Search

How does residing in the proximity of surveillance infrastructure—i.e., checkpoints, the separation barrier, and military installations—affect support for cooperative and confrontational forms of collective action? Cooperative actions involve engagement with outgroups to advance the ingroup cause (e.g., negotiations, joint actions, and peace movements), whereas confrontational actions involve unilateral tactics to weaken the outgroup (e.g., boycott, armed resistance). In the context of West Bank and Jerusalem, we combine geo‐coded data on the surveillance infrastructure with a representative survey of the adult population from 49 communities (N = 1,000). Our multilevel analyses show that surveillance does not affect support for confrontational actions but instead decreases support for cooperative actions. Moreover, we identify a new, community‐level mechanism whereby surveillance undermines cooperative actions through weakening inclusive norms that challenge dominant us‐versus‐them perspectives. These effects are empirically robust to various individual‐ and community‐level controls, as well as to the potential of reverse causality and residential self‐selection. Our findings illustrate how cooperative voices and the fabric of social communities become the first casualties of exposure to surveillance. They also speak to the importance of considering structural factors, with broader implications for the socio‐psychological study of collective action.

This article examines how Palestinians' intergroup contact experiences relate to their attitudes towards interactions with Israelis (i.e. normalization). We draw on four recent advances in intergroup contact literature. First, recent research indicates that positive contact can impede disadvantaged groups' motivation to challenge inequalities. Second, increased endorsement of normalization mediates this sedative effect of positive contact on motivation to resist in the West Bank. Third, negative contact has been related to increased motivation for social change. Fourth, institutions and societal norms shape the meaning of intergroup contact and its effect on intergroup relations. We hypothesize that negative experiences at checkpoints can act as reminders of institutionalized inequalities and thus attenuate sedative effects. Furthermore, we explore the contextual boundary conditions of such reminder effects. Analyses of cross‐sectional survey conducted among a representative sample ( N = 1,000) in the West Bank including Jerusalem showed that (1) positive intergroup contact related to normalization endorsement (sedative effect), (2) negative intergroup contact related to decreased normalization endorsement (mobilizing effect), and (3) negative contact experiences (at checkpoints) canceled out the effect of positive contact (reminder effect), but only in Jerusalem. Results suggest that the impacts of intergroup contact need to be interpreted in light of institutionalized forms of group inequality and segregation., info:eu-repo/semantics/published