Cognitive Theory in International Relations: A Comparative Analysis of Neoclassical Realism and Constructivism

Abstract

The cognitive perceptions of states toward foreign affairs influence the evolution of international relations. In theoretical studies of cognition within international relations, both neoclassical realism and constructivism provide in-depth analyses at the systemic and state levels. Neoclassical realism adopts a vertical dimension to delineate cognitive hierarchies, illustrating how inter-state perceptions are shaped by the international system and domestic factors, ultimately manifesting through policy behavior. Constructivism, conversely, employs a horizontal lens to emphasize the social dimensions of cognition, examining systemic structures at the international level, state-level social practices, and political processes, with a focus on identity formation and interactive practices. Cognitive theory not only explains foreign policy formulation but also predicts diplomatic behavior. A case study of Japan’s evolving perception of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) demonstrates how shifts in systemic culture and identity positioning transformed its stance from passive resistance to cautious engagement, reflected in adjustments to its foreign policy processes.