Disappointment expression evokes collective guilt and collective action in intergroup conflict: the moderating role of legitimacy perceptions

Research on intergroup emotions has largely focused on the experience of emotions and surprisingly little attention has been given to the expression of emotions. Drawing on the social-functional approach to emotions, we argue that in the context of intergroup conflicts, outgroup members’ expression of disappointment with one’s ingroup induces the complementary emotion of collective guilt and correspondingly a collective action protesting ingroup actions against the outgroup. In Study 1 conducted immediately after the 2014 Gaza war, Jewish-Israeli participants received information about outgroup’s (Palestinians) expression of emotions (disappointment, fear, or none). As predicted, outgroup’s expression of disappointment increased collective guilt and willingness to participate in collective action, but only among those who saw the intergroup situation as illegitimate. Moreover, collective guilt mediated the relationship between disappointment expression and collective action, moderated, again, by legitimacy perception. In Study 2, we replicated these results in the context of racial tension between Black and White Americans in the US. We discuss the theoretical and applied implications of the findings.     

The Automatic and Controlled Information-Processing Dissociation: Is It Still Relevant?

The purpose of this paper is to examine the dual-process information-processing model of Schneider and Shiffrin (Schneider, W., and Shiffrin, R. M., Psychol. Rev. 84: 1–66, 1977; see also Shiffrin, R. M., and Schneider, W. Psychol. Rev. 84: 127–190, 1977) in light of the research data that have accumulated since the model was introduced more than 20 years ago. First, a brief introduction of the basic model of automatic and controlled information processing will be given. Second, some alternatives to the basic model that were developed over the last two decades will be reviewed. Third, data from neuropsychology and cognitive neuroscience that have a bearing upon this framework will be considered. Finally, some comments on the current usefulness of the dual-process framework for neuropsychological research will be offered.     

Gender differences in intimate‐conflict initiation and escalation tendencies

According to gender motivation theory, men are driven by a desire to enhance their status; whereas, women are motivated by a desire to reduce risk, and the behavioral expressions of those motivations are context‐dependent. In order to test this theory in the context of intimate relationships, this study compared men's and women's escalatory tendencies in the initial development of intimate conflict. These tendencies were conceptualized in terms of four attributes: two attributes that represent response intention (decision and style) and two others that represent motivations for that intention (putting one's partner in his or her place and avoiding conflict). These attributes were measured in the context of five hypothetical situations. Each of those scenarios involved potential escalation of intimate conflict, following an intimate partner's aggressive verbal demand. The study involved a convenience sample of 403 male and female participants. The findings show that, in the initial steps of intimate‐conflict development, women tend toward escalation more than men. The findings also show that the escalatory tendency, as conceptualized and measured using the examined scenarios, corresponds to actual behavior exhibited in the resolution of common issues in the couples' lives. These findings reinforce gender motivation theory.

     

Automatic and controlled verbal-information processing in patients with frontal lobe lesions

The selectivity of frontal lobe lesion effects in the domains of verbal-information processing has not been well established. The authors hypothesized that capacity-limited controlled processing would be more impaired than automatic processing in frontal lobe patients (FLPs). Fifteen FLPs were compared with 2 matched control groups: 14 posterior-lesion patients and 15 normal controls. Both behavioral and event-related brain potential (ERP) measures were collected. Results suggest that both automatic and controlled processing were affected by frontal lobe lesions. ERP results indicated that the main dificulty for the FLPs was in the perceptual stage of information processing. This rather unexpected result may be explained by a basic difficulty of FLPs in attending to a new stimulus in order to process it.     

Explaining Normative Versus Nonnormative Action: The Role of Implicit Theories

The current research investigates what motivates people to engage in normative versus nonnormative action. Prior research has shown that different emotions lead to different types of action. We argue that these differing emotions are determined by a more basic characteristic, namely, implicit theories about whether groups and the world in general can change. We hypothesized that incremental theories (beliefs that groups/the world can change) would predict normative action, and entity theories (beliefs that groups/the world cannot change) as well as group identification would predict nonnormative action. We conducted a pilot in the context of protests against a government plan to relocate Bedouin villages in Israel and a main study during the Israeli social protests of the middle class. Results revealed three distinct pathways to collective action. First, incremental theories about the world predicted hope, which predicted normative action. Second, incremental theories about groups and group identification predicted anger, which also predicted normative collective action. Lastly, entity theories about groups predicted nonnormative collective action through hatred, but only for participants who were highly identified with the group. In sum, people who believed in the possibility of change supported normative action, whereas those who believed change was not possible supported nonnormative action.