Support for Conciliatory Policies in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: The Role of Different Modes of Identification and Territorial Ownership Perceptions

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.769643 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Nora Storz ◽

Borja Martinović ◽

Nimrod Rosler

Keyword(s):

Conflict Resolution ◽

Relevant Dimension ◽

Intergroup Conflict ◽

Conflict Settings ◽

Ingroup Identification ◽

People’S Attitudes

Understanding people’s attitudes toward conciliatory policies in territorial interethnic conflicts is important for a peaceful conflict resolution. We argue that ingroup identification in combination with the largely understudied territorial ownership perceptions can help us explain attitudes toward conciliatory policies. We consider two different aspects of ingroup identification—attachment to one’s ethnic ingroup as well as ingroup superiority. Furthermore, we suggest that perceptions of ingroup and outgroup ownership of the territory can serve as important mechanisms that link the different forms of ingroup identification with conciliatory policies. In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, among Israeli Jews (N = 1,268), we found that ingroup superiority, but not attachment, was negatively related to conciliatory policies. This relationship was explained by lower outgroup (but not by higher ingroup) ownership perceptions of the territory. Our findings highlight the relevance of studying ingroup superiority as a particularly relevant dimension of identification that represents a barrier to acknowledging outgroup’s territorial ownership, and is thus indirectly related to less support for conciliatory policies in intergroup conflict settings.

Download Full-text

“Under the Radar”: How is the Jewish–Arab Conflict Reflected in Internal Jewish Dialogue?

International Journal of Psychological Studies ◽

10.5539/ijps.v14n1p16 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 16

Author(s):

Lipaz Shamoa-Nir

Keyword(s):

Conflict Resolution ◽

Social Context ◽

Ethnic Conflict ◽

Thematic Analysis ◽

Intergroup Conflict ◽

Identity Exploration ◽

Exploration Process ◽

Divided Societies ◽

Arab Students

This study explores the role of intergroup conflict in the identity exploration process among 83 Jewish participants in a dialogue in a multicultural college in Israel. Thematic analysis has shown that the behavior of most of the participants has been affected by the Jewish–Arab conflict as follows: they centered on internal commonalities among Jewish subgroups; they neither engaged in conflict among Jewish subgroups nor explored their Jewish identities, and they expressed confusion regarding who the out-group was: the Jewish subgroups’ members or the Arab students in the college. These findings expand the knowledge about the identity exploration process in a social context of religious–ethnic conflict and may pose a practical contribution to the field of intergroup dialogues and conflict resolution in divided societies.   

Download Full-text

Vicarious Retribution: The Role of Collective Blame in Intergroup Aggression

Personality and Social Psychology Review ◽

10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_6 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. 372-390 ◽

Cited By ~ 145

Author(s):

Brian Lickel ◽

Norman Miller ◽

Douglas M. Stenstrom ◽

Thomas F. Denson ◽

Toni Schmader

Keyword(s):

Theoretical Framework ◽

Intergroup Conflict ◽

Intergroup Aggression ◽

Reduction Strategies ◽

Personal Consequences ◽

Conflict Reduction ◽

Ingroup Identification ◽

New Framework ◽

Original Event

We provide a new framework for understanding 1 aspect of aggressive conflict between groups, which we refer to as vicarious retribution. Vicarious retribution occurs when a member of a group commits an act of aggression toward the members of an outgroup for an assault or provocation that had no personal consequences for him or her but which did harm afellow ingroup member. Furthermore, retribution is often directed at outgroup members who, themselves, were not the direct causal agents in the original attack against the person's ingroup. Thus, retribution is vicarious in that neither the agent of retaliation nor the target of retribution were directly involved in the original event that precipitated the intergroup conflict. We describe how ingroup identification, outgroup entitativity, and other variables, such as group power, influence vicarious retribution. We conclude by considering a variety of conflict reduction strategies in light of this new theoretical framework.

Download Full-text

Superordinate Categorization as a Moderator of Mutual Infrahumanization

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations ◽

10.1177/1368430209343297 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 12 (6) ◽

pp. 731-746 ◽

Cited By ~ 28

Author(s):

Ruth Gaunt

Keyword(s):

Intergroup Conflict ◽

Superordinate Category ◽

Identity Model ◽

The Common ◽

Common Ingroup Identity Model ◽

Ingroup Identification ◽

Common Ingroup Identity ◽

Ingroup Identity ◽

Moderating Role

This research applies the Common Ingroup Identity Model (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000) to explore the moderating role of superordinate categorization in infrahumanization. Two studies were conducted within the context of an inter-racial intergroup conflict. As hypothesized, perceived outgroup identification with the superordinate category (Study 1) or identification with the superordinate category (Study 2) was related to a weaker tendency to infrahumanize the outgroup by attributing it a lesser degree of secondary emotions. In addition, weak ingroup identification eliminated infrahumanization in Study 2. The implications of these findings for infrahumanization research are discussed.

Download Full-text

Deconstructing positionality in conflict resolution: Reflections from first-person action research in Pakistan and the South Caucasus

Action Research ◽

10.1177/1476750320960803 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 147675032096080

Author(s):

Alexander Cromwell ◽

Margarita Tadevosyan

Keyword(s):

Conflict Resolution ◽

Action Research ◽

Research Approach ◽

First Person ◽

Constructive Approach ◽

The South ◽

South Caucasus ◽

Post Conflict ◽

Conflict Settings

This article explores the role of first-person action research in uncovering how positionality influences conflict resolution practice. Specifically, it examines the experiences of two scholar-practitioners conducting first-person action research in different conflict/post-conflict settings. The case studies include first-person action research on encounter programs with Pakistani youth and first-person action research examining peacebuilding engagement in the South Caucasus. We highlight the significant challenge posed by positionality for scholar-practitioners in our practice and research, particularly as members of one of the conflict parties, and present first-person action research as a constructive approach to enhance self-reflexivity and improve our practices. We argue that first-person action research highlights the fluidity of positionality and the value of building insider relationships to enhance conflict resolution practice. Concurrently, this research approach illuminates challenges resulting from insider identities because of assumed agreement. Thus, first-person action research is useful for improving conflict resolution practice because it highlights the various benefits and drawbacks of practitioners’ positionalities.

Download Full-text

A Rose by Any Other Name? A Subtle Linguistic Cue Impacts Anger and Corresponding Policy Support in Intractable Conflict

Psychological Science ◽

10.1177/0956797618772823 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 29 (6) ◽

pp. 972-983 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Orly Idan ◽

Eran Halperin ◽

Boaz Hameiri ◽

Michal Reifen Tagar

Keyword(s):

Conflict Resolution ◽

Experimental Studies ◽

Policy Support ◽

Policy Preferences ◽

Current Work ◽

Intergroup Conflict ◽

Psycholinguistic Research ◽

Intractable Conflict

Given the central role of anger in shaping adversarial policy preferences in the context of intergroup conflict, its reduction may promote conflict resolution. In the current work, we drew on psycholinguistic research on the role of language in generating emotions to explore a novel, extremely subtle means of intervention. Specifically, we hypothesized that phrasing conflict-relevant policies in noun form (vs. verb form) would reduce anger and impact policy support correspondingly. Results across three experimental studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict supported these expectations for both support for concessions (Studies 1–3) and retaliatory policies (Study 3), with reduction in anger mediating the salutary impact of noun form (vs. verb form) on policy support. These results expand our understanding of the influence of language on emotions and policies in the context of conflict and have applied relevance for conflict-resolution efforts.

Download Full-text