Search

Reconciliation research revealed that the institutional acknowledgement of the group's sufferings does not always improve fractured intergroup relations. To get a better understanding of this issue, through a field experiment we explored whether its effectiveness could be dependent on the collective background against which it is provided. That is, we involved citizens (N = 975) from societies entrapped in recent or ongoing conflicts (i.e., Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Palestinian, Israel) and examined the effects of the institutional acknowledgement of a chosen trauma when its denial by the majority (vs. minority) of outgroup members was made salient. Results revealed that the salience of the acknowledgement was effective in increasing the trust towards outgroup representatives. Instead, such an acknowledgement was ineffective in improving people's willingness to reconcile and hope for change, which was mainly dependent on the levels of denial by outgroup members. However, for these latter variables, relevant differences emerged depending on the conflictual versus post‐conflictual context. Implications of our findings for intergroup reconciliation are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the association between intergroup contact and academic performance at university among minority students in a context with a segregated pre-university school system. Study 1 tested whether participation in a group dynamics course, which involves intimate interpersonal contact between Israeli Arab (n = 125) and Jewish students, was associated with better grade point average (GPA). As expected, Arab students who participated in the course had a higher GPA than those who did not, even when controlling for pre-university achievements. The corresponding difference among Jews was substantially smaller. Study 2 (N = 90), a longitudinal study, revealed that the quality of contact with Jewish students at university was associated with Arab students' subsequent higher GPA, even when controlling for pre-university contact, proxies of academic achievements, and perceptions of intergroup relations. The quality of contact with Jewish students was also associated with Arab students' sense of academic belonging. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to explore stigma related to breast cancer among Druze women and men and identify factors associated with low screening rates among Druze women. A sample of 270 Druze women and men completed an online questionnaire adapted to detect breast cancer stigma and internalized breast cancer stigma. Independent samples t -test results showed higher scores for men compared to women, at a significant level, on four of the Breast Cancer Stigma scales: awkwardness, avoidance, policy opposition, and personal responsibility. Independent samples t -test results also showed higher scores for men compared to women, at a significant level, on two of the Internalized Breast Cancer Stigma scales: stereotype endorsement and discrimination experience. These results suggest a need for psychoeducation about breast cancer screening for minority groups such as the Druze, with male partners of women who are diagnosed with breast cancer being the main target recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrating research on social identity processes and helping relations, the authors proposed that low-status group members who are high identifiers will be unwilling to receive help from the high-status group when status relations are perceived as unstable and help is dependency-oriented. The first experiment, a minimal group experiment, found negative reactions to help from a high-status outgroup when status relations were unstable. The 2nd and 3rd experiments, which used real groups of Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews, replicated this finding and showed that high identifiers were less receptive to help from the high-status outgroup than low identifiers. The 4th experiment, a help-seeking experiment with real groups of competing high schools, found that the least amount of help was sought from a high-status group by high identifiers when status relations were perceived as unstable and help was dependency-oriented. Theoretical and applied implications are discussed. Keywords: reactions to help, help-seeking, perceived status stability, ingroup identification, dependency-/autonomy-oriented help

We theorised that competitive victimhood—the tendency to see one's ingroup as having suffered more than the outgroup as a result of a prolonged conflict—may function strategically as a psychological mechanism to justify violent actions against the outgroup under high (vs. low) realistic threat. Focusing on the Jewish Israeli perspective in the Israeli‒Palestinian conflict, the present study supports this argument by demonstrating the positive relationship between competitive victimhood and justifying both direct and structural violence against Palestinians following high (vs. low) realistic threat. Theoretical and applied implications for conflict resolution are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three studies investigated the effect of intergroup contact and social identification on social change among three advantaged groups in Cyprus, Romania, and Israel. In Study 1 (n = 340, Turkish Cypriots), intergroup contact with disadvantaged immigrant Turks positively predicted endorsement of their social change motivations directly, and via intergroup trust and perspective-taking indirectly. In Study 2 (n = 200, Romanians), contact with the ethnic minority Hungarians positively predicted endorsement of their social change motivations via intergroup trust, perspective-taking, and intergroup anxiety, while ingroup identification negatively predicted endorsement of Hungarian ethnic minority's collective action tendencies via perspective-taking and anxiety. In Study 3 (n = 240, Israeli Jews), intergroup contact positively predicted, while ingroup identification negatively predicted, endorsement of disadvantaged Israeli Palestinian citizens' social change motivations via perspective-taking, anxiety, and trust. Across three studies, results show that intergroup contact led the advantaged groups to attitudinally support social change motivations of the disadvantaged outgroups through increased trust, perspective-taking, and reduced anxiety, whereas ingroup identification weakened their intention to support social change motivations via perspective-taking and intergroup anxiety in Study 2, and via intergroup trust, perspective-taking, and intergroup anxiety in Study 3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]