Three layers of collective victimhood: effects of multileveled victimhood on intergroup conflicts in the Israeli–Arab context

Perceived collective victimhood plays a significant role in conflictual intergroup relations. We suggest a conceptualization of three different layers of collective victimhood: historical victimhood, general conflict victimhood, and conflict event victimhood. Three studies explore the interrelationship between the layers and their effects in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. In Study 1, general conflict victimhood mediates the relationship between historical victimhood and willingness for compromise. In Study 2, conducted in two waves, changes in general conflict victimhood predict support for military actions against the out‐group. The relationship between general conflict victimhood and support for military actions was mediated by conflict event victimhood. In Study 3, three new scales were developed, and their relations with different outcomes examined. Findings were nearly identical to the models tested in Studies 1–2.     

Organizational Politics and Job Outcomes: The Moderating Effect of Trust and Social Support

We propose a model for examining the moderating effect of trust and social support on the relationship between organizational politics and job outcomes. The model was tested empirically using data collected among 142 academics in one of Israel's major research universities. Findings based on interaction effects support the hypothesis that trust and social support are good moderators of the relationship between perceived organizational politics (POPs) and several job outcomes (i.e., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, stress, burnout). In other words, the potentially negative aftermaths of POPs can be controlled and reduced when trust and social support dominate the intra‐organizational climate. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings, as well as recommendations for future studies, are suggested.     

Goal Setting Theory,Job Feedback,and OCB: Lessons From a Longitudinal Study

This study examines the relationships among goal setting, job feedback, and employees' formal and informal performance. We argue that the knowledge gained in the field of goal setting may be useful in understanding organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), beyond formal performance. A longitudinal design based on two points in time (T1, T2) and four research stages (A-D) was developed to test a series of hypotheses among student-employees. 176 participants provided data on goal setting (goal specificity and goal difficulty) and on work attitudes (job satisfaction, organizational justice, job commitment) at T1 (stage A). 23 supervisors provided additional data on formal performance and OCB at T1 (stage B) and at T2 (stage D). Employees were given feedback regarding their formal and informal work performance between T1 and T2 (stage C). The results generally support a positive relationship between goal setting, formal performance, and altruistic OCB at T1 but not at T2. Furthermore, job feedback was related to formal performance and to altruistic and compliance OCB at T2. Implications of these findings are discussed in both the context of goal setting theory and the ongoing study of OCB.     

The Validity of Assessment Centres for the Prediction of Supervisory Performance Ratings: A meta‐analysis

The current meta‐analysis of the selection validity of assessment centres aims to update an earlier meta‐analysis of assessment centre validity. To this end, we retrieved 26 studies and 27 validity coefficients (N=5850) relating the Overall Assessment Rating (OAR) to supervisory performance ratings. The current study obtained a corrected correlation of .28 between the OAR and supervisory job performance ratings (95% confidence interval .24≤ρ≤.32). It is further suggested that this validity estimate is likely to be conservative given that assessment centre validities tend to be affected by indirect range restriction.     

Affirmation, acknowledgment of in-group responsibility, group-based guilt, and support for reparative measures

Three studies, 2 conducted in Israel and 1 conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina, demonstrated that affirming a positive aspect of the self can increase one's willingness to acknowledge in-group responsibility for wrongdoing against others, express feelings of group-based guilt, and consequently provide greater support for reparation policies. By contrast, affirming one's group, although similarly boosting feelings of pride, failed to increase willingness to acknowledge and redress in-group wrongdoing. Studies 2 and 3 demonstrated the mediating role of group-based guilt. That is, increased acknowledgment of in-group responsibility for out-group victimization produced increased feelings of guilt, which in turn increased support for reparation policies to the victimized group. Theoretical and applied implications are discussed.     

How I learned to stop fearing: Ideological differences in choice of reappraisal content

In down-regulating intergroup fear, an intense emotion common to intractable intergroup conflicts, people may employ various fear-reducing appraisals. Adopting a motivated reasoning perspective, we posited that the contents of individuals’ ideological beliefs influence the contents they employ to down-regulate fear, with rightists preferring ingroup-empowering content and leftists preferring outgroup-weakening content. In Study 1, rightists (vs. leftists) reported greater use of ingroup-empowering reappraisal to down-regulate fear, but no differences emerged in the use of outgroup-weakening reappraisal. Study 2 manipulated the contents’ perceived instrumentality in reducing fear, to examine this as an alternative mechanism. Perceived instrumentality influenced participants’ behavioral content preferences ahead of a fear induction, but the manipulation did not mitigate the right-left differences in ingroup-empowering reappraisal use once participants were confronted with the stimulus, replicating Study 1. Study 3 extended these findings, identifying ideological differences in two additional fear-reappraisal themes and in the attitudinal outcomes of fear regulation.     

Estimating the validity of the guilty knowledge test from simulated experiments: the external validity of mock crime studies

This experiment was designed to examine the external validity of the standard mock-crime procedure used extensively to evaluate the validity of polygraph tests. The authors manipulated the type of mock-crime procedure (standard vs. a more realistic version) and the time of test (immediate vs. delayed) and examined their effects on the validity of the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT) and the recall rate of the relevant items. The results indicated that only the type of mock-crime affected the 2 outcome variables. The realistic procedure was associated with a lower recall rate and weaker detection efficiency than the standard procedure. However, these effects were mediated by the type of GKT questions used. Practical implications of these results are discussed.     

Lateralized lexical decision in schizophrenia: hemispheric specialization and interhemispheric lexicality priming

Reports of left-hemisphere dysfunction and abnormal interhemispheric transfer in schizophrenia are mixed. The authors used a unified paradigm, the lateralized lexical decision task, to assess hemispheric specialization in word recognition, hemispheric error monitoring, and interhemispheric transfer in male, right-handed participants with schizophrenia (n=34) compared with controls (n=20). Overall, performance and error monitoring were worse in patients. However, patients like controls showed left-hemisphere superiority for lexical processing and right-hemisphere superiority for error monitoring. Only patients showed selective-interhemispheric lexicality priming for accuracy, in which performance improved when the lexical status of target and distractor stimuli presented to each hemifield was congruent. Results suggest that schizophrenia is associated with impaired monitoring and with increased interhemispheric automatic information transfer rather than with changed hemispheric specialization for language or error monitoring.     

Expressive suppression as an obstacle to social change: Linking system justification,emotion regulation,and collective action

Motivation and Emotion - Research on system justification theory suggests that justifying the societal status quo decreases negative emotions, leading to less collective action. In this...