The Role of Inclusive and Exclusive Victim Consciousness in Predicting Intergroup Attitudes: Findings from Rwanda,Burundi, and DRC

The present research examined the differential relationship between distinct construals of collective victimhood—specifically, inclusive and exclusive victim consciousness—and intergroup attitudes in the context and aftermath of mass violence. Three surveys in Rwanda (N = 842), Burundi (N = 1,074), and Eastern DRC (N = 1,609) provided empirical support for the hypothesis that while exclusive victim consciousness predicts negative intergroup attitudes, inclusive victim consciousness is associated with positive, prosocial intergroup attitudes. These findings were significant when controlling for age, gender, urban/rural residence, education, personal victimization, and ingroup superiority. Additionally, exclusive victim consciousness mediated the effects of ingroup superiority on negative intergroup attitudes. These findings have important theoretical implications for research on collective victimhood as well as practical implications for intergroup relations in regions emerging from violent conflict.     

Different forms of intergroup contact with former adversary are linked to distinct reconciliatory acts through symbolic and realistic threat

In a society burdened with the most severe type of intergroup conflict, we examined the association between willingness to reconcile with former adversary, intergroup contact with, and perceived threat from former adversary. We focused on three reconciliatory acts—forgiveness to the outgroup, support for ingroup apology and support for financial compensation to the outgroup. We included different forms of positive and negative intergroup contact—direct and indirect (extended and mass‐mediated). In the link between contact and reconciliation, we tested the mediating role of two types of intergroup threat—realistic and symbolic. The sample comprised Bosniaks (N = 267) and Croats (N = 278) from Bosnia and Herzegovina. In both samples, reconciliation associated with indirect forms of intergroup contact even when controlling for its link with direct contact. This indicates the potential of indirect contact to promote reconciliation in the lack of direct contact, characteristic for segregated post‐conflict societies. Symbolic threat mediated the relationship between intergroup contact and symbolic forms of reconciliation—forgiveness and support for ingroup apology. Realistic threat mediated the link between intergroup contact and a more tangible form of reconciliation—support for financial compensation. This highlights the importance of considering different types intergroup threat when targeting distinct reconciliatory acts. Our results suggest that practitioners promoting reconciliation in post‐conflict societies need to implement different means when tailoring interventions that should enhance different sides of peace‐making process.     

The role of retributive justice and the use of international criminal tribunals in post‐conflict reconciliation

Four experiments examined people's responses to intergroup violence either committed or suffered by their own group. Experiment 1 demonstrated that Serbs who strongly glorified Serbia were more supportive of future violence against, and less willing to reconcile with, Bosniaks after reading about Serbian victimization by Bosniaks rather than Serbian transgressions against Bosniaks. Replicating these effects with Americans in the context of American–Iranian tensions, Experiment 2 further showed that demands for retributive justice explained why high glorifiers showed asymmetrical reactions to ingroup victimization vs. perpetration. Again in the Serb and the American context, respectively, Experiments 3 and 4 demonstrated that post‐conflict international criminal tribunals can help satisfy victim group members' desire for retributive justice, and thereby reduce their support for future violence and increase their willingness to reconcile with the perpetrator group. The role of retributive justice and the use of international criminal justice in intergroup conflict (reduction) are discussed.     

Intergroup Perceptions and Attitudes toward Immigrants in a Culturally Plural Society

The research examined perceptions of Chinese immigrants held by New Zealanders of European and Maori descent. The study (N = 318) adopted an intergroup perspective to test a predictive model of attitudes toward immigrants. It was based on a nation‐wide survey with prospective respondents randomly selected from the New Zealand Electoral rolls. Findings revealed that Maori differed from their European counterparts in predictable ways, reporting more relative deprivation and greater perceived threat, and holding more negative outgroup attitudes. Less contact and greater perceived threat predicted more negative attitudes toward immigrants; in addition, when intergroup boundaries were permeable, the link between perceived threat and negative attitudes was stronger in Maori than New Zealand Europeans. While intergroup relations are traditionally analysed in a dual group formation involving a privileged “dominant” ingroup and disadvantaged “minority” immigrant outgroup, the current research suggests the need to advance beyond this dichotomy to a more inclusive approach and to consider the interface between the historical and political milieux in specific national contexts.     

United we stand: Intergroup conflict moderates the intergroup sensitivity effect

Ingroup members who criticize their group face much less resistance than outgroup members who say the same thing (the intergroup sensitivity effect). In the context of intergroup conflict, however, it was predicted that treatment of ingroup critics would not be so generous. Muslim Indonesians read an extract from an interview in which the speaker criticized Muslims. The comments were attributed to either another Muslim or to a Christian. Before reading the criticism, half of the participants had read an article describing intense conflict between Muslims and Christians in Indonesia, whereas the other half read a neutral article. As predicted, negativity toward the ingroup critic and the ingroup critic's comments increased in the conflict salience condition, to the point that the intergroup sensitivity effect disappeared. However, conflict salience did not have an effect on attributions of motive or on agreement with the message. Implications for our understanding of “patriotic criticism” are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

From Mecca with tolerance: religion,social recategorisation and social capital

Does participation in mass religious rituals promote intergroup conflict or does it promote intergroup tolerance? We assess these claims by examining the effects of the annual pilgrimage to Mecca (the hajj) on sociopolitical views of Muslims in Russia’s North Caucasus. Participant observation during the hajj and a quasi-experimental focus group study of pilgrims and non-pilgrims produced paradoxical findings. While the hajj strengthened their ingroup pride as Muslims, the pilgrims came through as more outgroup-tolerant and prosocial than the non-pilgrims. We develop a synthetic theoretical solution: in high-identity-value, high-diversity common group settings social recategorisation and social capital become transitive – that is, inclusive views and social capital effects within an ingroup extend to outgroups. This means that intergroup conflict could be reduced by not only maximising contact across conflicting groups, but also by bringing together as many subgroups as possible within each conflicting group in settings where their common identity is positively affirmed in a non-discriminatory fashion.     

With or without you: The paradoxical role of identification in predicting joint and ingroup collective action in intergroup conflict

While we have a rich understanding of the motivations of disadvantaged group members to act collectively with their group, especially the important role played by identification, we know less about the disadvantaged's motivations to engage in joint action with the advantaged. This research examines the role of identification in predicting joint and ingroup collective action in intergroup conflicts. Since joint action inherently diffuses the perception of “us versus them”, we propose that identification predicts ingroup action, but not joint action. We also examine conflict intensity as a moderator, and examine how changing identification is linked to change in support for joint action. We test these hypotheses in a three-wave longitudinal study in the Palestinian–Israeli conflict. Results support our hypotheses, demonstrating that identification positively predicts ingroup action but not necessarily joint action, and that when conflict intensifies, changes in identification are negatively related to joint action with outgroup members.     

Predictors of “the last acceptable racism”: Group threats and public attitudes toward Gypsies and Travellers

Prejudice against Gypsies/Travellers is prevalent in the United Kingdom and elsewhere but there is a lack of research investigating the underlying factors. The present research examined the relationships between different types of intergroup threats and their antecedents and U.K. residents' attitudes toward Gypsies/Travellers. Regression analyses confirmed that negative stereotypes, symbolic threats, and intergroup anxiety predicted attitudes, whereas multicultural ideology endorsement, ingroup identification, realistic threats, and intergroup anxiety predicted support for Gypsy/Traveller group rights. Moreover, multicultural ideology endorsement predicted support for group rights indirectly through realistic threats, whereas negative stereotypes predicted attitudes indirectly through symbolic threats and intergroup anxiety and predicted support for group rights indirectly through realistic threats and intergroup anxiety. Discussion focuses on the implications for strategies aimed at reducing what is often defined as “the last acceptable racism.”     

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.     

Social identity and prosocial and antisocial behavior in youth sport

ObjectivesTo examine (a) the effects of social identity on prosocial and antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents, and (b) whether any effects of social identity on prosocial and antisocial behavior were mediated by cohesion.DesignProspective, observational.MethodsMale and female youth–sport participants (N = 329; M_age = 15.88 years) completed questionnaires at the beginning, middle and end of the season assessing three dimensions of social identity (cognitive centrality, ingroup ties, ingroup affect), cohesion (task, social) and prosocial and antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents.ResultsWith the exception of cognitive centrality (which was therefore not analyzed further), all measures of study variables proved reliable. Structural equation modeling indicated the following: Ingroup affect had a positive effect on prosocial teammate behavior, Task cohesion mediated a positive effect of ingroup ties on prosocial teammate behavior and a negative effect of ingroup ties and ingroup affect on antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents. Social cohesion mediated a positive effect of ingroup ties on antisocial behavior toward teammates and opponents. Prosocial opponent behavior was not predicted by any dimension of social identity.ConclusionThe findings highlight that social identity may play a salient role in regulating prosocial and antisocial behavior in youth sport, and changes in cohesion may partially explain these effects.     

Collective Narcissism: Political Consequences of Investing Self‐Worth in the Ingroup’s Image

This article proposes a new theoretical framework for the reviewed state‐of‐the‐art research on collective narcissism—the belief that the ingroup’s exceptionality is not sufficiently appreciated by others. Collective narcissism is motivated by the investment of an undermined sense of self‐esteem into the belief in the ingroup’s entitlement to privilege. Collective narcissism lies in the heart of populist rhetoric. The belief in ingroup’s exceptionality compensates the undermined sense of self‐worth, leaving collective narcissists hypervigilant to signs of threat to the ingroup’s position. People endorsing the collective narcissistic belief are prone to biased perceptions of intergroup situations and to conspiratorial thinking. They retaliate to imagined provocations against the ingroup but sometimes overlook real threats. They are prejudiced and hostile. Deficits in emotional regulation, hostile attribution bias, and vindictiveness lie behind the robust link between collective narcissism and intergroup hostility. Interventions that support the regulation of negative emotions, such as experiencing self‐transcendent emotions, decrease the link between collective narcissism and intergroup hostility and offer further insights into the nature of collective narcissism.     

Intergroup threat,knowledge of the outgroup,and willingness to purchase ingroup and outgroup products: The mediating role of intergroup emotions

Established theories have acknowledged that intergroup threat is one of the key determinants of intergroup attitudes and behaviours, but how intergroup threat can affect consumer behaviour remains unclear. Here, four preregistered studies (total N = 988) examined the effect of intergroup threat (manipulated in terms of realistic and symbolic threats) on consumers’ willingness to purchase ingroup and outgroup products. In the context of China–West relations, we measured Chinese consumers’ willingness to purchase Chinese (ingroup) and Western (outgroup) products. These studies together revealed that realistic and symbolic threats (versus control) increased willingness to purchase ingroup products and decreased willingness to purchase outgroup products, regardless of the product category. Studies 3a and 3b also measured knowledge of the outgroup as a potential moderator, revealing that realistic threat (versus control) reduced willingness to purchase outgroup products only among individuals who had less knowledge of the outgroup. Furthermore, Study 3b showed that the intergroup threat manipulation indirectly influenced consumers’ willingness to purchase ingroup/outgroup products through increased anger and decreased hope. We discussed the contributions to the intergroup relations and consumer behaviour literature and the implications for transnational marketing practices, as well as the limitations of this research.     

Does remembering past ingroup harmdoing promote postwar cross‐group contact? Insights from a field‐experiment in Liberia

In the aftermath of the Liberian civil wars, we investigated whether it is possible to systematically influence how people construe their group's role during the conflict and how this affects intergroup emotions and behavioral intentions. In a field experiment, 146 participants were randomly assigned to think about incidents of violence during the war that were either committed by fellow ingroup members (perpetrator‐focus) or against fellow ingroup members (victim‐focus). Adopting a perpetrator‐focus led to greater willingness to engage in cross‐group contact, greater need for acceptance, and greater intergroup empathy. The focus manipulation did not affect participants' need for empowerment. Key message: Appraising the ingroup as “victim” or “perpetrator” after conflicts with reciprocal harmdoing is largely a matter of psychological construction. A promising avenue for promoting positive cross‐group contact consists in widening the ingroup's victim role by also remembering the harm that the ingroup inflicted upon others. This amplifies the need of acceptance, which leads to greater intergroup empathy and greater willingness to engage in cross‐group contact. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The development of bystander intentions and social–moral reasoning about intergroup verbal aggression

A developmental intergroup approach was taken to examine the development of prosocial bystander intentions among children and adolescents. Participants as bystanders (N = 260) aged 8–10 and 13–15 years were presented with scenarios of direct aggression between individuals from different social groups (i.e., intergroup verbal aggression). These situations involved either an ingroup aggressor and an outgroup victim or an outgroup aggressor and an ingroup victim. This study focussed on the role of intergroup factors (group membership, ingroup identification, group norms, and social–moral reasoning) in the development of prosocial bystander intentions. Findings showed that prosocial bystander intentions declined with age. This effect was partially mediated by the ingroup norm to intervene and perceived severity of the verbal aggression. However, a moderated mediation analysis showed that only when the victim was an ingroup member and the aggressor an outgroup member did participants become more likely with age to report prosocial bystander intentions due to increased ingroup identification. Results also showed that younger children focussed on moral concerns and adolescents focussed more on psychological concerns when reasoning about their bystander intention. These novel findings help explain the developmental decline in prosocial bystander intentions from middle childhood into early adolescence when observing direct intergroup aggression.     

“In‐Group Love” and “Out‐Group Hate” in Repeated Interaction Between Groups

Costly individual participation in intergroup conflict can be motivated by “in‐group love”—a cooperative motivation to help the in‐group, by “out‐group hate”—an aggressive or competitive motivation to hurt the out‐group, or both. This study employed a recently developed game paradigm (Halevy, Bornstein, & Sagiv, 2008) designed specifically to distinguish between these two motives. The game was played repeatedly between two groups with three players in each group. In addition, we manipulated the payoff structure of the interaction that preceded the game such that half of the groups experienced peaceful coexistence and the other half experienced heightened conflict prior to the game. Enabling group members to express in‐group love independently of out‐group hate significantly reduced intergroup conflict. Group members strongly preferred to cooperate within their group, rather than to compete against the out‐group for relative standing, even in the condition in which the repeated game was preceded by conflict. Although both “in‐group love” and “out‐group hate” somewhat diminished as the game continued (as players became more selfish), choices indicative of the former motivation were significantly more frequent than choices indicative of the latter throughout the interaction. We discuss the implications of these findings for conflict resolution. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations

We examined the impact of intergroup similarity on two aspects of intergroup relations. Drawing on social identity and belief congruence theory, we hypothesized that — at high levels of intergroup similarity — increasing similarity has dual, seemingly opposed effects: It increases ingroup favouritism in evaluations but also increases readiness for social contact with the outgroup. We further hypothesized that both effects are moderated by the strength of individuals' identification with their ingroup. Finally, we hypothesized that there is ingroup favouritism on dimensions relevant for defining the group, but outgroup favouritism on dimensions irrelevant for this purpose. One hundred and forty-nine students from two prestigious high schools, who were assigned to one of three levels of manipulated similarity between their schools, evaluated both schools on dimensions relevant and irrelevant to the school context and expressed their readiness for social contact with the other school. Ingroup favouritism appeared on relevant dimensions and outgroup favouritism on irrelevant dimensions. As predicted, for those highly identified with their ingroup, intergroup similarity led to greater ingroup favouritism in evaluations on relevant dimensions but to increased readiness for outgroup social contact. Implications for interpreting inconsistent results of past research and for specifying conditions for intergroup bias are discussed.     

Motivated emotion and the rally around the flag effect: liberals are motivated to feel collective angst (like conservatives) when faced with existential threat

A careful look at societies facing threat reveals a unique phenomenon in which liberals and conservatives react emotionally and attitudinally in a similar manner, rallying around the conservative flag. Previous research suggests that this rally effect is the result of liberals shifting in their attitudes and emotional responses toward the conservative end. Whereas theories of motivated social cognition provide a motivation-based account of cognitive processes (i.e. attitude shift), it remains unclear whether emotional shifts are, in fact, also a motivation-based process. Herein, we propose that under threat, liberals are motivated to feel existential concern about their group’s future vitality (i.e. collective angst) to the same extent as conservatives, because this group-based emotion elicits support for ingroup protective action. Within the context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, we tested and found support for this hypothesis both inside (Study 1) and outside (Study 2) the laboratory. We did so using a behavioural index of motivation to experience collective angst. We discuss the implications of our findings for understanding motivated emotion regulation in the context of intergroup threat.     

Terror Management Theory: Implications for Understanding Prejudice,Stereotyping, Intergroup Conflict,and Political Attitudes

Terror management theory posits that to maintain psychological security despite the awareness of personal mortality, humans must maintain faith in cultural worldviews. These worldviews provide ways for humans to believe they are significant enduring beings in a world of meaning rather than mere animals fated only to obliteration upon death. We review basic support for terror management theory and research exploring the implications of terror management theory for understanding prejudice, stereotyping, intergroup conflict, and political attitudes. This research shows that when the psychological need to defend these worldviews is heightened by reminders of death (mortality salience), prejudice, stereotyping, and support for charismatic leaders and aggression against outgroups is increased. Terror management concerns also lead targets of prejudice to disidentify with their ingroup and confirm negative stereotypes of their group. We conclude by considering the implications of terror management theory and research for the alleviation of prejudice and intergroup conflict.     

The other side of we: when outgroup members express common identity

Previous research on the common ingroup identity model has focused on how one's representations of members of the ingroup and outgroup influence intergroup attitudes. Two studies reported here investigated how learning how others, ingroup or outgroup members, conceive of the groups within a superordinate category affects intergroup bias and willingness to engage in intergroup contact. Across both studies, high school students who learned that other ingroup members categorized students at both schools within the common identity of "students" showed less intergroup bias in evaluations and greater willingness for contact. However, consistent with the hypothesized effects of identity threat, when participants read that outgroup members saw the groups within the superordinate category, they exhibited a relatively negative orientation, except when ingroup members also endorsed a superordinate identity (Study 1). This result occurred even when the relative status of the groups was manipulated (Study 2).     

Taming Uncivil Discourse

In an era of seemingly intense populist politics, a variety of issues of intergroup prejudice, discrimination, and conflict have moved center stage in much of the industrialized world. Among these is “political correctness” and, in particular, what constitutes a legitimate discourse of political and social conflict and opposition. Yet the meaning of legitimate discourse is being turned on its head as some disparaged groups seek to reclaim, or reappropriate, slurs directed against them. Using as a context a U.S. Supreme Court case about whether “The Slants”—a band named after a traditional slur against Asians—can trademark its name, we test several hypotheses about reappropriation processes based on a nationally representative sample with an oversample of East Asian Americans and several survey experiments. We find that motives attributions influence how people understand and evaluate potentially disparaging words. In particular, when reappropriation motives are perceived, insulting words are judged to be less insulting. In this sense, uncivil discourse can to some degree be tamed.