Where Are Geopolitics in Psychology?

The war in Ukraine illustrates how geopolitics can profoundly impact psychology. In Ukraine, psychologists are studying the mental health effects of the invasion, from post-traumatic stress to communal trauma. Yet truly understanding these impacts requires analyzing how international ambitions and the use of military force shape Ukrainians' psychological experience.

Similarly, research on Muslim communities in the wake of the "War on Terror" reveals increased discrimination, stigma, and serious mental health issues. But grasping the psychological toll necessitates analyzing the geopolitical goals, rhetoric, and actions that fueled anti-Muslim sentiments after 9/11.

These examples show how geopolitics—defined as the intersection of geography, international relations, and power dynamics—can determine the types of psychological issues that emerge and the forms they take. Ignoring geopolitics risks missing crucial contextual factors that drive psychological phenomena.

Indeed, these are turbulent times, fueled by tensions between nations, conflicts over resources, and uncertainty about the future. As upheaval dominates headlines, psychology has an opportunity to provide insight—but it needs a broader lens that incorporates geopolitical realities.

Kevin Schmid / Unsplash

Most psychology research focuses on the individual or group. But human behaviors do not exist in a vacuum; they are shaped by larger political and international dynamics. A failure to consider geopolitics can result in an incomplete or even distorted understanding of psychological phenomena.

Take the concept of racism. While psychology has extensively studied bias at the individual level, it has paid less attention to how geopolitical forces like colonialism spread racial ideologies across the world. Failing to recognize this wider context can make racism seem like a universal human tendency rather than a social construct with deep historical roots.

Or consider research on attitudes and values. Much of this work assumes people form opinions in a political vacuum. But geopolitical events like wars, trade disputes, and world shifts profoundly shape what populations prioritize and believe. Ignoring these influences can give an inaccurate picture of how and why individuals think the way they do.

The Journal of Social Issues has recognized this gap and issued a call for research (Bettache et al., 2023) integrating geopolitics and psychology. It notes that while other disciplines like sociology, history, and anthropology routinely consider geopolitics, psychology has been slower to incorporate these perspectives.

I believe this call represents an important step towards a "recontextualized" social psychology that accounts for the larger social and political context in which human thoughts and behaviors unfold. In a world framed by international tensions, environmental dangers, and technological disruptions, psychology needs the tools and insights that the serious study of geopolitics can provide.

The question is not whether individual minds matter—of course they do. But if we want to truly understand individual minds, we need to study how they interact with and are shaped by the complex geopolitical world around them. With a world in turmoil, does psychology not need more geopolitics? I believe the answer is a resounding yes. Psychology's next frontier may lie beyond the individual, in grappling with the broad political forces that profoundly impact why people are the way they are.