary24% 6.5 (0.97) Industrial Revolution 20% 5.5 (1.6) Portuguese Discovs. 26% 6.2 (1.1) Discov. Americas 25% 5.3 (2.4)
5 Hung. Regime change3% 2 5.2 (1.4) 9-11 WTC 19% 2.0 (1.8) Carnation Revolution 25% 6.3 (1.0) Spanish Civil War 23% 1.3 (0.1)
6 French revolution 23% 4.9 (1.5) French Rev 17% 5.0 (1.5) Industrial Revolution 20% 6.0 (1.1) March 11 Train Bomb 23% 1.3 (0.2)
7 Industrial Revolution 23% 4.9 (1.2) Both Wwars 14% 2.5 (1.8) Man on the Moon 18% 6.4 (0.8) Iraq War 20% 1.3 (0.3)
8 Man on the Moon 16% 6.1 (0.84) Abolish Slavery 11% 6.7 (0.64) Atomic Bomb 12% 1.7 (1.7) Both Wwars 18% 1.7 (1.1)
9 1956 Hungarian Rev.16% 5.4 (0.88) Iraq War 11% 1.3 (0.91) Iraq War 12% 1.6 (0.8) Democracy 18% 6.0 (0.8)
10 1848 Hungarian Rev.12% 6.0 (1.1) Atomic Bomb 11% 1.5 (1.3) Fall of Berlin Wall 11% 5.9 (1.5) Vaccinations 17% 7.0 (0.0)
10= Cold War 12% 2.1 (1.2)
10= Holocaust 12% 1.7 (1.9)

18. Summary: Towards a Global Political Culture?
“Samples from 12 new countries confirmed the major findings
reported in Liu et al. (2005): (1) world history is a story
about politics and war, (2) representations of world history
are focused on the present, and (3) characterized by
Eurocentrism tempered by nationalism. The World Wars,
especially the Second World War and Hitler continued to be
considered across cultures as the most important events
and figure in world history…”
“A new cluster of events and figures surrounding 9-11 and the
Iraq War displaced the clusters of events and figures related
to the Cold War and to the Enlightenment (industrialization
and the rise of democracy) as the second most significant
cluster of events and people in world history. ”
“Not only does the past weigh on the present, but the present
weighs on the past (see Olick & Robbins, 1998 for the
sociological literature). Events and figures from the past
become salient as they are selectively mobilized for their
relevance to current political agendas.”

19. The World History Survey
• Major theories on cross-cultural psychology
revolve dimensions of cultural variation, like
individualism-collectivism, power distance,
autonomy-relatedness, etc., with Geert Hostede
and Shalom Schwartz being the most famous.
• Are there dimensions of historical perception that
are universal? Or is the meaning of historical
events and figures narratively constructed by
cultures and/or civilizations so that there are no
universal dimensions of meaning?
• Need for a Quantitative Survey

21. New World History Survey (Liu et al., Journal of
Cross Cultural Psychology, 2012)
• Moving from open-ended nominations to closed-ended
mathematical evaluations.
• Student data collected from 30 societies, with more
than 5800 participants
• Any event or figure nominated by more than 1 society in
either the 2004 or 2009 papers were included.
Importance and evaluation of 40 prominent historical
events and figures across 30 societies.
• Goal is to use the science of survey analysis to develop a
global language of historical symbols: What
understandings do we share about the events in history
that brought here?
• Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, Asian Journal of Social Psychology, Culture
& Psychology are all potential outlets for representational papers

22. Data Samples: 30+ societies, N=5800
Country N Gender Age
Female Male
Australia 183 138 45 27,26 (12,10)
Austria 195 113 82 25,06 (4,62)
Belgium 141 115 24 20,53 (4,409
Brasil 212 156 56 24,11 (7,51)
Bulgaria 239 202 36 19,4 (1,1)
Canada 196 133 62 19,55 (4,61)
China 186 103 83 19,76 (1,17)
Colombia 159 78 81 21,26 (2,86)
Fiji 196 102 94 22,19 (3,00)
Germany 151 78 73 23,92 (3,31)
Hong Kong 152 98 51 --
Hungary 185 119 65 21,36 (2,21)
India 202 100 102 21,24 (2,83)
Indonesia 199 93 106 20,68 (2,38)
Italy 142 78 64 24,22 (7,75)
Japan 113 60 53 21,06 (1,52)
Korea 224 123 101 20,98 (2,37)
Malaysia 198 159 39 23,64 (4,37)
Mexico 198 100 98 20,19 (2,04)
Netherlands 201 163 38 19,74 (2,91)
New Zealand 161 -- -- --
Norway 181 118 62 22,43 (3,54)
Philippines 330 218 112 18,96 (1,65)
Portugal 198 135 63 19,87 (2,67)
Russia 214 101 113 20,97 (3,61)
Singapore 220 162 58 20,89 (1,45)
Switzerland 145 107 37 21,41 (3,44)
Taiwan 291 140 151 20,66 (1,84)
Tunisia 135 109 24 22,61 (5,18)
USA 253 145 108 19,67 (1,22)
Σ = 5800

24. World History Survey
- Methodological Procedure
• Initial set of items = 40
• Initial number of countries = 31
• Removal of outlier items
– Criteria: low consistency of meaning across countries, Mode analyses
(neutral ratings on all scales, except in home country)
– Items removed: Islam/Christian Wars, French Revolution, Opium War,
Sino-Japanese War, Women’s Emancipation & Suffrage, Foundation of
major religions, Age of Discovery/Colonization, Sept 11, Discovery of
Americas, Rise of Islamic Civilization, 30 Years War, Russian Revolution
(1917), Partition of India and Pakistan, Invention of Printing Press, Rise of
Ancient Civilizations, Cultural Revolution
• Removal of outlier countries
– Criteria: based on MDS (Multidimensional Scaling) analyses between
countries, on screening of data and on quantitative outlier analyses
– Countries removed: Cape Verde, Congo, Burundi, Guinea Bissau, Tunisia

26. Only First Dimension Stable
• Correlations between coordinates for individual
societies and the overall solution were very high
for the first (vertical) dim
• But the second (horizontal dimension) produced
low correlation coefficients. The second
dimension was sometimes uninterpretable.
• So we eliminated items that fit the overall
solution poorly using the ratio between sum of
squares fit per item divided by sum of squares
total.
• Fit did not improve.
• So we aggregated countries into clusters, and
used MDS and GPA on the clusters to achieve
better fitting dimensional solutions: one Western
and two non-Western country clusters.

30. Less Agreement on Progress and
Resistance to Oppression
“Historical Progress” (αoverall = .65; αwestern = .65, αnon-western1 = .65; αnon-western2 =
.65; overall mean inter-item correlation=,.24; Tucker’s Phi = .99, .98, .96)
Digital Age (Computers, Internet) 0.03 0.71 -0.07
Man on the Moon / Space Travel -0.06 0.64 0.05
Creation/Evolution of Humanity -0.07 0.54 0.19
Industrial Revolution 0.03 0.53 0.31
Rise of European Union -0.03 0.53 0.18
Foundation of United Nations -0.13 0.44 0.21
“Historical Resistance to Oppression” (αoverall = .59; αwestern = .50, αnon-western1 =
.56; αnon-western2 = .57; overall mean inter-item correlation= .19;Tucker’s Phi =
.99, .97, .96)
American Civil War 0.28 -0.07 0.55
American (war of) Independence 0.06 0.22 0.54
th
Abolition of Slavery (19 c) -0.20 0.05 0.51
th
Renaissance (15 c) -0.10 0.19 0.51
Fall of Berlin Wall/End of USSR -0.05 0.21 0.50
Decolonization -0.15 0.12 0.50

32. Country level Data for our non-Imperial Age:
Western countries don’t want to fight and
see Calamities as horrific
2,75
Malaysia
Hong Kong
Fiji
China
India
Taiwan South Korea Tunisia
2,50
Mexico Philippines
Russia
Historical Calamities
Colombia
Japan Singapore Indonesia
2,25
Canada
Brasil
USA Portugal
2,00
Australia New Zealand
Netherlands Norway
Austria
1,75 Belgium Germany
Italy Bulgaria
Switzerland
Hungary
2,00 4,00 6,00
Willingness to Fight

33. Conclusions from the Past: the Historical
Basis for Global Political Culture
• Global Historical Consciousness is rooted in forms of
modernity developed and exported from the West to
other Cultures, including democracy, the nation-state
system, and industrialization.
• But in mathematical terms, the Symbolic Landscape of
Shared Meanings about History is Limited. There is much
more agreement about what is Historical Calamity than
Progress (what to avoid rather than what to achieve).
Reactions from non-Western states.
• It is promising for global stability that the most powerful
civilization also has citizens who are the least willing to
fight in wars.
• We have left behind the era of Western imperialism, but
that era casts long post-colonial shadows of inequality.

34. Inglehart & Baker’s (2000) Conclusion
to 2 decades of research on the World
Values Survey
• “A history of Protestant or Islamic or
Confucian traditions gives rise to cultural
zones with distinctive value systems that
persist after controlling for the effects of
economic development… We doubt that
the forces of modernization will produce a
homogenized world culture in the
foreseeable future. (p. 49).”

35. Towards the Future: National
and Global Political Cultures
• Representations of history are an important
warrant of legitimacy, or “charter” for political
order in general, and the emergence of world
political culture in particular (Hilton & Liu, 2008;
Liu & Hilton, 2005). Through the embellishment
of history into tradition (Hobsbawm & Ranger,
1983), historical heroes and villains can become
embodiments (or symbols) of national political
cultures. Acquiring representations of them is a
principal mechanism through which political
socialization occurs.

38. Narrative Functions of Figures & Events
in World History as a Morality Tale
• Historical figures symbolize and embody
national (Schwartz, 1997) and civilizational
political cultures, whereas critical events
like World War II are more like cultural
schemata that may be invoked or mobilized
as lessons to justify action (Reicher &
Hopkins, 2000; Liu & Hilton, 2005). Events
impart lessons, whereas heroes embody
values and inspire actions.

40. Highest Ratings of Importance and Evaluation of Figures
Highest Evaluations Most Important
Name M SD ICC Name M SD ICC
Einstein 6.15 1.10 0.06 Einstein 6.17 1.13 0.06
M.Theresa 6.10 1.22 0.08 Jesus 5.91 1.56 0.11
Gandhi 5.92 1.29 0.13 Newton 5.83 1.27 0.07
ML King 5.81 1.29 0.17 Gandhi 5.76 1.35 0.08
Newton 5.78 1.17 0.05 ML King 5.69 1.35 0.11
Jesus 5.61 1.59 0.14 M. Theresa 5.65 1.44 0.08
Edison 5.43 1.31 0.09 Hitler 5.58 1.76 0.10
Mandela 5.41 1.47 0.19 Edison 5.48 1.39 0.09

41. Lowest Ratings of Importance and Evaluation for Figures
Worst Evaluations Least Importance
Name M SD ICC Name M SD ICC
Qin Emperor 3.99 1.02 0.04 Thatcher 4.58 1.38 0.04
Saladin 3.94 1.06 0.08 G.W Bush 4.55 1.83 0.04
Geng. Khan 3.85 1.30 0.14 Gorbachev 4.53 1.35 0.06
Lenin 3.66 1.48 0.15 Charlemagne 4.50 1.36 0.12
Mao 3.49 1.46 0.19 Geng. Khan 4.43 1.39 0.08
Stalin 2.85 1.47 0.21 Priincess Di 4.40 1.75 0.11
G.W. Bush 2.61 1.58 0.13 Qin Emperor 4.21 1.37 0.18
Jr
Saddam 2.38 1.52 0.27 Sun Yatsen 4.18 1.33 0.25

44. Pattern of Regional Variation in Meaning,
with Liberal Philosophy underpinning
Westerners’ ratings (for the most part)
• Western societies rate benevolent figures very highly,
“axis of evil” figures very negatively.
• They also rated events of Historical Calamities and
Historical Progress(!) more negatively, and Resistance to
Oppression more positively than non-Western societies.
• Factor Analytical techniques of removing items and
increasing shared variance doesn’t seem to make much
sense for Figures, because multiple factors emerge
without greater shared meaning than the individuals that
make them up (e.g., American Presidents sans Bush,
Humanitarians, axis of evil, Marxist leaders, etc).
• Probe with Latent Cluster Analysis rather than Factor
Analysis, gather PEOPLE rather than ITEMS that share
similarities in pattern of ratings.

45. Latent Class Analysis of World History Figures

46. Prevalence Mapping of the Distribution
of Classes in Different Cultural Zones

47. What is Global Consciousness?
• A form of Pluralistic Interconnectedness spanning
gulfs of religion and culture with awareness and
understanding.
– Rooted in Western forms of modernity, but capable of
taking on different forms as it fuses with alternative cultures
and religions.
– Coming to terms with different models of societal
organization, one new and one more ancient: liberal/social
democracy and benevolent authority
– Religion is something Secular Idealists and Realpolitik would
like to go away, but it is here to stay. So get used to it.

48. “Out of great suffering comes great
things” or can we talk about it now?