Intractable Intergroup Conflicts Research Articles

A Threat to Cohesion: Intragroup Affective Polarization in the Context of Intractable Intergroup Conflict

A Threat to Cohesion: Intragroup Affective Polarization in the Context of Intractable Intergroup Conflict

Features of Constructing Representations Regarding Intractable Intergroup Conflicts in the Russian and Ukrainian Media Discourse

The phenomenon of intractable intergroup conflict is being actively studied in modern foreign psychology. The study of conflicts of this type is now becoming especially important due to the increase in their number in today’s reality. Of great importance are the works of the Israeli scientific school, which considers the phenomena of the ethos of the conflict, the collective memory of the conflict and the collective emotional orientation, which are the basis for interpreting information about the conflict situation. Despite the large number of models and approaches, there are still quite a few gaps in the research of intractable conflicts (for example, there is no generally accepted definition of an intractable conflict, and many research methods are poorly operationalized). The representations regarding an intractable conflict in the Russian and Ukrainian media discourse are analyzed. The ways of constructing such representations in the media discourse are considered through a reference to the socio-psychological infrastructure of the conflict. The main research method was critical discourse analysis in the interpretation of J. Potter and M. Weatherell. It was found that in both Russian and Ukrainian media discourse representations regarding the conflict were constructed through references to the ethos of the conflict: in particular, through the justification of group goals, the presentation of the opponent’s actions as illegitimate and unfair, the victimization of opposition groups, and the maintenance of positive image of the group. It was revealed that in both Russian and Ukrainian media there are references to collective memory, but the frequency of their occurrence does not allow to talk about a trend. The results can be used to develop measures to reduce bias in media coverage of conflicts. The prospects for further research are discussed, in particular, the analysis of intractable conflict representations in audiences of different media and their comparison with those repertoires that have been identified in the media discourse.

Perceived respect from the adversary group can improve intergroup attitudes in a context of intractable conflict.

Respect has been found to play a crucial role in human relationships including intergroup relations. Its presence has a significant positive influence in shaping the character of all relationship interactions. In intractable violent conflicts, there is almost no space for gestures of respect between adversarial parties, and the prevailing phenomenon is a mutual disrespect that fuels the conflict. This study examines a novel and challenging intervention that aims to induce in laboratory experiments, for the first time, perceptions of respect from adversary group members in the context of intractable intergroup conflict. In addition, this research examines the effect of perceived respect from the adversary on attitudes and perceptions towards the adversary group and the conflict. In three experimental studies (N=1261) in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we manipulated expressions of respect from the Palestinian adversary group members and presented them to Jewish Israelis. Results revealed that, a group involved in a prolonged violent conflict may perceive respect from its adversary outgroup, and the perceived respect from the adversary in turn predicts improvement in attitudes and perceptions towards the adversary group and the conflict. These findings underline the important role of respect in intergroup conflict and its role in mitigating the conflict.

The Dual Effect of COVID-19 on Intergroup Conflict in the Korean Peninsula.

The coronavirus pandemic has fundamentally shifted the way human beings interact, both as individuals and groups, in the face of such a widespread outbreak. This paper seeks to investigate the effects of COVID-19 on intergroup emotions and attitudes within an intractable intergroup conflict, specifically, through the lens of the Korean conflict. Using a two-wave, cross-sectional design, this study was able to track the profound psychological changes in intergroup emotions and attitudes both prior to the pandemic and during its onslaught. Results of these two wave representative samples show that South Korean citizens demonstrated higher levels of fear of their neighbors in North Korea after the outbreak of COVID-19 than before. In turn, this led to increased societal support of hostile government policies towards North Koreans. Conversely, the same participants exhibited higher levels of empathy towards North Koreans during the pandemic, which led to a higher willingness to collaborate with their outgroup. This dual effect on intergroup emotions within intractable conflicts brings forth new avenues from which societies may be able to restrain the destructive influence of the COVID-19 threat on intergroup relations — as well as harvesting its constructive potential for reconciling warring intergroup relations.

Developing Fact Finders: A Mobile Game for Overcoming Intractable Conflicts

This study describes the design of a serious game for social change (“Fact Finders”) that presents intergroup conflicts through historical inquiry and multiperspectivity. A pre-test post-test experimental design examined the game’s effect on undergraduates’ perceptions of conflicts in history. Participants included 97 Greek Cypriots (direct parties of the conflict) and 79 Slovenians (third parties of the conflict) who interacted with and evaluated the game online. Data sources included a 17-item questionnaire on perceptions of conflicts in history and gameplay learning analytics data. Findings indicated that both groups’ perceptions for historical source evaluation and understanding multiperspectivity changed significantly after the game. The game significantly changed perceptions about the constructedness of history and the ability to overcome their country’s troubled past only for direct parties of the conflict. The study provides empirical evidence demonstrating the potential value of serious games for affecting young people’s perceptions of intractable intergroup conflicts and their desire to overcome troubled pasts.

Moral elevation increases support for humanitarian policies, but not political concessions, in intractable conflict

Moral elevation is an emotional experience elicited after witnessing acts of exceptional moral goodness and involves feeling moved and inspired. Previous research has demonstrated that experiences of moral elevation can lead to increased altruism. We examined whether the benefits of moral elevation on prosocial intentions extend to the context of intractable intergroup conflict, by testing whether moral elevation increases support for outgroup-favorable policies. We hypothesized that moral elevation would increase support for humanitarian policies, but not political concessions, as only the former are considered to be within the moral domain. To test this, we ran three studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including a preregistered replication, and found overall support for our hypothesis. This research is the first to demonstrate that moral elevation can play an important role in the context of intractable conflict by increasing support for alleviating outgroup suffering, but it also suggests that the effect of elevation is limited in that it does not extend to increasing support for political compromises.

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

AbstractIn 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.

Adolescents growing up amidst intractable conflict attenuate brain response to pain of outgroup

Adolescents' participation in intergroup conflicts comprises an imminent global risk, and understanding its neural underpinnings may open new perspectives. We assessed Jewish-Israeli and Arab-Palestinian adolescents for brain response to the pain of ingroup/outgroup protagonists using magnetoencephalography (MEG), one-on-one positive and conflictual interactions with an outgroup member, attitudes toward the regional conflict, and oxytocin levels. A neural marker of ingroup bias emerged, expressed via alpha modulations in the somatosensory cortex (S1) that characterized an automatic response to the pain of all protagonists followed by rebound/enhancement to ingroup pain only. Adolescents' hostile social interactions with outgroup members and uncompromising attitudes toward the conflict influenced this neural marker. Furthermore, higher oxytocin levels in the Jewish-Israeli majority and tighter brain-to-brain synchrony among group members in the Arab-Palestinian minority enhanced the neural ingroup bias. Findings suggest that in cases of intractable intergroup conflict, top-down control mechanisms may block the brain's evolutionary-ancient resonance to outgroup pain, pinpointing adolescents' interpersonal and sociocognitive processes as potential targets for intervention.

Emotions and Emotion Regulation in Intractable Conflict: Studying Emotional Processes Within a Unique Context

Recent years have seen researchers making initial steps towards drawing on insights from emotion research in the study of intractable intergroup conflicts, but the knowledge on emotion and emotion regulation cannot simply be implanted “as is” into the study of these unique contexts. The present article begins with a discussion of the unique context of intractable conflicts and continues with an examination of the existing knowledge on emotion and emotion regulation in these conflicts. From there it proceeds to detail the contextual factors unique to intractable conflict that must be taken into account when studying these constructs, focusing on three such factors: long‐term emotional sentiments, entrenched conflict‐supporting ideology, and clinical factors related to the repeated exposure to violence associated with life in conflict. For each factor, the article examines existing theories and empirical knowledge on its influence over the type and magnitude of emotion experienced, the behavioral and political outcome of emotional experiences, and on emotion regulation processes. When existing theory and knowledge are limited, we present theory and propose directions for future research. Finally, the article discusses the challenges facing those wishing to integrate conflict studies and emotion research and benefit fully, theoretically, empirically, and on the applied level from such an interdisciplinary integration.

Do computer games enhance learning about conflicts? A cross-national inquiry into proximate and distant scenarios in Global Conflicts

Interactive conflict resolution and peace education have developed as two major lines of practice to tackle intractable inter-group conflicts. Recently, new media technologies such as social media, computer games, and online dialogue are added to the existing set of tools used for peace education. However, a debate is emerging as to how effective they are in motivating learning and teaching skills required for peace building. We take issue with this question and have conducted a study investigating the effect of different conflict contexts on student learning. We have designed a cross-national experimental study with Israeli-Jewish, Palestinian, and Guatemalan undergraduate students using the Israeli–Palestinian and Guatemalan scenarios in the computer game called “Global Conflicts.” The learning effects of these scenarios were systematically analyzed using pre- and post-test questionnaires. The study indicated that Israeli-Jews and Palestinians acquired more knowledge from the Guatemalan game than Guatemalans acquired from the Israeli–Palestinian game. All participants acquired knowledge about proximate conflicts after playing games about these scenarios, and there were insignificant differences between the three national groups. Israeli-Jews and Palestinians playing the Israeli–Palestinian game changed their attitudes about this conflict, while Guatemalans playing the Guatemalan game did not change their attitudes about this case. All participants changed their attitudes about distant conflicts after playing games about these scenarios.

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.

Communicating the right emotion makes violence seem less wrong: Power-congruent emotions lead outsiders to legitimize violence of powerless and powerful groups in intractable conflict

In intractable intergroup conflicts, groups often try to frame intergroup violence as legitimate through the use of emotional appeals. Two experiments demonstrate that outsiders’ perception of which emotion conflict parties communicate influences the extent to which they legitimize their violence. Results show that although outsiders typically give more leeway to powerless groups because of their “underdog” status, communicating power-congruent emotions qualifies this effect; observers legitimize intergroup violence most when powerless groups communicate fear and when powerful groups communicate anger. This is because fear communicates that the group is a victim that cannot be blamed for their violence, whereas anger communicates that the group is wronged and thus their violence seems righteous and moral. Results further show that sympathy for the powerless appears to be a more fragile basis for legitimization of violence than the moral high ground for the powerful. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

Extinction threat and reciprocal threat reduction: Collective angst predicts willingness to compromise in intractable intergroup conflicts

Two experiments examined the impact of ingroup extinction threat on willingness to compromise with an adversary group. Specifically, Israel’s ability to cope with a nuclear capable Iran was manipulated and Israelis’ willingness to compromise with Hamas (Experiment 1) or the Palestinian Authority (Experiment 2) was assessed. In Experiment 1, extinction threat decreased willingness to compromise with Hamas—an effect mediated by heightened collective angst. Conversely, in Experiment 2, extinction threat increased willingness to compromise with the Palestinian Authority, again via collective angst. The reason for this inverted effect in Experiment 2 was perceived reciprocal threat reduction—the belief that compromise with the Palestinian Authority would reduce the Iranian threat (a belief not relevant to the issue of compromise with Hamas). Implications for the understanding of intergroup conflicts and peace making are discussed within the context of the role played by collective angst.

Institutionalization of Conflict: How Frame Constellations and Ritualized Identity Dynamics Perpetuate Intractable Intergroup Conflicts

We argue that there is utility in studying intractable conflicts using an institutional theory lens. If the frames and behaviors of conflicting groups become both predictable and routinely enacted and legitimated, then a contest of logics among actors and their interactive practices (rather than a single dominant logic and its attendant practices) may be what becomes institutionalized within a field. We study framing of three environmental conflicts to investigate this premise.

Humiliation and the Inertia Effect: Implications for Understanding Violence and Compromise in Intractable Intergroup Conflicts

AbstractWe investigated the influence of humiliation on inter-group conflict in three studies of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza. We demonstrate that experienced humiliation produces an inertia effect; a tendency towards inaction that suppresses rebellious or violent action but which paradoxically also suppresses support for acts of inter-group compromise. In Study 1, Palestinians who felt more humiliated by the Israeli occupation were less likely to support suicide attacks against Israelis. In Study 2, priming Palestinians with a humiliating experience caused fewer expressions of joy when subsequently hearing about suicide attacks. In Study 3, Palestinians who felt more humiliated by peace deals were less likely to support those deals, while Israeli symbolic compromises that decreased feelings of humiliation increased support for the same deals. While the experience of humiliation does not seem to contribute to political violence, it does seem to suppress support for conflict resolution.

Promoting Tractability in South Africa and Israel/Palestine

This article examines two cases of intractable intergroup conflict in which a process of “semiofficial talks” led adversaries to direct, official negotiation. It adopts a typological approach to specify the variables—in terms of the status of participants in the talks, the status of the third party, the objectives of the intervention, and the form of dialogue— that distinguish semiofficial talks from other forms of diplomacy. It analyzes why adversary leaders sought negotiated settlements and draws on oral histories and narrative accounts from participants in two cases of semiofficial talks, as well as on documented minutes of the meetings themselves, to trace the causal pathways by which such talks contributed to conflict resolution. Analysis of semiofficial talks in South Africa and Israel/Palestine permits an inductive approach to theory building regarding the particular political circumstances in which this type of conflict resolution initiative may be effective.

Promoting Coexistence by Means of Conflict Education: The MACBE Model

This article presents a conflict education program designed to restore relationships among adversaries experiencing protracted, seemingly intractable intergroup conflict. It is designed on the basis of a systems model. The underlying assumption is that breaking the escalation cycle and ameliorating the adversaries' relationships requires a comprehensive intervention. Consequently, the curriculum imparts knowledge about conflict dynamics and teaches constructive conflict resolution skills, enhancing the probability of behavior and attitude change. The program is deemed relevant to efforts of improving Arab‐Jewish relations in Israel. Implementation of the intervention requires ample resources, cooperation of local communities, and forbearance of program initiators and participants, which rarely exist in tandem. Nonetheless, even partial implementation can contribute to peaceful coexistence of Arabs and Jews.

From Intractable Conflict Through Conflict Resolution To Reconciliation: Psychological Analysis

Intractable intergroup conflicts require the formation of a conflictive ethos that enables a society to adapt to the conflict situation, survive the stressful period, and struggle successfully with the adversary. The formal termination of such a conflict begins with the elimination of the perceived incompatibility between the opposing parties through negotiation by their representatives—that is, a conflict resolution process. But this is only part of the long‐term reconciliation process, which requires the formation of peaceful relations based on mutual trust and acceptance, cooperation, and consideration of mutual needs. The psychological aspect of reconciliation requires a change in the conflictive ethos, especially with respect to societal beliefs about group goals, about the adversary group, about the ingroup, about intergroup relations, and about the nature of peace. In essence, psychological reconciliation requires the formation of an ethos of peace, but this is extremely difficult in cases of intractable conflict. Political psychologists can and should work to improve the state of knowledge about reconciliation,which until now has received much less attention than conflict resolution.