• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文OA文献 >Toward Theory Building for Comparative Public Diplomacy from the Perspectives of Public Relations and International Relations: A Macro-Comparative Study of Embassies in Washington, D.C.
【2h】

Toward Theory Building for Comparative Public Diplomacy from the Perspectives of Public Relations and International Relations: A Macro-Comparative Study of Embassies in Washington, D.C.

机译：从公共关系和国际关系的角度为比较性公共外交建立理论体系：华盛顿特区使馆的宏观比较研究。

页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Despite a century of history, public diplomacy research has lacked defining conceptual frameworks for two focal constructs, public diplomacy behavior and excellence in public diplomacy management. Without such frameworks, the discipline has focused on historical, ideological, and descriptive research on public diplomacy practices and management. At the same time, research has been instrumental, serving the policy concerns of government by studying what effects public diplomacy programs have, can have, and should have from the paradigm of communication effects. Consequently, public diplomacy seldom has been studied as a set of dependent variables. Scholars have rarely asked theoretical questions about what factors affect public diplomacy behavior and management. The lack of conceptual frameworks has further discouraged comparative questions about whether and why governments are different or similar in their practices and management of public diplomacy. Even when comparative questions were asked, they lacked methodological frameworks for comparative study on a large scale--of a large number and different types of governments. To overcome the limitations, this dissertation proposed a conceptual framework for the two focal constructs based on an application of the Excellence study (L. Grunig, J. Grunig, & Dozier, 2002), a program of public relations research. From the perspective of international relations, this study constructed and tested a theory of comparative public diplomacy on how a government's contextual variables-- culture, political system, interest-group system, and interstate dependence-- are associated with her public diplomacy behavior and management. Lastly, this study employed an innovative methodological framework of using embassies as "matching samples" as well as "surrogate governments." Out of 169 embassies in Washington, D.C., 113 embassies participated in a survey that measured their policy communication behavior in the form of press relations and overall management of the public diplomacy function. This study found that uncertainty avoidance, one of Hofstede's (2001) four dimensions of culture, was the most salient in explaining excellence in public diplomacy. Countries with a low uncertainty avoidance culture were most excellent in public diplomacy management. It also found no significant empirical evidence for linkages between culture and public diplomacy behavior. Of the contextual variables investigated, only the political system had significant associations with public diplomacy behavior. The findings also suggested that electoral and non-democracies have more excellent public diplomacy overall than liberal democracies. In addition, the findings showed that interstate dependence is empirically associated with the outsourcing practices of foreign governments for their public diplomacy through local public relations and lobbying firms. The findings also indicated that the outsourcing practices, in turn, increased the excellence of the clients' (i.e., embassies) public diplomacy behavior. Moreover, the findings confirmed an empirical convergence between public relations and public diplomacy not only at the level of communication behavior but also at the level of communication management. This dissertation, a macro-replication study having governments as the units of analysis, replicated the normative theory of global public relations (Vercic, J. Grunig, & L. Grunig, 1996). Among other things, this study pioneered the macro-comparative research strategy of studying embassies throughout the world capitals. This methodological framework for comparative public diplomacy should offer a myriad of opportunities for advanced theory building from various theoretical perspectives and research methods.
机译：尽管有一个世纪的历史，但公共外交研究仍缺乏为两个焦点结构，公共外交行为和卓越的公共外交管理定义概念框架的定义。如果没有这样的框架，该学科将专注于对公共外交实践和管理的历史，意识形态和描述性研究。同时，研究已经发挥了作用，通过研究公共外交计划在交流效果范式中将产生，可以产生和应该产生的影响来服务于政府的政策关注。因此，很少将公共外交作为一组因变量进行研究。学者们很少询问有关哪些因素影响公共外交行为和管理的理论问题。缺乏概念框架，进一步使人们不敢问比较问题，即政府在实践和公共外交管理上是否以及为何不同或相似。即使在提出比较问题时，它们也缺乏用于大量不同类型政府的大规模比较研究的方法框架。为了克服这些局限性，本文基于公共关系研究计划卓越研究（L. Grunig，J. Grunig，＆Dozier，2002）的应用，为这两个焦点构想提出了一个概念框架。从国际关系的角度来看，本研究构建并检验了比较公共外交理论，探讨了政府的背景变量（文化，政治制度，利益集团制度和国家间依存关系）如何与其公共外交行为和管理相关联。最后，这项研究采用了创新的方法框架，将使馆用作“匹配样本”以及“代议政府”。在华盛顿特区的169个使馆中，有113个使馆参加了一项调查，该调查以新闻关系和公共外交职能的整体管理形式衡量了他们的政策沟通行为。这项研究发现，避免不确定性是霍夫斯特德（Hofstede，2001）的四个文化维度之一，在解释卓越的公共外交方面最为突出。具有较低不确定性回避文化的国家在公共外交管理方面最出色。它还没有发现任何重要的经验证据证明文化与公共外交行为之间存在联系。在所调查的环境变量中，只有政治制度与公共外交行为有着重要的联系。调查结果还表明，总体而言，选举民主制和非民主制民主制比自由民主制更为出色。此外，调查结果表明，国家间的依存关系在经验上与外国政府通过当地公共关系和游说公司进行公共外交的外包实践有关。调查结果还表明，外包实践反过来又提高了客户（即使馆）公共外交行为的卓越性。此外，研究结果证实了公共关系和公共外交之间不仅在沟通行为方面而且在沟通管理方面都存在经验上的融合。本论文是一项以政府为分析单位的宏观复制研究，它复制了全球公共关系的规范理论（Vercic，J. Grunig，＆L. Grunig，1996）。除其他事项外，这项研究开创了研究世界各国首都使馆的宏观比较研究战略。从各种理论观点和研究方法来看，这种比较公共外交的方法论框架应为无数的高级理论构建提供许多机会。

著录项

  • 作者

    Yun Seong-Hun;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2005
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en_US
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号