Author Correction: A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size-and at times, direction-of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change-willingness to work in solidarity- that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members.

When the world collapses: changed worldview and social reconstruction in a traumatized community.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic experience can affect the individual's basic beliefs about the world as a predictable and safe place. One of the cornerstones in recovery from trauma is reestablishment of safety, connectedness, and the shattered schema of a worldview. OBJECTIVE: This study explored the role of negatively changed worldview in the relationship between war-related traumatization and readiness for social reconstruction of intergroup relations in a post-conflict community measured by three processes: intergroup rapprochement, rebuilding trust, and need for apology. It was hypothesized that more traumatized people are less supportive of social reconstruction and that this relationship is mediated by the changed worldview. METHOD: The study included a community random sample of 333 adults in the city of Vukovar, Croatia, that was most devastated during the 1991-1995 war. Six instruments were administered: Stressful Events Scale, Impact of Event Scale-Revised, Changed Worldview Scale, and three scales measuring the post-conflict social reconstruction processes: Intergroup Rapprochement, Intergroup Trust and Need for Apology. RESULTS: Mediation analyses showed that the worldview change fully mediated between traumatization and all three aspects of social reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: In a population exposed to war traumatization the worldview change mediates post-conflict social recovery of community relations.

Predictors of collective guilt after the violent conflict.

After a violent conflict many post-conflict communities remain ethnically divided and normalization of the inter-group relations is hindered not only by in-group norms and interpretation of past events, but also by collective guilt. Although collective guilt has proved to be an important indicator of post-conflict social repair, more research is needed to define its predictors. This study, conducted in an ethnically divided community, confirmed that collective guilt acceptance and collective guilt assignment in our sample are typical for the post-conflict pattern of intergroup relations--people readily assign guilt to the outgroup but are unwilling to accept the guilt of their in-group. This suggests that the process of community social reconstruction has not considerably progressed. Our findings also suggest that the two aspects of collective guilt--assignment and acceptance--are predicted by similar sets of variables. Both collective guilt assignment and collective guilt acceptance are influenced by identification with in-group which influence is fully or partially mediated with the justification of the in-group's wrongdoings. This indicates that in the post-conflict setting relationship towards the in-group may be more important for experiencing collective guilt than the relationship towards the out-group. Relationship towards out-group, although not crucial, also plays a role in experiencing collective guilt. Specifically, both affect towards and cognitions about out-group members predict collective guilt assignment (with cognition being stronger predictor than positive affect), whereas only (absence of) positive affect predicts acceptance of collective guilt and the cognitive aspect is not predictive.