Europe seen by Turkish students : a mental definition from a non- eurocentric point of view

1. Europe seen by Turkishstudents: a mental definitionfrom a non-eurocentric point of view EUGEO Congress – september 2013 Etienne Toureille, Université Paris Diderot,UMR 8506 Géographie Cités Mapcomingfrom a Turkishtextbookfrom 1989(Copeaux, 2000)

2. Outline 1- Introduction: the necessity of a non-Eurocentric perspective in the case of Turkey 2- The dominant representations of Europe by Turkish students (aggregative analysis) 3- The role of gender and education (cross-analysis)

3. Growth of the Turkish GDP since 2007 (Word Bank) Introduction 1 – WhyTurkey ? WhyisTurkey a relevant objectfor the studyof a worldwidegeography of representations? Whydecentring the point of view about Europe? • The context of Europeanstudies To giveinterest to extra-european vision of Europe(Lucarelli and Fioramonti, 2009) • A new role in the World and opportunities for Turkey An emerging power in the multipolar Word. • Relativizingthe Europeandestiny of Turkey: A multi-orientecpolitic and national iconography • A non-Eurocentric perspective (Europe in the World)

4. Introduction 2 – main issues • Consequences of the 2005’s debates on the Turkish public opinion. • Is Turkey turning back to Europe ? • Is Europe still positively viewed ? Or are Turkish people now regarding to new horizons ?

5. Introduction 3 – about the surveyEuroBroadMap Number of students EuroBroadMap • An international survey(9 341 studentsfrom 18 countries) • Conductedduringspring 2008 • Withundergraduatestudents(averageage 21) For more informations about the surveysee: http://www.eurobroadmap.eu/

6. Introduction – the question • Residential preferences Extract from the questionnaire • Judgement about places (countries) • Europe relatively to the rest of the World (not disconnected)

7. 2- The dominant representations of Europe by Turkish students • Principe and method: analysing the dominant vision in the Turkish sample through 2 indexes : An “asymmetry” index (in order to observe for each country the ratio between positive and negative quotations where student would like to live or not) Asymmetry (i)= A “knowledge index” (in order to observe the importance of each country in the whole quotations)  Knowledge(i) = pi + ni  S pi - ni  pi + ni pi= number of positive answers for the country i,ni= number of negative answers for the contryi, S= total number of students who answered the question.

8. « Wherewouldyoulike to live in the near future? » « WherewouldyouNOT like to live in the near future? »

9. More attractive but lessknown (than for otherstudents) More attractive and betterknown More repulsive but lessknown More repulsive and betterknown

10. 3- The role of gender and education Some elements about the answers to the question: Using a tool of the statistical textual analysis: « Wherewouldyoulike to live in the near future? » Specificvocabulary: wordswhich are significantlyused by an identifiable group in the population.

11. WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE TO LIVE IN THE NEAR FUTURE? Girls attracted by West and boys by East * Selection of the significantresults Girls specificvocabulary Boys specificvocabulary

12. WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE TO LIVE IN THE NEAR FUTURE? About cities of survey and fields of study* The role of the field of study The role of the city of survey Studentsin artsprefer: USA, France, Netherlands StudentsfromErzurumprefer: Azerbaïjan, SaudiArabia, Japan, China Students in businessprefer: Swizerland, Sweden StudentsfromIstanbulprefer: Italia, Spain, Austria, CzechRepublic Students in ingineeringprefer: Italy, Ukraine, Russia StudentsfromIzmirprefer: Russia, Mexico, Spain, Swizerland Students in the healthsectorprefer: USA, India, Egypt Students in political sciences prefer: Cuba Students in social sciences prefer: New Zealand, Australia, South Korea, United Emirates, Brazil * Selection of significantresults

13. Concludingremarks • Europe remainsa relevant area in the representations of Turkishstudents(knowledge)… • …But mainlythrough a little group of very positive viewed countries (Italy, France, Great Britain and Spain). • Observations about dominants representations autorise someexplanationrelated to collective representations(History of the country, influence of the media…) • The analysis of the specificvocabulary shows the influence of individualfactors. • Threfore, Europe isa complexobject, analysedthrought the residentialpreferencies. • A new surveyconducted in spring 2012 willgivesomeelements about the inertia of the Turkishstudentsrepresentations. This new surveywillalsogive more informations about the relative importance of collective or individualfactors.

14. Thankyou for your attention ! Soonsubmitted publication (with more about textualanalysis): Guérin-Pace, F., Toureille, E., and, Grasland, C., « A cross-analysis of mental maps of Turkishundergraduatestudents », EuropeanJournal of Social Sciences (Revue Européenne de Sciences sociales). Referencies (selective) Copeaux, E., 2000, Une Vision turque du monde: à travers les cartes de 1931 à nos jours (A Turkish Vision of the World: throughmapssince 1931), Paris, CNRS Éditions, 240 p. Didelon, C., de Ruffray, S, and, Grasland, (dir.), 2011, Mental Maps of Students, (deliverable of the Eurobroadmap Survey for the FP7 Framework of the European Commission), aviable on www.eurobroadmap.eu,197 p. Beauguitte L., and, Grasland, C., 2012, « ModelingAttractiveness of Global Places, A Worldwidesurvey on 9 000 undergraduatestudents », ERSA conferencepaper, 28 p. Lucarelli, S., and Fioramonti, L., (dir.), 2009, The External Image of the European Union, phase two,aviable on www.garnet-eu.org