Yuval Feinstein

Department of Sociology, University of Haifa



Summary of research work

I am a political sociologist. My first research (as an MA student in Israel) was about social movements in Israel: specifically, I examined distinct modes of resistance to the construction of a separation barrier by Israel in the West Bank. My findings are presented in articles in Mobilization and Journal of Israel Studies, and in a book chapter that zooms-in on the 'radicalism versus pragmatism' dilemma that activists in social movements often face.

In another research, which as a graduate student in the United States, I examined how US veterans who suffer from mental health problems and seek care in a VA healthcare center navigate between two primary statuses: national hero and mental patient (an article in Armed Forces & Society presents my findings.)

Most of my recent and current research is in the field of ethnicity and nationalism, and it has evolved through three paths.

The impact of complex and situated national identities on political attitudes

In my main line of work, I seek to explain precisely when and how national identities influence political attitude formation. Using original data from surveys, experiments, and in-depth interviews, as well as historical materials, my research extends previous investigations of this topic in three ways. First, inspired by cultural sociology, my work pays special attention to the complex contents of national identities, which are composed of interlinked ideas, beliefs, and symbols, and to intra-national variation in the contents of national identities. Second, by investigating the conditions under which distinct elements of national identities become activated and impact political attitudes, as well as the mechanisms through which this occurs, my research highlights the situated nature of national identities. Third, I incorporate a focus on the emotions that mediate the relationship between national identities and political attitude formation.

Independent studies

Arguably, my most important contribution so far as an independent scholar has been my investigation of the situated nature of certain aspects of national identities, which vary from the everyday ("banal") manifestations to highly emotional ("hot") manifestations that may be observed, for instance, during war. So far, this line of research has produced (in addition to my doctoral dissertation) several articles and a book manuscript that I currently write.

In an article in Social Science History, I revisit the "rally-round-the-flag" phenomenon in the United States, by comparing and contrast the public reactions to all major war events and security crises from 1950 to 2006. In contrast to a common understanding of the rally phenomenon as an automatic reaction of the public to international conflicts (especially to war), my investigation reveals that rally is a rare outcome, which has emerged only when historical circumstances and presidential action led the majority of Americans to believe that military action is needed in order to restore national honor and reclaim the respect of other nations.

In a second study, presented in an article in Sociological Science, I conducted a survey-experiment in the United States and used the results to revisit the relationship between national chauvinism (i.e., a belief about the home nation's superiority to other nations) and individual support for military actions. While prior studies had shown that national chauvinism is a strong predictor of support for military actions, these studies assumed that national chauvinism is a stable trait of individuals. In contrast, my study was the first to reveal the dynamic aspect of national chauvinism, showing that political leaders' framing of international conflicts can evoke higher levels of national chauvinism, which in turn leads to increased support for military action. In a subsequent study (published in Social Science Research), I extended the analysis by using original panel survey data from Israel to reveal the dynamic character of several distinct elements of national identities that have different effects on attitudes during war.

A fourth study, which is forthcoming in The Sociological Quarterly, is the first to employ sociological theories of emotions that center on group membership in meaning-making, in order to explain a large-scale political phenomenon. Specifically, it examines the role of emotions during two rally-round-the-flag periods in the United States (in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks and during the 2003 invasion of Iraq).

A fifth article, which is under review, goes beyond the rally-round-the-flag phenomenon. It develops an extended theoretical framework to explain why, when, and how national identities have a strong impact on political attitudes and behavior. This framework further explains under which conditions the result is greater consensus or polarization of public opinion.

Collaborative studies

Three of my coauthored articles focus on intra-national variation in the ideas, beliefs, symbols, and affective dispositions that compose national identities and how this variation is associated with attitudes toward major policy issues. The first study (coauthored by Bart Bonikowski), which is presented in an article in the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, shows how in Israel (and arguably in other countries) embracing specific narratives concerning the nation’s past and its unique role in the world generate powerful antipathies toward populations excluded from the national community.

A second study is presented in an article manuscript under review (coauthored by Bart Bonikowski and Sean Bock), in which we show (a) that over the past twenty years, nationalism in the United States has become sorted by party, as Republican identifiers have become predominantly ethno-nationalist and Democrats have increasingly endorsed creedal and disengaged conceptions of nationhood; and (b) that during the 2016 primaries and general elections, competing understandings of American nationhood were effectively mobilized by candidates from the two parties (so that different types of American national identities are predictive of individuals' voting).

In a third study, which is presented in an article in Mediterranean Politics (coauthored by Uri Ben-Eliezer from the University of Haifa), we use original panel survey data collected in Israel to estimate the relative sizes of three political-ideological camps that we label "ethnocentric nationalists," "non-xenophobic nationalists," and "civic liberals," Then, we discuss the historical-political process through which ethnocentric nationalism rose to dominance in the public discourse and politics in Israel over the past two decades.

Inter-ethnic relations

My second line of research expands the scope of my work from nationalism to ethnicity and inter-ethnic relations, and it currently includes two published articles. First, an article in Ethnicities examines how the refusal of some Jewish Israelis to embrace ethnic identities affects their attitudes toward and relationships with members of the Arab/Palestinian minority. More broadly this article argues against an "epistemic oppression" of ethnic/racial refusniks in survey research, and against common misinterpretations of the meaning of refusal to embrace ethnic/racial identity in qualitative studies.

A second article, which was published in Sociology (coauthored by Maha Shehade-Switat), is the first to examine how subjective ethnic identities influence emotion management by members of ethnic/racial minority category in ethnically/racially-mixed work places. We use in-depth interviews with Arab/Palestinians in Israel as a case-study.

Macro-historical investigation of the development of nation-states.

My third line of research applies a macro-historical perspective on the development and spread of modern territorial national states across the world. My research on this topic is done in collaboration with Andreas Wimmer (Columbia University). In 2010, we published an article in the American Sociological Review, in which we tested all the major explanations for the global spread of the nation-state in the past two centuries, and also introduced an original (historical-institutionalist) explanation. In 2016, we extended our discussion (we specifically reexamined arguments made by scholars who embrace World Polity Theory) in reply to a comment that was published again in the American Sociological Review.

More recently, we completed a study in which we used a variable-rich panel data set with global coverage and wide temporal span (some variables record information from as early as the 15th century) to examine under which conditions fighting inter-state wars has contributed to state development. The findings are presented in an article manuscript that is now under review.


Other studies

In an article published in Politics and Gender, I revisit the "gender gap" in the United States in attitudes toward the use of military power, analyzing data from opinion polls conducted from 1986 to 2011 and variable-rich data collected during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The results indicate that the gender gap is not the product of fixed differences between men and women, but is driven by ideological dispositions that depend on the location of individuals in a social and political field that includes several salient systems of classification. This study traces gap-generating dispositions at the intersection of gender and partisanship and shows that these dispositions were activated at certain historical junctures, temporarily widening a gender gap that at other times was fairly narrow.