(Ritsumeikan

University, Kyoto,

Japan)

HOW DO THE JAPANESE ANDTHE MONGOLIANS VIEW EACH OTHER?

A Discussion from the Analyses of Nationwide Survey Data

Kunio Minato

Introduction

• This study explores:

(1) The Japanese attitude toward Mongolia

(2) The Mongolian attitude toward Japan

• Discussions are based on quantitative

analyses of nationwide survey data

• Primary focus is on ordinary people’s

general attitude (feeling or impression)

toward Mongolia / Japan

2

Issues to Be Examined

• [Japanese] What the attitude toward

Mongolia is like?

• [Mongolians] Does “legacy” of former

rivalry remain in the attitude toward

Japan?

• Is the attitude more / less favorable,

compared with that toward other

countries (esp. East and Southeast Asian

countries)?

• What are factors affecting the attitude?

3

Data to Be Analyzed

• [Japanese Mongolia] JGSS-2006 data

(2006 data of the Japanese General Social

Surveys)

• [Mongolians Japan] ABS2 data (the

Second Wave of the Asian Barometer

Survey); The Third Wave Data of ABS

(ABS3) is also used for additional analysis

• All the three data were collected with

nationwide coverage through multi-stage

random sampling

4

The Japanese Attitude toward Mongolia 5

Question in Focus (JGSS-2006)

6

More favorable Less favorable

A South Korea +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3B North Korea +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3C China +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3D Mongolia +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3E Taiwan +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3

F The Philippines +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3G Thailand +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3H Indonesia +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3I India +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3J Russia +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3K USA +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3

Self-administered questionnaire A, Q22 How do you feel

about the following countries and regions? For each country

and region, please choose one of the numbers. If you don’t

have any specific feeling to a country or region, choose "0".

Distribution of Answers

7

Comparison of Mean Scores

8

Mean S.D.

S. Korea .137 1.408 .167 *** .063 .270

N. Korea -2.316 1.192 2.620 *** 2.503 2.738

China -.383 1.447 .687 *** .580 .794

Mongolia .304 1.040

Taiwan .438 1.092 -.134 *** -.201 -.067

Philippines .035 1.056 .269 *** .192 .345

Thailand .250 1.010 .054 -.016 .124

Indonesia .193 .956 .111 *** .044 .179

India .215 .999 .089 ** .020 .159

Russia -.320 1.173 .624 *** .528 .719

USA .669 1.322 -.365 *** -.469 -.262

CI (95%)Difference

*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, + p<.01, F=1478.794***

Regression Analysis

9

B S.E. β B S.E. β B S.E. β

Intercept -.672 ** .214 -.808 * .320 -.264 .303

Gender .162 ** .051 .078

Age -.004 + .002 -.058 -.004 .003 -.054 -.005 + .003 -.086

Area block: Hokkaido .076 .127 .015 .046 .197 .009 .106 .165 .024

Tohoku .139 .111 .034 .277 .170 .063 .026 .147 .007

Kanto .275 *** .080 .122 .205 + .120 .088 .329 ** .108 .153

Hokuriku .015 .119 .003 -.127 .167 -.030 .196 .172 .041

Tozan .060 .127 .012 .011 .188 .002 .113 .172 .024

Tokai .126 .098 .039 .205 .148 .059 .064 .129 .021

Kinki .065 .091 .022 -.002 .136 .000 .155 .121 .054

Chugoku .051 .113 .012 .052 .168 .012 .056 .153 .014

Shikoku .237 + .132 .045 .119 .198 .022 .337 + .177 .067

Education: Higher secondary .046 .072 .022 -.025 .105 -.011 .095 .101 .048

Non-university .051 .096 .023 .033 .157 .015 .098 .127 .046

University -.110 .087 -.044 -.181 .145 -.078 -.108 .119 -.036

Occupation: Upper-white .062 .083 .020 .029 .131 .010 .063 .112 .020

Lower-white .003 .066 .001 .039 .113 .016 -.049 .081 -.022

Blue-collar -.006 .070 -.002 -.048 .111 -.021 .014 .097 .005

Agriculture, forestry and fishery -.002 .146 .000 .105 .186 .020 -.155 .263 -.019

Subjective social stratification .000 .036 .000 -.033 .053 -.026 .023 .048 .018

Income level .014 .033 .012 .082 + .047 .071 -.061 .046 -.051

Sense of trust .061 *** .018 .079 .045 + .026 .058 .086 *** .025 .111

Political attitude .003 .027 .002 .026 .036 .024 -.043 .041 -.034

Religion: Buddhist .128 .086 .053 .194 .126 .080 .069 .119 .029

Christian -.074 .254 -.007 .182 .463 .013 -.142 .302 -.017

Others .213 .132 .049 .432 * .211 .088 .078 .167 .020

Religiosity .038 .053 .028 .004 .082 .003 .041 .070 .033

Hours of watching TV per day .006 .011 .012 .006 .017 .012 .004 .015 .010

Frequency of reading a newspaper .028 .021 .032 -.048 .031 -.054 .101 *** .030 .116

Amount of reading books per month .012 .022 .014 .038 .038 .036 -.004 .026 -.005

Frequency of seeing foreigners .041 .026 .039 .044 .039 .041 .044 .035 .043

For or against an increase of foreigners .260 *** .049 .124 .249 *** .072 .114 .254 *** .067 .128

Occasions of using English -.002 .030 -.002 -.057 .043 -.058 .049 .044 .048

Self-rated English proficiency .014 .021 .021 .077 ** .030 .122 -.049 .031 -.078

Willingness of learning English .007 .028 .007 .056 .044 .051 -.020 .038 -.021

Foreign language of interest exc. English .223 *** .065 .086 .170 + .096 .062 .269 ** .089 .110

F-value 4.580 *** .027 .002 2.514 *** 3.380 ***

adjusted R2 .061 .052 .077

*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, + p<.01

All (N=1913) Male (N=947) Female (N=966)

Summary of the Analyses

• Mongolia is more favored than most of

other countries listed in the questionnaire

• However, majority of respondents rated

the favorability “0”

• Males are more likely to have favorable

feeling to Mongolia

• View on foreigners has relations to the

attitude toward Mongolia

• Other factors with significant effect are

clearly different between males and

females10

The Mongolian attitude toward Japan 11

Question in Focus (ABS2)

“Please let us know about your impressions of the following countries. Give it a grade from 1 to 10, being 1 very bad and 10 very good.”

12

Grade Do not

understandthe question

Can’t choose Decline

165. United States ___ 97 98 99

166. China [optional for China] ___ 97 98 99167. Japan [optional for Japan] ___ 97 98 99

Very

Bad

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Very

Good

Question Examined (ABS2)

“For each aware of, please let us know about your impression of the following organizations. Here is a scale: 1 means very bad and 10 means very good. . Give it a grade from 1 to 10, being 1 very bad and 10 very good.”

13

Grade Do not

understandthe question

Can’t choose Decline

161. The European Community or European Union

___ 97 98 99

162. The United Nations or UN ___ 97 98 99163. International Monetary Fund or IMF

___ 97 98 99

164. World Bank ___ 97 98 99

Very

Bad

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Very

Good

Distribution of Answers

14

GUS = Generation under Socialism

GAD = Generation after Democratization

Cross-national Comparison

15

Comparison of Mean Score (1)

16

N Mean S.D.

GUS 669 6.810 2.070

GAD 481 7.087 2.054

Difference CI (95%)

.277 * .035 .519

*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, + p<.1

N=1121 Mean S.D.

Japan 6.935 2.057

USA 7.310 2.218 1.401 *** 1.247 1.556

China 5.533 2.354 -.375 *** -.539 -.211

Difference CI (95%)

*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, + p<.1, F=355.883***

Difference between generation

Difference among impression of countries

Comparison of Mean Score (2)

17

Mean S.D. S.E. S.E.

Mongolia (N=1150) 6.926 2.067 .061

Malaysia (N=1139) 6.097 2.145 .070 -.829 *** .084

Vietnam (N=923) 7.192 1.652 .052 .266 * .089

Singapore (N=953) 6.132 1.575 .069 -.794 *** .088

Indonesia (N=1377) 6.126 1.994 .054 -.800 *** .080

Thailand (N=1097) 6.281 2.300 .051 -.645 *** .085

Taiwan (N=1479) 6.542 2.001 .054 -.384 *** .079

Philippines (N=1090) 6.158 2.326 .064 -.768 *** .085

Japan (N=1050) 7.035 1.771 .055 .109 .086

Total (N=10258) 6.482 2.048 .020 - - -

*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, + p<.1, F=50.662***, η2=.038

Difference

Difference among East / Southeast Asians

Regression Analysis (1)

18

B S.E. β B S.E. β B S.E. β

Intercept 6.155 *** .523 5.681 *** .485 6.179 *** .534

Gender .058 .138 .014 .047 .138 .011 .057 .138 .014

Age -.016 ** .005 -.108 -.017 * .008 -.116

Socialist era dummy -.296 * .148 -.071 .047 .214 .011

Years of education .048 * .024 .078 .054 * .024 .089 .047 * .024 .078

Place of residence: Province -.045 .190 -.008 -.016 .191 -.003 -.048 .191 -.009

County .129 .183 .031 .179 .182 .043 .127 .184 .030

Countryside .445 .415 .037 .496 .415 .041 .445 .415 .037

Subjective social stratification -.029 .042 -.023 -.033 .042 -.027 -.029 .042 -.023

Income level .141 ** .053 .097 .150 ** .053 .103 .141 ** .053 .096

Sense of trust -.016 .209 -.002 -.038 .210 -.006 -.016 .210 -.002

Religion: Buddhist -.063 .266 -.014 -.123 .266 -.027 -.061 .267 -.013

Muslim .089 .352 .011 .021 .352 .003 .090 .353 .011

Christian -.465 .472 -.039 -.471 .473 -.039 -.465 .472 -.038

Religiosity -.034 .113 -.015 -.017 .113 -.007 -.035 .113 -.015

Ownership of TV -.092 .306 -.010 -.093 .307 -.010 -.090 .307 -.010

Accessilibity to CATV .021 .186 .004 -.003 .186 -.001 .022 .186 .005

Ownership of radio -.169 .134 -.041 -.185 .134 -.045 -.169 .134 -.041

Use of Internet -.073 .058 -.054 -.047 .058 -.035 -.071 .059 -.053

Following major foreign events .037 .077 .017 .024 .077 .011 .037 .077 .017

Traveling abroad .056 .064 .034 .049 .065 .029 .054 .065 .032

Contact w/ foreigners .107 + .062 .067 .115 + .062 .072 .107 + .062 .067

Recognition of international organizations .168 * .069 .086 .155 * .069 .080 .168 * .069 .086

F-value 3.118 *** 2.874 *** 2.975 ***

adjusted R2 .043 .038 .042

Model 1 (N=994) Model 3 (N=994)Model 2 (N=994)

Regression Analysis (2)

19

B S.E. β B S.E. β

Intercept 5.823 *** .742 6.969 *** .988

Gender .267 .183 .065 -.131 .218 -.030

Age -.016 + .009 -.082 -.025 .024 -.059

Socialist era dummy

Years of education .063 * .029 .115 .030 .048 .041

Place of residence: Province -.022 .053 -.018 -.070 .319 -.012

County .084 .070 .056 .423 .287 .102

Countryside .064 .243 .013 1.269 * .642 .108

Subjective social stratification .095 .243 .023 -.049 .068 -.038

Income level -.140 .546 -.011 .236 ** .083 .165

Sense of trust -.252 .255 -.041 .411 .372 .054

Religion: Buddhist .076 .349 .016 -.165 .424 -.036

Muslim .241 .436 .033 -.437 .640 -.042

Christian -.788 .680 -.056 -.276 .678 -.027

Religiosity .043 .145 .018 -.111 .183 -.051

Ownership of TV .180 .383 .020 -.973 + .523 -.097

Accessilibity to CATV .261 .254 .054 -.245 .281 -.052

Ownership of radio -.366 * .179 -.089 .079 .209 .019

Use of Internet -.167 + .092 -.095 -.008 .085 -.007

Following major foreign events -.064 .102 -.029 .245 * .118 .112

Traveling abroad .081 .087 .051 .056 .104 .030

Contact w/ foreigners .016 .089 .010 .218 * .089 .144

Recognition of international organizations .233 ** .088 .123 .025 .113 .012

F-value 2.501 *** 2.056 **

adjusted R2 .051 .052

*** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05, + p<.1

GUS (N=586) GAD (N=408)

Additional Analysis (ABS3)

• Is Japan “model for future development?”

• The Mongolians’ answers are examined by

using ABS3 data

• The question focused on is “Which country

should be a model for our own country’s

future development?”

• Choices are: “1. United States,” “2.

China,” “3. India,” “4. Japan,” “5.

Singapore,” “6. Other [please name],”

and “7. We should follow our country’s

own model”20

Cross-national Comparison

21

Summary of the Analyses

• Impression of Japan is significantly

different between GUS and GAD

• However, in both generations the majority

have favorable impression of Japan

• The Mongolians has relatively favorable

impression of Japan, compared with other

East and Southeast Asians

• Factors affecting impression of Japan are

totally different between GUS and GAD

• Japan is less likely to be a “model for

future development” in Mongolia22

Discussion (JP MN)

• Meaning of the answer “0” is ambiguous

(Neither good nor bad feeling? No feeling

at all? Don’t know about Mongolia? etc.)

• The potential reasons for relatively

favorable attitude are:

(1) Rapidly developing exchanges and

relations since Mongolian

democratization

(2) Longstanding interest in Mongolia and

its history (esp. Mongol Empire)

23

Interest in Mongolia (Japan)

Examples of fictional and non-fictional works during Cold War era whose subject relates to Mongolia 24

Discussion (MN JP)

• Effect of socialist education and

propaganda has been diminishing (or had

little effect from the beginning?), as far as

impression of Japan is concerned

• Generational difference might have

linkage to difference in significant factors

• Socialist education system had

(presumably) unintended effect: Longer

education years under socialism (!) led to

more favorable impression of Japan

25

Conclusion

• This study confirmed favorable attitude

between Japanese and Mongolian citizens

• However, the study also has limitations:

(1) There might be other factors relating to

the attitude

(2) There might be change in the attitude

after 2007

• Exploring affinity between the two

countries might be suggestive when we

are to find clues to resolve estrangement

in East Asia 26

AcknowledgementsThe Japanese General Social Surveys (JGSS) are designed

and carried out by the JGSS Research Center at Osaka University of Commerce (Joint Usage / Research Center for Japanese General Social Surveys accredited by Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology), in collaboration with the Institute of Social Science at the University of Tokyo. The datasets are distributed by SSJ Data Archive, Institute of Social Science, the University of Tokyo.

Data analyzed in this article were collected by the Asian Barometer Project (2005-2008 and 2010-2012), which was co-directed by Professors Fu Hu and Yun-han Chu and received major funding support from Taiwan’s Ministry of Education, Academia Sinica and National Taiwan University. The Asian Barometer Project Office (www.asianbarometer.org) is solely responsible for the data distribution. The author appreciates the assistance in providing data by the institutes and individuals aforementioned. The views expressed herein are the author’s own. 27