Disadvantaged group members are prouder of their group when using the language of the dominant group compared to their native language.

In ethnically and linguistically diverse societies, disadvantaged groups often face pressures to acquire and speak the advantaged group's language to achieve social inclusion and economic mobility. This work investigates how using the advantaged group's language affects disadvantaged group members' in-group pride and collective self-esteem, relative to using their native language. Across six experimental studies involving Palestinian citizens of Israel (total N = 1,348), we test two competing hypotheses: Disadvantaged group members may experience greater in-group pride when using a) their native language, due to its emotional significance (the nativity hypothesis), or b) the language of the advantaged group, due to activation of habituated compensatory responses to dominance relations (the identity enhancement hypothesis). We found that respondents reported significantly higher in-group pride when responding to a Hebrew survey when compared to performing the same activity in Arabic (Studies 1a and 1b), regardless of whether the researchers administering the survey were identified as Jewish or Arab (Studies 2a and 2b). Study 3 replicated this effect while employing the "bogus pipeline" technique, suggesting the pride expression was authentic, not merely driven by social desirability. Finally, Study 4 (pre-registered) examined additional measures of positive regard for the in-group, finding that participants described their group more positively in an attribute selection task, and reported greater collective self-esteem, when surveyed in Hebrew, rather than in Arabic. Taken together, these findings suggest that language use influences disadvantaged group members' perceptions and feelings concerning their group when those languages are associated with relative position in an intergroup hierarchy.

Digital guided self-help for eating disorders: thematic analysis of participant text messages to coaches.

Digital guided self-help for eating disorders (GSH-ED) can reduce treatment disparities. Understanding program participants' interests throughout the program can help adapt programs to the service users' needs. Participants were 383 college students receiving a digital GSH-ED, who were each assigned a coach to help them better utilize the intervention through text correspondence. A thematic and affective analysis of the texts participants had sent found they primarily focused on: strategies for changing their ED-related cognitions, behaviors, and relationships; describing symptoms without expressing an active endeavor to change; and participants' relationship with their coach. Most texts also expressed affect, demonstrating emotional engagement with the intervention. Findings suggest that participants in GSH-ED demonstrate high involvement with the intervention, and discuss topics that are similar to those reported in clinician-facilitated interventions. The themes discussed by digital program participants can inform future iterations of GSH-ED, thereby increasing scalability and accessibility of digital evidence-based ED interventions.

The Informative Process Model as a New Intervention for Attitude Change in Intractable Conflicts: Theory and Empirical Evidence.

Peacemaking is especially challenging in situations of intractable conflict. Collective narratives in this context contribute to coping with challenges societies face, but also fuel conflict continuation. We introduce the Informative Process Model (IPM), proposing that informing individuals about the socio-psychological processes through which conflict-supporting narratives develop, and suggesting that they can change via comparison to similar conflicts resolved peacefully, can facilitate unfreezing and change in attitudes. Study 1 established associations between awareness of conflict costs and conflict-supporting narratives, belief in the possibility of resolving the conflict peacefully and support for pursuing peace among Israeli-Jews and Palestinians. Studies 2 and 3 found that exposure to IPM-based original videos (vs. control) led Israeli-Jews to deliberation of the information presented, predicting acceptance of the IPM-based message, which, in turn, predicted support for negotiations. Study 3 also found similar effects across IPM-based messages focusing on different conflict-supporting themes. We discuss the implications to attitude change in intractable conflicts.

And sympathy is what we need my friend-Polite requests improve negotiation results.

The wording negotiators use shapes the emotions of their counterparts. These emotions, in turn, influence their counterparts' economic decisions. Building on this rationale, we examined how the language used during negotiation affects discount rate and willingness to engage in future deals. In three studies, participants assumed the role of retailers. Alleged counterparts (actually a computerized program) asked for a discount under three conditions: request, want, and demand. Results show that less extreme language (request/want) resulted in better outcomes than demanding a discount. Moreover, while the language used by the customer had an effect on experienced emotions, the positive emotions (sympathy and empathy) participants felt toward the customer mediated the relationship between the linguistic cue and the negotiation outcome. Our results inform both psycholinguistic research and negotiation research by demonstrating the causal role of linguistic cues in activating concept-knowledge relevant to different emotional experiences, and point to the down-the-line impact on shaping negotiation preferences.

A Rose by Any Other Name? A Subtle Linguistic Cue Impacts Anger and Corresponding Policy Support in Intractable Conflict.

Given the central role of anger in shaping adversarial policy preferences in the context of intergroup conflict, its reduction may promote conflict resolution. In the current work, we drew on psycholinguistic research on the role of language in generating emotions to explore a novel, extremely subtle means of intervention. Specifically, we hypothesized that phrasing conflict-relevant policies in noun form (vs. verb form) would reduce anger and impact policy support correspondingly. Results across three experimental studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict supported these expectations for both support for concessions (Studies 1-3) and retaliatory policies (Study 3), with reduction in anger mediating the salutary impact of noun form (vs. verb form) on policy support. These results expand our understanding of the influence of language on emotions and policies in the context of conflict and have applied relevance for conflict-resolution efforts.

Socioemotional self-perceptions, family climate, and hopeful thinking among students with learning disabilities and typically achieving students from the same classes.

This study aimed at examining the adjustment of students with learning disabilities (LD) and at exploring the mediating role of hope. By means of a multidimensional approach, the interactions between risk and protective factors emerging from internal and external resources among 856 high school students (10th to 12th grades) were analyzed. A total of 529 typically achieving students and 327 students with LD attending general education classes in seven high schools completed seven instruments measuring sense of coherence, basic psychological needs, loneliness, family climate, hope, academic self-efficacy, and effort. The students' achievements in English, history, and mathematics were collected. The analysis used structural equation modeling, and the results emphasized the significant role of hope as a mediator between risk and protective factors and academic self-efficacy and its significance for students with and without LD in explaining achievements and effort investment.