In-between group membership within intergroup conflicts: The case of Druze in Israel.

In-between groups encompass individuals who simultaneously belong to social categories that are often seen as mutually exclusive in addition to maintaining their distinct group identity. The current paper sheds light on how members of in-between groups manage their relations within intergroup conflicts. Three studies were conducted among the Druze minority in Israel, a group that is ethnically Arab and shares the Arab identity with the Arab-Palestinian minority in Israel and simultaneously identifies as Israeli. In Study 1 (N = 300), we found that identification as Druze was positively associated with the identification as Arab and Israeli. In Study 2, we examined Druze's endorsement of conflict narratives compared to Jewish-Israeli and Palestinian citizens (N = 271). While the latter participants endorsed their ingroup narrative more than the outgroup narrative, Druze participants endorsed both narratives equally. In Study 3, we tested Druze's solidarity with the Palestinian minority against the 2018 Nation-State Law. We found that overall, Druze participants (N = 568) endorsed more inclusive amendments that benefited the Druze and Palestinians than exclusive amendments that benefited the Druze only. In all studies, we tested the role of identification with the rival groups. We discuss these findings and suggest possible underlying mechanisms.

Conceiving one's national group as transgenerational: Effects on attitudes towards 'foreign' and diaspora migrants.

The current paper presents three studies, which suggest that perceiving one's nation as transgenerational (TG) is related to a differentiation in the evaluation of ethnically German diaspora migrants and ethnically non-German ('foreign') migrants. First, we find that unlike 'classical' concepts such as right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), and hierarchic self-interest (HSI), TG explains differences in derogatory sentiments expressed towards diaspora and 'foreign' migrants. Second, TG is differentially related to positive emotions and behavioral intentions expressed towards these two groups of migrants. Lastly, results indicate that people who perceive the ingroup as TG require 'foreign' migrants to fulfill more criteria that make them eligible for citizenship and are thereby more exclusionist than people who include only the current generation into their concept of national identity. The social implications of these findings in face of the so-called refugee crisis in Germany and the wider European Union are discussed.

Observer perceptions of the justifiability of the actions of nations in conflict: The relative importance of conveying national vulnerability versus strength.

Because the underdog in a conflict typically gains the support of observers, nations will often adopt a narrative that persuades both their domestic following and international allies that they are the true victim in the conflict. Three survey studies were conducted to assess the perceptions of citizens of a third-party observer nation (Canada) in relation to two nations in conflict that differ in their historical persecution, namely the U.S. and Israel. Perceptions of the vulnerability of their safety and survival, and their strength to protect themselves against their opponents were hypothesized to mediate differences in the perceived justification for each nation's conflict actions. Study 1 (N = 91) supported this mediational model, with the U.S. seen as less vulnerable and more powerful than Israel, and perceptions of vulnerability accounting for differences in the justifiability of their respective conflict actions. Study 2 (N = 315) further demonstrated a moderating effect of Canadians' shared identity with the nations in conflict; only at lower levels of a shared identity was Israel perceived to be more vulnerable and the mediated relation with the perceived justifiability of its conflict actions retained. Study 3 was conducted 10 years later (2018), administering measures to an independent sample of Canadian participants (N = 300). Canadians were found to be significantly less likely to share a common identity with Americans than previously; once again, the mediating role of the perceived vulnerability of the nations in conflict and the justifiability of their actions was conditional on shared identification. The findings contribute to understanding influences on the credibility of victim claims by nations in conflict, as well as implications for how their actions are construed by citizens of a third-party observer nation.

For the Sake of the Eternal Group: Perceiving the Group as Trans-Generational and Endurance of Ingroup Suffering.

We introduce the distinction between perceiving the group as Intra-Generational (IG; including only the present generation of group members) and Trans-Generational (TG; including all past, present, and future generations of the group). In four studies ( N = 1,265) administered to Jewish Israeli, Palestinian Israeli, American, and Swedish samples, we demonstrate that a tendency to perceive the group as TG is related to willingness to endure ingroup suffering and that this relationship is mediated by the degree to which the interest of the group as a whole is given primacy over the interest of the group as a collection of group members (Primacy of Interest). Furthermore, experimentally raising the salience of the group as TG leads to increased willingness to endure ingroup suffering as compared with raising the salience of the group as IG, and the effect of the TG salience manipulation is mediated by Primacy of Interest.

The Shadows of the Past: Effects of Historical Group Trauma on Current Intergroup Conflicts.

We examined associations between two orientations based on historical group trauma, a form of enduring group victimhood (Perpetual Ingroup Victimhood Orientation [PIVO]) and the belief that one's group might itself become a victimizer (Fear of Victimizing [FOV]), and attitudes, cognitions, and emotions related to intergroup conflicts. PIVO was positively and FOV was negatively related to aggressive attitudes and emotions toward the outgroup (Studies 1a-1c, Israeli-Palestinian conflict), and to the attribution of responsibility for a series of hostilities to the outgroup (Study 3, Israeli-Palestinian conflict). PIVO was negatively and FOV positively related to support for forgiveness and reconciliation (Study 2, Northern Ireland conflict). In Experimental Study 4, FOV predicted greater accuracy in remembering harm, regardless of victims' group identity, whereas PIVO was associated with reduced accuracy only when victims were Palestinians (outgroup members). Taken together, these findings indicate that both orientations have a significant impact on intergroup conflicts and their resolution.

The paradox of group-based guilt: modes of national identification, conflict vehemence, and reactions to the in-group's moral violations.

The authors examined the relationships between 2 modes of national identification (attachment to the in-group and the in-group's glorification) and reactions to the in-group's moral violations among Israeli students. Data were collected during a period of relative calm in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well as during a period of great intensification of this conflict. As expected, in Study 1, the 2 modes of identification had contrasting relationships with group-based guilt: Attachment was positively related whereas glorification was negatively related to group-based guilt for in-group's past infractions. Glorification suppressed the attachment effect but not vice versa. Both relationships were mediated by the use of exonerating cognitions. In Study 2, group-based guilt for the in-group's current wrongdoings was increased by priming critical rather than conventional attachment to the in-group, suggesting a causal effect of mode of identification on the experience of negative group-based emotions.

When standards are wide of the mark: nonselective superiority and inferiority biases in comparative judgments of objects and concepts.

People are frequently required to judge how particular group members measure up against others in their group. According to the local-comparisons-general-standards (LOGE) approach, in these member-to-group comparisons, people fail to use the normatively appropriate local (group) standard and are infelicitously affected by a more general standard (involving instances from outside the judged group). Within positive groups, target group members are judged superior to the other members of the group, and within negative groups, inferior. To date, these nonselective superiority and inferiority biases have been demonstrated solely in judgments about human beings. In 6 experiments, nonselective biases were found in perceptual, affective, and cognitive judgments of nonhuman targets, objects, and concepts, thus supporting a cognitive rather than a social account.