This paper reports on research addressing the question of what role, if any, the existence and location of victimhood in problem representations of Israelis and Palestinians plays in their ability to reach compromise in experimental situations. It builds on the work of Sylvan and Thorson (1992) and Sylvan and Voss (1998) in studying problem representation: how options get specified in foreign policy and other political decisions. It also builds on the work of such scholars as Rouhana and Bar Tal (1998), Doosje et al., (1998), and Nadler and Leviatan (in press) who examine the ways in which a collective sense of victimhood exerts its effects upon the group members' view of themselves, their perceptions and feelings towards their adversaries, and their willingness to move towards co-existence with them. The research reported begins from the assumption that victimhood is a socially constructed aspect of problem representation, in the sense that external events and situational forces can increase the salience of group members' sense of victimhood, or decrease it. Specifically, this research project uses both experimental analysis and textual and events data analysis to address the hypothesis that the combination of high in-group commitment with salient ingroup victimhood will produce the least empathy to the needs of the other side, and have adverse effects on inter group relations. For Israeli subjects, the results indicate that among high in-group commitment Israelis there were no differences on measures of willingness for reconciliation as a function of induction of victimhood. However, Israelis characterized as being low in their commitment to the in-group were affected by the induction of victimhood. Participants who had been exposed to victimization information showed lower levels of willingness for reconciliation with Palestinians than low-commitment Israelis in the control condition who had not been exposed to similar information. Similar patterns characterized subjects' ratings of empathy for Palestinian suffering. The "real world" textual/events data analysis find cross-community impacts for which we have not yet been able to test experimentally, since we have examined only Israeli subjects thus far. This venue of analysis also tells us that the psychological factors we have examined seem to have more impact on Palestinian actions than on those of Israelis. Expressed goals seem to be of roughly equal importance to identity and victimization in this part of our analysis. Identity has distinct impacts, mostly cross community. Victimization, on the other hand, only garners one significant relationship, but it is worth emphasizing: When Israeli leaders exude victimhood (of Israelis) in their speech, Palestinians tend to act more conflictually in the subsequent month. American subjects are also studied, and this is reported in the appendices. These findings suggest that priming of Collective Victimization focuses the attention of group members on their sufferings and denies them the empathy and openness for the sufferings of others. That effect occurs when the level of Identification with the Ingroup is low. It seems that for them, the initial feelings of empathy for the other side and their willingness to reconcile with it are blocked by the induction of victimhood. Put differently, in the context of inter-nation conflict people who are highly committed to the in-group are in a relatively constant state of victimhood. Therefore, making victimization salient has no effect of their conflict-related judgments and perceptions. Results of experiments involving American subjects included finding that the identity manipulation produced a dramatic impact on subjects' assessment of both Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs, but very little impact on their assessment of what the future would bring. This is consistent with our central proposition.… [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]