Perceived respect from the adversary group can improve intergroup attitudes in a context of intractable conflict.

Respect has been found to play a crucial role in human relationships including intergroup relations. Its presence has a significant positive influence in shaping the character of all relationship interactions. In intractable violent conflicts, there is almost no space for gestures of respect between adversarial parties, and the prevailing phenomenon is a mutual disrespect that fuels the conflict. This study examines a novel and challenging intervention that aims to induce in laboratory experiments, for the first time, perceptions of respect from adversary group members in the context of intractable intergroup conflict. In addition, this research examines the effect of perceived respect from the adversary on attitudes and perceptions towards the adversary group and the conflict. In three experimental studies (N = 1261) in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we manipulated expressions of respect from the Palestinian adversary group members and presented them to Jewish Israelis. Results revealed that, a group involved in a prolonged violent conflict may perceive respect from its adversary outgroup, and the perceived respect from the adversary in turn predicts improvement in attitudes and perceptions towards the adversary group and the conflict. These findings underline the important role of respect in intergroup conflict and its role in mitigating the conflict.

Children's biased preference for information about in- and out-groups.

Children's intergroup attitudes arguably reflect different construals of in- and out-groups, whereby the former are viewed as composed of unique individuals and the latter of homogeneous members. In three studies, we investigated the scope of information (individual vs. category) Jewish-Israeli 5- and 8-year-olds prefer to receive about "real" in-group ("Jews") and out-group members ("Arabs" and "Scots") (Study 1, N = 64); the scope of information Jewish and Arab Israeli 8-year-olds prefer to receive about minimal in- and out-groups (Study 2, N = 64); and how providing such information affects children's intergroup attitudes (Study 3, N = 96). The main findings were that (a) 8-year-olds requested category information more about out-groups than in-groups, and vice-versa regarding individual information-for both, "real" and minimal groups, and (b) providing individual information about a "conflict" out-group reduced attitudinal biases. These findings highlight children's differential construal of in- and out-groups and suggest ways for remedying biases toward out-groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Young Children in Intractable Conflicts: The Israeli Case.

The article examines the political socialization of young Jewish-Israeli children who live under the Israeli-Palestinian intractable conflict. It proposes arguments and presents empirical evidence to suggest that the way in which political socialization of young children happens in this context contributes to the development of conflict-supporting narratives of ethos of conflict and collective memory by the youngest generation. As a result, the conflict solidifies adherence to these narratives in adulthood, thereby serving as a major obstacle to the processes of peace-making and peace-building. Specifically, as evidence for showing how the political socialization works in Israel, a series of studies conducted in Israeli kindergartens and elementary schools are presented. These studies recount the contents acquired by young children, as well as contents delivered by teachers, related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This indicates the serious consequences of acquiring conflict-supporting narratives at an early age in societies involved in intractable conflict.

Overcoming the barrier of narrative adherence in conflicts through awareness of the psychological bias of naïve realism.

One significant socio-psychological barrier for peaceful resolution of conflicts is each party's adherence to its own collective narrative. We hypothesized that raising awareness to the psychological bias of naïve realism and its identification in oneself would provide a path to overcoming this barrier, thus increasing openness to the adversary's narrative. We conducted three experimental studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Studies 1 and 2, conducted among Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Israelis, respectively, revealed that participants with hawkish political ideology reported greater openness to the adversary's narrative when they were made aware of naïve realism bias. Study 3 revealed that hawkish participants at the baseline adhered to the ingroup narrative and resisted the adversary's narrative more than dovish participants. They were also more able to identify the bias in themselves upon learning about it. This identification may explain why the manipulation led to bias correction only among hawkish participants.