Violent Intergroup Conflict Research Articles

Is Exposure to Conflict‐Related Violence Associated With Less Intergroup Empathy? The Moderating Role of Ideology

ABSTRACTExposure to conflict‐related violence is one of the most harmful consequences of living amidst a violent intergroup conflict. While its potential significance is profound, the impact of exposure to conflict‐related violence on intergroup empathy remains largely unexplored. The current paper aims to address this gap by proposing political ideology as a potential moderator of the exposure‐empathy link. Three studies conducted among Jewish‐Israeli participants reveal an interactive effect of exposure to conflict‐related violence and political ideology on intergroup empathy. In Study 1, high (vs. low) exposure to conflict‐related violence was associated with decreased empathy among rightists—but increased empathy among leftists—towards individual outgroup members. In Study 2, political ideology also moderated the exposure‐empathy relationship: Bereaved (vs. non‐bereaved) rightists exhibited significantly less intergroup empathy towards both an individual bereaved outgroup member and the outgroup as a whole, an effect not found among leftists. Study 3 revealed a similar, albeit marginally significant, interactive effect of exposure to conflict‐related violence and political ideology on empathy towards individuals living in a different violent conflict. Finally, an internal meta‐analysis provided further, more robust evidence for these effects. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of the findings and suggest future directions for research on this important issue.

Perception of perpetrators’ acknowledgement of victimhood increases rather than decreases support for reconciliation with another victim group

ABSTRACT Centuries of colonial oppression in the collective memory of native Indonesians perpetuated their perception as victims of historical injustice, and left behind violent intergroup conflicts. We investigated how perceived acknowledgement of victimhood by perpetrators and another victim group would predict support for reconciliation with Chinese Indonesians through acknowledgement of ingroup wrongdoing and reduced prejudice. We conducted an online survey among native Indonesians (N = 333) and identified an indirect relationship between perceived acknowledgement of victimhood by Dutch colonizers and support for reconciliation with Chinese Indonesians via the mediating effect of prejudice. However, contrary to expectations, participants with higher levels of perceived acknowledgement of victimhood by perpetrators were more likely to show prejudice, which in turn predicted lower support for reconciliation. Acknowledgement of ingroup wrongdoing was not a statistically significant mediator. This study suggests that, in some cases, acknowledgement of victimhood by the perpetrator group may be primarily taken as a confirmation of victimhood rather than a direct path towards a more peaceful co-existence with other groups.

A multi-dimensional typology of allyship action in violent intergroup conflict settings: Differentiating actor, target, and type of action

ABSTRACT Despite an increase in social psychological research on allyship, less attention has been paid to allyship action in violent intergroup conflict settings. In this contribution, first, we introduce a multi-dimensional typology of allyship action in such settings by differentiating allyship based on the a) actors (i.e. individuals, collectives, and societies), b) targets (i.e. victim- vs perpetrator-focused), and c) types of those actions (i.e. low- vs high-cost action). Second, we mostly draw on examples from our own research programmes and where relevant from global conflicts and previous studies on allyship to show the applicability of the proposed typology. Finally, we discuss theoretical and practical implications, reflect on the limitations of past studies and suggest directions to address research gaps. Our typology contributes to the collective action and intergroup conflict literatures by showing how allyship action has been studied in conflict settings andthe similarities and differences between conflict and non-conflict settings.

Election results can decrease intergroup threat and through that positively affect intergroup relations

AbstractPrevious research has established that intergroup threat is pivotal to intergroup relations in divided societies. We used the Northern Ireland Assembly Elections in 2022 as a unique chance to investigate how elections can affect feelings of threat and intergroup relations between communities with a history of violent intergroup conflict. We argued that because of their conflicting goals, if Sinn Féin (i.e., a Republican party that promotes a united Ireland) gains more votes than the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP, i.e., a party promoting Northern Ireland's union with the United Kingdom), it would threaten DUP supporters and vice versa. We assessed whether participants supported Sinn Féin or DUP relatively to each other, intergroup threat, and intergroup bias before and after the elections (N = 285). Following an election outcome where Sinn Féin gained more votes than DUP, Sinn Féin supporters showed decreased feelings of threat which in turn decreased their intergroup bias. DUP supporters, the party that received fewer votes, showed no changes in their feelings of threat or intergroup bias. This research highlights how electoral results affect intergroup relations in postconflict societies.

The promise and limits of moral exemplars for intergroup conflict resolution and reconciliation

AbstractStories about moral exemplars can provide crucial information about the moral heterogeneity of social groups involved in the conflict. This article addresses the role of moral exemplars narratives in changing perceptions of violent historic intergroup conflicts. We propose that two central outcomes of such interventions make them potentially an effective approach for improving intergroup relations in situations of violent intergroup conflict: (1) facilitation of intergroup contact and (2) increasing reconciliatory attitudes. Although most of the existing research on moral exemplars is focused on their positive outcomes, we suggest that moral exemplars might also have destructive consequences: they could be misused to gain an advantage in an intergroup conflict and might stress the immorality of the non‐helping majority. By integrating these two possibilities, we propose a curvilinear model of the effects of moral exemplars narratives in post‐conflict reconciliation and resolution of violent conflicts.

The Role of Personal Centrality of Ingroup Victimhood in Intergroup Relations and Political Agenda in Northern Ireland

Even though the violent conflicts during the Troubles officially ended decades ago, the memories of violence and division between Catholics and Protestants linger in Northern Ireland. We argue that the personal centrality of collective victimhood, which is formed by the memory and perception of past and ongoing victimization, may play an important role in people's attitudes in postconflict societies. The current study investigated both the antecedents and outcomes of the personal centrality of ingroup victimhood in Northern Ireland and examined the vital role it plays in the aftermath of a violent intergroup conflict among Catholics and Protestants. The results demonstrated that ongoing experiences of victimization such as personal and group‐level discrimination and memories of personal and close others' suffering are strongly related to people's personal centrality of ingroup victimhood. The centrality of ingroup victimhood, in turn, predicted various strategies for intergroup interaction and policy preferences such as collective action, support for nonviolence, and attitudes toward reunification of Ireland, which were moderated by group membership. The findings provide empirical evidence for the role of the centrality of ingroup victimhood as a link between experiences of victimization and intergroup interactions as well as policy preferences.

Effect of group status and conflict on national identity: Evidence from the Brexit referendum in Northern Ireland

National identity remains one of the most potent forces in global politics, yet surprisingly little is known about processes of national identity formation and change. This article argues that national identity preferences are susceptible to fluctuations in group status and distance but constrained by conflict experience and socialization. Integrating research on conflict socialization with social identity theory, we hypothesize that growing up during violent intergroup conflict socializes individuals into identities and attitudes which are durable to significant changes. Conversely, the identity preferences of those who grow up during relative peace are more malleable and likely to change due to significant events which affect perception of group identities. Exploiting the unique political context in Northern Ireland, where individuals can legally choose to identify as Irish, British, or both, we use a diff-in-diff approach to estimate national identity preferences of individuals before and after the EU referendum. The results show that 20% of Protestants who did not experience conflict shifted from British towards Irish identity after the referendum. However, for those who experienced violent intergroup conflict, there is a ‘durable distance’ between groups which constrains identity change irrespective of fluctuations in status. The results have important implications for our understanding of national identity, particularly in post-conflict societies.

Virtual reality-based conflict resolution: The impact of immersive 360° video on changing view points and moral judgment in the context of violent intergroup conflict

We present an experimental study conducted in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict that examined the effect of immersive 360° video on inducing a more critical perception of the ingroup’s actions in the conflict. An immersive experience of a simulated conflict scenario filmed from the outgroup’s point of view led to the judgment of the ingroup actors’ behavior as less moral and less justified compared to watching the same scenario as a two-dimensional video. This effect was not mediated through increased outgroup perspective-taking and empathy but through higher levels of hostile emotions toward the ingroup actors, which in turn were influenced by an increased sense of presence and engagement in the immersive experience. These findings provide initial evidence for the still widely unexplored potential of virtual reality as a new method for conflict resolution.

Indirect reciprocity and tradeoff paradigms in the wake of violent intergroup conflict

Intergroup interaction can be hindered by legacies of conflict and group biases. Many studies have looked at intergroup attitudes and pro-sociality in the wake of intergroup conflict, but few have explicitly studied how the group affiliation of another person affects the willingness to interact economically, especially when the interactions concern contested issues. In this study, I investigate the effect of group affiliation on the willingness to engage in economic interactions with others among individuals exposed to violent intergroup conflict, using a sample of refugees from the conflicts in Syria and Iraq. Based on the theory of indirect reciprocity, it is predicted that the tradeoff paradigms, that is, the willingness to engage in economic transactions with another individual, will depend on previous actions of other members of that individual's group. Participants tended to adopt a communal sharing tradeoff paradigm with ingroup members, and they tended to adopt a market pricing paradigm with outgroup members. However, this was the case only for those who reported that outgroup members had taken actions to harm them or their family in the conflict. For those who reported being harmed by members of the ingroup, a market pricing paradigm was employed also with ingroup members. The results suggest that group biases and indirect reciprocity after violent conflict do not necessarily arise from group identities alone, but as a function of past interactions with outgroup members.

Intergroup conflict runs in the family: Parental social attitudes and political ideology predict the ethos of conflict in their offspring

Ethos of Conflict (EOC) represents a set of societal beliefs regarding violent intergroup conflict. One of the important topic in intergroup conflict research is the political socialization of beliefs regarding conflict ? the intergenerational transmission of the conflict-related beliefs from parents to children. However, the empirical data on this process is still very scarce. This is why the main goal of the present research was to examine the associations between EOC beliefs between the parents and their offspring; furthermore, we analyzed which of the parental social attitudes and political ideology beliefs predict EOS in their offspring. The research participants were family members of Serbian nationality (Ntotal=253; 102 families). We examined EOC in the context of the conflict between Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo. The data revealed high correlation in EOC between parents and their children. Furthermore, parental traditional religiousness, materialistic ethnocentrism, high conservative, and low liberal political ideology predicted EOC in the offspring. The research findings showed that parental attitudes can indeed be a major source of EOC in their children. Results specified that religious, self-oriented and conservative parents have higher EOC themselves and tend to share beliefs about the conflict with their children to a higher extent. The results have a conceptual and practical implication for building reconciliation and peace

Feel Good or Do Good? A Valence–Function Framework for Understanding Emotions

Previous thinking has often categorized emotions as either pleasant or unpleasant or examined to what extent they are functional or dysfunctional. We suggest that researchers should consider the positivity or negativity of discrete emotions on both dimensions: subjective feelings and constructiveness of outcomes. We discuss how, across contexts, a specific emotion can potentially be categorized differently within the framework. We further suggest that this approach is particularly useful in unique, complex contexts that involve clashes among goals, interests, or values, such as violent intergroup conflicts. Using this context, we demonstrate how emotions that feel good to people can lead to behaviors and attitudes that sustain violence and thwart conflict resolution, whereas emotions that promote conflict resolution are often unpleasant. Such clashes may depend on the presence of embedded contextual factors, such as group membership and relative power. Thus, this framework will be useful for examining specific emotions while taking contextual factors into consideration. Finally, we examine several important questions stemming from our framework and suggest directions for future research.

The enemy's gaze: Immersive virtual environments enhance peace promoting attitudes and emotions in violent intergroup conflicts.

Perspective-taking is essential for improving intergroup relations. However, it is difficult to implement, especially in violent conflicts. Given that immersive virtual reality (VR) can simulate various points of view (POV), we examined whether it can lead to beneficial outcomes by promoting outgroup perspective-taking, even in armed conflicts. In two studies, Jewish-Israelis watched a 360° VR scene depicting an Israeli-Palestinian confrontation from different POVs–outgroup’s, ingroup’s while imagining outgroup perspective or ingroup’s without imagined perspective-taking. Participants immersed in the outgroup’s POV, but not those who imagined the outgroup’s perspective, perceived the Palestinians more positively than those immersed in the ingroup’s POV. Moreover, participants in the outgroup’s POV perceived the Palestinian population in general more favorably and judged a real-life ingroup transgression more strictly than those in the ingroup’s POV, even five months after VR intervention. Results suggest that VR can promote conflict resolution by enabling effective perspective-taking.

The Chain of Climate Change, Scarcity and Conflict in Global Politics.

To state that climate change and environment issues are becoming increasingly important in the realm of International Relations is an understatement. Mitigation and adaptation debates, strategies and mechanisms are all developed at the international level, often demonstrating the nuances of international politics and governance. The changes experienced in the environment have in many ways been identified as plausible causes of violent intergroup conflict. These changes include greenhouse-induced climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, degradation and loss of good agricultural land, degradation and removal of forests, depletion and pollution of fresh water supplies, and depletion of fisheries. The notion is that there is a complex linkage between environment, scarcity and conflict among competing groups in the international system. Policy makers, national and international actors, and academics are left in bewilderment as they sought to identify how conflict can be environmentally induced. However, some sectors believe that environment does not directly or exclusively causes violent conflicts rather they are a subset of the whole. It upon these contending issues that this study attempts to examine the relationship between environment, scarcity and conflict. And do in any way contemporary conflicts have direct linkages to scare resources as some circles of thought believe? The study also will identify contending issues of these chain of events – environment-scarcityconflict – that are prevailing discourse in the international system.

Neuroimaging 'will to fight' for sacred values: an empirical case study with supporters of an Al Qaeda associate.

Violent intergroup conflicts are often motivated by commitments to abstract ideals such as god or nation, so-called ‘sacred’ values that are insensitive to material trade-offs. There is scant knowledge of how the brain processes costly sacrifices for such cherished causes. We studied willingness to fight and die for sacred values using fMRI in Barcelona, Spain, among supporters of a radical Islamist group. We measured brain activity in radicalized individuals as they indicated their willingness to fight and die for sacred and non-sacred values, and as they reacted to peers' ratings for the same values. We observed diminished activity in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), inferior frontal gyrus, and parietal cortex while conveying willingness to fight and die for sacred relative to non-sacred values—regions that have previously been implicated in calculating costs and consequences. An overlapping region of the dlPFC was active when viewing conflicting ratings of sacred values from peers, to the extent participants were sensitive to peer influence, suggesting that it is possible to induce flexibility in the way people defend sacred values. Our results cohere with a view that ‘devoted actors’ motivated by an extreme commitment towards sacred values rely on distinctive neurocognitve processes that can be identified.

Life History in a Postconflict Society : Violent Intergroup Conflict Facilitates Fast Life-History Strategy.

Previous theoretical accounts have predicted that warfare and intergroup conflict are environmental factors that contribute to the emergence of a fast life-history strategy. However, this assumption has never been directly empirically tested. We examined youth who grew up in a territory that experienced violent intergroup conflict and compared them with a control group (N = 215) on various life-history measures: age of first sexual intercourse, mating behavior, desired timing of marriage and first reproduction and desired number of children. We also measured other characteristics (family dysfunction and economic poverty) to explore the congruence between them and exposure to conflict. Participants from the postconflict society showed indications of faster life-history strategy: greater mating effort, a tendency to marry and have their first child sooner, and a larger desired number of children. Furthermore, interactions between exposure to conflict and participants' sex were found: females from a postconflict society want to have their child earlier, and males have elevated short-term mating success. Finally, the exposure to violent conflict turned out to have congruent effects with economic poverty but not troublesome family relations. The findings are in accordance with life-history theory and show the adaptiveness of human behavior related to fitness optimization in hostile and dangerous environments.

Cues of Violent Intergroup Conflict Diminish Perceptions of Robotic Personhood

Convergent lines of evidence indicate that anthropomorphic robots are represented using neurocognitive mechanisms typically employed in social reasoning about other people. Relatedly, a growing literature documents that contexts of threat can exacerbate coalitional biases in social perceptions. Integrating these research programs, the present studies test whether cues of violent intergroup conflict modulate perceptions of the intelligence, emotional experience, or overall personhood of robots. In Studies 1 and 2, participants evaluated a large, bipedal all-terrain robot; in Study 3, participants evaluated a small, social robot with humanlike facial and vocal characteristics. Across all studies, cues of violent conflict caused significant decreases in perceived robotic personhood, and these shifts were mediated by parallel reductions in emotional connection with the robot (with no significant effects of threat on attributions of intelligence/skill). In addition, in Study 2, participants in the conflict condition estimated the large bipedal robot to be less effective in military combat, and this difference was mediated by the reduction in perceived robotic personhood. These results are discussed as they motivate future investigation into the links among threat, coalitional bias and human–robot interaction.

Bands of brothers and in-laws: Waorani warfare, marriage and alliance formation.

The root of modern human warfare lies in the lethal coalitionary violence of males in small-scale societies. However, there is a paucity of quantitative data concerning the form and function of coalitionary violence in this setting. Debates exist over how lethal coalitions are constituted, as well as the motivations and benefits for males to join such groups. Data from a lowland Amazonian population, the Waorani of Ecuador, illuminate three issues: (i) the degree to which raiding parties are composed of groups of fraternal kin as opposed to strategic alliances of actual or potential affinal kin; (ii) the extent to which individuals use pre-existing affinal ties to motivate others to participate in war or leverage warfare as a mechanism to create such ties; and (iii) the extent to which participation in raiding is driven by rewards associated with future marriage opportunities. Analyses demonstrate that Waorani raiding parties were composed of a mix of males who were potential affines, actual affines and fraternal kin, suggesting that men used pre-existing genetic, lineal and social kin ties for recruiting raid partners and used raiding as a venue to create novel social relationships. Furthermore, analyses demonstrate that males leveraged raiding alliances to achieve marriage opportunities for themselves as well as for their children. Overall, it appears that a complex set of motivations involving individual rewards, kin marriage opportunities, subtle coercion and the assessment of alliance strength promote violent intergroup conflict among the Waorani. These findings illustrate the complex inter-relationships among kin selection, coalition building and mating success in our species.

May God Guide Our Guns

The perceived support of supernatural agents has been historically, ethnographically, and theoretically linked with confidence in engaging in violent intergroup conflict. However, scant experimental investigations of such links have been reported to date, and the extant evidence derives largely from indirect laboratory methods of limited ecological validity. Here, we experimentally tested the hypothesis that perceived supernatural aid would heighten inclinations toward coalitional aggression using a realistic simulated coalitional combat paradigm: competitive team paintball. In a between-subjects design, US paintball players recruited for the study were experimentally primed with thoughts of supernatural support using a guided visualization exercise analogous to prayer, or with a control visualization of a nature scene. The participants then competed in a team paintball battle game modeled after “Capture the Flag.” Immediately before and after the battle, participants completed surveys assessing confidence in their coalitional and personal battle performance. Participants assessed their coalition’s prospects of victory and performance more positively after visualizing supernatural aid. Participants primed with supernatural support also reported inflated assessments of their own performance. Importantly, however, covarying increases in assessments of their overall coalition’s performance accounted for the latter effect. This study provided support for the hypothesis that perceived supernatural support can heighten both prospective confidence in coalitional victory and retrospective confidence in the combat performance of one’s team, while highlighting the role of competitive play in evoking the coalitional psychology of intergroup conflict. These results accord with and extend convergent prior findings derived from laboratory paradigms far removed from the experience of combat. Accordingly, the field study approach utilized here shows promise as a method for investigating coalitional battle dynamics in a realistic, experientially immersive manner.

Collaborative and competitive motivations uniquely impact infants' racial categorization

Abstract Human history has been plagued by violent inter-group conflicts. Such conflicts are arguably grounded on group biases – particularly, a tendency to favor ingroups over outgroups – manifested in adults, children, and infants. A question these findings prompt is what motivates social categorization? Here it is shown that priming 14-month-old infants ( N = 144) with collaborative or competitive interactions affects their capacity to form racial categories, and that this effect varies according to the gender of the exemplars being categorized. Specifically, whereas racial categorization of women was facilitated by collaboration, racial categorization of men was facilitated by competition. The presence of these differential effects in infancy is consistent with the idea that social categorization is driven by fundamental functions of group relations.

Spoils division rules shape aggression between natural groups.

Violent intergroup conflicts cause widespread harm; yet, throughout human history, destructive hostilities occur time and time again1,2. Benefits that are obtainable by victorious parties include territorial expansion, deterrence and ascendency in between-group resource competition3-6. Many of these are non-excludable goods that are available to all group members, whereas participation entails substantial individual risks and costs. Thus, a collective action problem emerges, raising the question why individuals participate in such campaigns at all7-9. Distinguishing offensive and defensive intergroup aggression provides a partial answer: defensive aggression is adaptive under many circumstances10-14. However, participation in offensive aggression, such as raids or wars of conquest, still requires an explanation. Here, we focus on one condition that is hypothesized to facilitate the emergence of offensive intergroup aggression: asymmetric division of a conflict's spoils may motivate those profiting from such inequality to initiate between-group aggression, even if doing so jeopardizes their group's welfare15-17. We test this hypothesis by manipulating how benefits among victors are shared in a contest experiment among three Ethiopian societies whose relations are either peaceful or violent. Under equal sharing, between-group hostility increased contest contributions. By contrast, unequal sharing prompted offensive contribution strategies in privileged participants, whereas disadvantaged participants resorted to defensive strategies, both irrespective of group relations.