In DeFENCE of the In‐Group Historical Narrative in an Intractable Intergroup Conflict: An Individual‐Difference Perspective

Groups, particularly when immersed in an intractable intergroup conflict, place considerable value on protecting and defending their historical group narrative. However, some group members are more narrative‐protective than others. In Study 1, we introduce a new individual‐difference measure of motivation to achieve a Firmly Entrenched Narrative ClosurE (FENCE) and test it on several Israeli samples (N = 1132). In Study 2 (N = 120), we show that in‐group glorification, right‐wing political orientation, and right‐wing‐authoritarianism, but not attachment to the In‐group, nonspecific need for cognitive closure, or need for cognition, predict FENCE motivation and Behavioral Lack of Openness to Counternarratives (BLOC). In Studies 3 and 4, we show using international (N = 24) and Israeli (N = 78) samples that a belief in the zero‐sum nature of the conflict is related to FENCE and BLOC. In Study 5, we demonstrate that FENCE affects quality of recall of conflict information. The potential merit of FENCE in accounting for the variability among group members in protecting the group narrative is discussed.     

群际宽恕的影响因素

群际宽恕(Intergroup Forgiveness)是指对曾经侵犯过本群的外群所具有的报复感、愤怒感以及不信任感的减少, 有意识地去理解、接近对方群体, 并积极地参与到对方群体中去的一种心理过程。学界对影响群际宽恕的因素进行了深入的研究, 分析了低人性化、竞争受害性、群体认同、愤怒、共情、道歉以及群体接触7个因素对群际宽恕产生的影响作用; 同时, 以影响因素的研究结论为基础, 不同的学者提出了提升宽恕水平, 缓和群体关系的干预性建议。但是, 作为一个新的研究主题, 还需要深入探讨群际宽恕的内部过程机制, 积极建立符合本土文化的干预模型。     

A Wittgensteinian Role‐Based Account of Assertion

According to an “orthodox” reading proposed by Dummett and more recently endorsed by Lugg and Price, the later Wittgenstein rejects the idea of grouping together certain utterances as a single class of assertions. We offer an alternative commentary on the Philosophical Investigations §§21–24, developing what we call a Wittgensteinian role‐based account of assertion. We then examine whether this role‐based account can solve the problem of on‐stage utterances. In the course of this, the merits of the account are shown and compared to an alternative proposal offered by Searle.     

社会偏见与群际威胁在群际冲突发生过程中的作用

研究以“医患冲突”为载体,采用竞争反应时范式（CRT）和故事补全范式（SCP）,探讨社会偏见和群际威胁在群际冲突发生过程中的作用。结果表明：（1）“医生”被试中,社会偏见在CRT和SCP两个指标上均具显著主效应,而“患者”被试中,社会偏见仅在CRT范式“惩罚持续时间”指标上主效应显著;（2）群际威胁在CRT和SCP指标上的主效应均显著。研究发现,在群际冲突发生过程中,社会偏见的作用具有“方向效应”,而群际威胁变量发挥着显著而直接的影响。     

Schism in Groups: A Social Psychological Account

Far from being monoliths, groups tend to be internally subdivided into competing factions that, in some cases, may leave the parent group thereby causing a schism. Although schisms are complex phenomena, research has revealed the existence of specific social psychological patterns that different schisms seem to have in common. A schism is normally triggered by the perception that a change (i.e., either the adoption of a new norm or the revision of an old norm) endorsed by the group majority denies the group identity and constitutes a rupture with its historically sedimented essence. Members of the faction opposing the change may or may not decide to leave the group, depending on their perceived ‘voice’ within the group. Feeling marginalised and discriminated against, rather than valued and respected within, the group will increase chances of joining a schism.     

Parent–Child Conflict Profiles in Chinese American Immigrant Families: Links to Sociocultural Factors and School‐Age Children's Psychological Adjustment

Research suggests that parent–child conflict is a salient family process in Asian immigrant families and often a stressful experience for Asian American youth due to value discrepancies between Asian and Western cultures. The present study examined ratings of parent–child conflict across conflict topics from parents' and children's perspectives in a sample of Chinese American immigrant families with school‐age children (N = 239; age = 7.5–11 years). Latent profile analyses identified three parent‐rated conflict profiles and four child‐rated conflict profiles. Parent and child conflict profiles were unrelated to each other and differentially related to family sociocultural factors and children's psychological adjustment. Parents' moderate conflict profile scored highest on parent‐rated child behavior problems and had the highest household density and lower parent Chinese orientation. Children's moderate‐specific and high conflict profiles scored higher on child‐reported behavior problems than the low conflict profile. These results highlight the need to assess family conflict from both parents' and children's perspectives and target parent–child conflict communication as a pathway to prevent or reduce behavioral problems in Chinese American children of immigrant families.     

A Multi‐Factor Account of Degrees of Awareness

In this paper we argue that awareness comes in degrees, and we propose a novel multi‐factor account that spans both subjective experiences and perceptual representations. At the subjective level, we argue that conscious experiences can be degraded by being fragmented, less salient, too generic, or flash‐like. At the representational level, we identify corresponding features of perceptual representations—their availability for working memory, intensity, precision, and stability—and argue that the mechanisms that affect these features are what ultimately modulate the degree of awareness. We conclude the paper by demonstrating why the original interpretations of certain empirical findings that apparently pose problems for our account are, in fact, flawed.     

Integrating Theories of Psychological Needs‐as‐Requirements and Psychological Needs‐as‐Motives: A Two Process Model

Two conceptions of psychological needs predominate within contemporary motivational science. Motive disposition theory conceives of needs as behavioral motives which direct behavior (needs‐as‐motives), while self‐determination theory conceives of needs as universally required experiences for optimal functioning (needs‐as‐requirements). Until recently, these perspectives on psychological needs have proceeded without much intersection, despite the fact that they address the same fundamental concept. Here we summarize the Two Process Model of Psychological Needs, which attempts to bridge these two conceptions. We argue that psychological needs are best defined as tendencies to seek out certain basic types of psychosocial experiences, to a somewhat varying extent across individuals, and to feel good and thrive when those basic experiences are obtained, to the same extent across individuals. We suggest that this definition allows a reconciliation of needs‐as‐motives and needs‐as‐requirements perspectives and a more consilient science of human motivation. Empirical support for the TPM is also summarized.     

The Effect of Intergroup Conflict on Ingroup Cooperation and Conformity: An Experimental Vignette Study

In this study, we aimed to test the hypothesis that intergroup conflict would enhance not only ingroup cooperation, but also conformity (frequency‐dependent tendency). One hundred and eighty undergraduate students participated in a vignette experiment. They read four scenarios describing daily intergroup conflict situations, and rated behavioral intention for ingroup cooperation and frequency‐dependent tendency of ingroup members. In each vignette, level of intergroup conflict (weak/moderate) was manipulated by costs of defeat. The results supported the hypothesis in part that intergroup conflict enhanced both ingroup cooperation and conformity.     

Kripke's Account of the Rule‐Following Considerations

Abstract: This paper argues that most of the alleged straight solutions to the sceptical paradox which Kripke (1982) ascribed to Wittgenstein can be regarded as the first horn of a dilemma whose second horn is the paradox itself. The dilemma is proved to be a by‐product of a foundationalist assumption on the notion of justification, as applied to linguistic behaviour. It is maintained that the assumption is unnecessary and that the dilemma is therefore spurious. To this end, an alternative conception of the justification of linguistic behaviour is outlined, a conception that vindicates some of the insights behind Kripke's Wittgenstein's sceptical solution of the paradox. This alternative conception is defended against two objections (both familiar from McDowell's works): (1) that it would imply that for the linguistic community there is no authority, no standard to meet and, therefore, no possibility of error and (2) that it would lead to a kind of idealism.     

Intergroup conflict and barriers to common ground: A self‐affirmation perspective

Psychological barriers to conflict resolution stem, in part, from defensive responses to feelings of self‐threat. Self‐affirmation theory proposes that affirmations of global self‐worth—often achieved by writing or reflecting on core values—can broaden individuals' perspectives and potentially reduce biases in their intergroup judgments. In this paper, we review the extant literature on the use of self‐affirmation to potentially reduce intergroup biases in order to shed light on the role of self‐threat in perpetuating conflict. Self‐affirmation has been shown to impact 3 key aspects of intergroup conflict: (a) the strength with which conflict‐supporting beliefs are held, (b) the biased processing of conflict‐relevant information, and (c) the resistance to seeing common ground in negotiations. Discussion centers on the limits as well as the potential of self‐affirmation to promote openness and conflict resolution.     

Information‐Seeking Behavior in Intercultural and Intergroup Communication

This review essay analyzes the current status of information‐seeking research and theory in the field of intercultural communication writ broadly. After drawing distinctions between different types of intercultural communication research (cross‐cultural, intercultural, intergroup), the authors discuss how information seeking might be relevant across types and different between types of intercultural communication. Finally, the authors recommend directions for future research.     

Depletion from Self‐Regulation: A Resource‐based Account of the Effect of Value Incongruence

Value incongruence between employees and organizations has been identified as a negative work condition. An attitude‐based account suggests that value incongruence gives rise to negative attitudes toward organizations and thus causes low performance. To complement this mechanism, we propose a resource‐based account based on ego‐depletion theory, which suggests that value incongruence consumes an individual's regulatory resources and leads to low work performance. In support of this view, results from 2 survey studies and a vignette experiment reveal that value incongruence is positively associated with ego depletion, which in turn is negatively related to work performance. The mediation effect of ego depletion is independent of the attitude‐based mechanism as represented by job satisfaction and affective commitment. Consistent with the affective consistency perspective, the relationship between value incongruence and ego depletion is stronger among employees high in positive affectivity and weaker among employees high in negative affectivity. The corresponding moderated mediation analysis shows that the indirect effects of value incongruence on work performance through ego depletion vary as a function of positive and negative affectivity. This investigation unravels the self‐regulatory consequence of value incongruence and shows that the resource‐based mechanism of value incongruence operates differentially as a function of dispositional affectivity.     

Intergroup Discrimination Involving Negative Outcomes and Self‐Esteem

Two studies examined the link between intergroup discrimination involving negative outcomes (i.e., removal of positive resources and allocation of noxious resources), global self‐esteem (GSE), and collective self‐esteem (CSE). Study 1 found that New Zealanders who took away more positive resources from out‐group than in‐group members experienced enhanced CSE, but not GSE. These findings were replicated in Study 2, with respect to the allocation of noxious resources (i.e., white noise). New Zealanders' GSE and CSE assessed prior to the allocation of noxious resources were unrelated to the subsequent allocation of white noise. The data are interpreted to indicate that intergroup discrimination involving negative outcomes leads to enhanced CSE. However, neither GSE nor CSE predict such discrimination.     

Explaining Support for Violating Out‐Group Human Rights in Conflict: Attitudes Toward Principles of Human Rights,Trust in the Out‐Group,and Intergroup Contact1

A public atmosphere that supports violating the human rights of out‐group members can enable or even encourage enacting such violations. We present a model that explains such support in terms of 2 underlying components: (a) support for violating general principles of human rights (SVHRG); and (b) lack of trust toward the specific out‐group. This model was successful (R² = .47) in predicting Jewish‐Israeli support for violating human rights of Palestinians (SVHRP). Structural equation modeling indicated that, consistent with our hypotheses, SVHRG and distrust of Palestinians each significantly contributed to predicting SVHRP; and contact with Palestinians and religiosity each significantly contributed to predicting trust in Palestinians, with more contact predicting higher trust and more religiosity predicting lower trust.     

Cyberattacks as Casus Belli: A Sovereignty‐Based Account

Since cyberattacks are nonphysical, standard theories of casus belli — which typically rely on the violent and forceful nature of military means — appear inapplicable. Yet, some theorists have argued that cyberattacks nonetheless can constitute just causes for war — generating a unilateral right to defensive military action — when they cause significant physical damage through the disruption of the target's computer systems. I show that this view suffers from a serious drawback: it is too permissive concerning the types of actions that generate casus belli since many essentially peaceful and non‐violent mechanisms can nonetheless cause physical damage. I resolve this difficulty by developing a sovereignty‐based account of casus belli and applying it to cyberwarfare. I argue that legitimate states have a constrained right to unilaterally respond with military force to unfriendly actions that bypass or overwhelm the political deliberations of the target state in order to force a change in behaviour contrary to the determinations of the people of the target state. This new account of casus belli avoids the problems of the consequence‐based view by plausibly restricting the types of unfriendly action that give rise to casus belli and yet offers an attractive explanation for why some cyberattacks nonetheless do generate a potential right to a unilateral defensive response.     

Assessing the Impact of a Media‐based Intervention to Prevent Intergroup Violence and Promote Positive Intergroup Relations in Burundi

The present study (N = 1074) examined the impact of a theory‐driven media intervention aimed at violence prevention and intergroup reconciliation in Burundi. We used a novel methodology utilizing audio‐based surveys to assess attitudes related to intergroup conflict and reconciliation among community members. We conducted a propensity score analysis to estimate the causal effects of the intervention by examining differences between listeners and non‐listeners of the radio dramas. The results indicated a positive effect of the intervention on several social psychological outcomes (tolerance, in‐group superiority, social distance, intergroup trust, responsibility attributions, trauma disclosure and competitive victimhood). However, listeners and non‐listeners did not differ in obedience toward leaders or historical perspective taking; and the results for active bystandership, one of the main foci of the intervention, were mixed. Furthermore, the results show that the impact of the intervention sometimes depends on listeners' personal experiences of victimization. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What We Know Now About Bias and Intergroup Conflict, the Problem of the Century

After nearly a century's study, what do psychologists now know about intergroup bias and conflict? Most people reveal unconscious, subtle biases, which are relatively automatic, cool, indirect, ambiguous, and ambivalent. Subtle biases underlie ordinary discrimination: comfort with one's own in–group, plus exclusion and avoidance of out–groups. Such biases result from internal conflict between cultural ideals and cultural biases. A small minority of people, extremists, do harbor blatant biases that are more conscious, hot, direct, and unambiguous. Blatant biases underlie aggression, including hate crimes. Such biases result from perceived intergroup conflict over economics and values, in a world perceived to be hierarchical and dangerous. Reduction of both subtle and blatant bias results from education, economic opportunity, and constructive intergroup contact.