Abstract
A discussion of the overall findings specifically aimed at highlighting the implications for policy-making. We will argue that sense-making processes can play an important role in helping design policies, in mapping and in understanding how people of given social milieus interpret social reality and therefore intend to act or react upon it. In recent years, a more realistic understanding of human behaviour and decision-making has challenged the often-implicit assumptions about people on which policies were often conceived. From the individual rational choice based citizen we moved to a bounded rationality perspective. A further step, outlined by this project, is to take into account the interpretative and cultural nature of human behaviour as a fundamental element to consider at both the policy design and implementation stages. At the descriptive level, revealing the cultural landscape of a community that is the target of a policy intervention ensures an alignment between the normative behaviour contained in the policy and its cultural compatibility and acceptance. At the more transformative level, culture can become the target itself of policies, when cultural change is collectively accepted as necessary.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
By tool, we mean a conceptual, analytical or methodological strategy of data collection, analysis and interpretation.
References
Allison, G. T. (1969). Conceptual models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. American Political Science Review, 6(5), 689–718.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Cerulo, K. A. (2010). Mining the intersections of cognitive sociology and neuroscience. Poetics, 38(2), 115–132.
Cerulo, K. A. (2014). Continuing the story: Maximizing the intersections of cognitive science and sociology. Sociological Forum, 29(4), 1012–1019.
Codagnone, C., Bogliacino, F., & Veltri, G. A. (2018). Scienza in vendita: Incertezza, interessi, e valori nelle politiche pubbliche [Science for sale: Uncertainty, interests, and values in public policies]. Milano, Italy: Egea, Università Bocconi.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.
Cyert, R., & March, J. (1963). A Behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
D’Andrade, R. G. (1997). The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, J. S., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241.
Fleck, L. (1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press (Original work published 1935).
Frankish, K., & Evans, J. S. B. T. (2009). The duality of mind: An historical perspective. In J. S. Evans & K. Frankish (Series Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 1–30). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gertler, P. J., Martinez, S., Premand, P., Rawlings, L. B., & Vermeersch, C. M. (2016). Impact evaluation in practice. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.
Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000). A fine is a price. The Journal of Legal Studies, 29(1), 1–17.
Green, D., & Shapiro, I. (1994). Pathologies of rational choice theory: A critique of applications in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., & Woo, J. J. (2015). From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: The new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy & Politics, 43(2), 291–311.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgement. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49–81). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Mannheim, K. (1985). Ideology and utopia: An introduction to the sociology of knowledge. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich (Original work published 1936).
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.
Martin, J. (1992). Culture in organizations: Three perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Metcalfe, J., & Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool-system analysis of delay of gratification: Dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106(1), 3–19.
Moscovici, S. (1984). The phenomenon of social representations. In R. Farr & S. Moscovici (Eds.), social representations (pp. 3–69). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
O’Donnell, C. L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationships to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 33–84.
Salvatore, S. (2016). Psychology in black and white: The project of a theory-driven science. Charlotte, NC: InfoAge Publishing.
Salvatore, S., Fini, V., Mannarini, T., Avdi, E., Battaglia, F., Castro-Tejerina, J., Ciavolino, E., Cremaschi, M., Kadianaki, I., Kharlamov, N. A., Krasteva, A., Kullasepp, K., Matsopoulos, A., Meschiari C., Mossi, P., Psinas, P., Redd, R., Rochira, A., Santarpia, A., Sammut, G., Valsiner, J., Veltri, G. A., & Valmorbida, A. (2018). Symbolic universes between present and future of Europe. First results of the map of European societies’ cultural milieu. PLoS ONE, 13(6), e0200223. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200223.
Salvatore, S., Valsiner, J., & Veltri, G. A. (2019). The theoretical and methodological framework. Semiotic cultural psychology, symbolic universes and lines of semiotic force. In S. Salvatore, V. Fini, T. Mannarini, J. Valsiner & G. A. Veltri (Eds.), Symbolic Universes in time of (post) crisis. The Future of European Societies. Dordrecht, The Netherland: Springer.
Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1990). Behavioural assumption of policy tools. The Journal of Politics, 52(2), 510–529.
Sewell, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.
Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3–22.
Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108–131.
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645–726.
Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 220–247.
Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51(2), 273–286.
Thorngate, W. (2001). The social psychology of policy analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 3(1), 85–112.
Valsiner, J. (2007). Culture in minds and societies: Foundations of cultural psychology. New Delhi, India: Sage.
Veltri, G., Redd, R., Mannarini, T., & Salvatore, S. (2019). The identity of Brexit: A cultural psychology analysis. Journal of Community & Applied Psychology, 29, 18–31.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Veltri, G.A., Mannarini, T., Krasteva, A., Cremaschi, M., Sammut, G., Salvatore, S. (2020). Implications for Policy-Making and Further Developments. In: Mannarini, T., Veltri, G., Salvatore, S. (eds) Media and Social Representations of Otherness. Culture in Policy Making: The Symbolic Universes of Social Action. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36099-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36099-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36098-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36099-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)