The authors propose that conflict threatens different psychological resources of victims and perpetrators and that these threats contribute to the maintenance of conflict (A. Nadler, 2002; A. Nadler & I. Liviatan, 2004; A. Nadler & N. Shnabel, in press). On the basis of this general proposition, the authors developed a needs-based model of reconciliation that posits that being a victim is associated with a threat to one's status and power, whereas being a perpetrator threatens one's image as moral and socially acceptable. To counter these threats, victims must restore their sense of power, whereas perpetrators must restore their public moral image. A social exchange interaction in which these threats are removed should enhance the parties' willingness to reconcile. The results of 4 studies on interpersonal reconciliation support these hypotheses. Applied and theoretical implications of this model are discussed.

This article presents a comprehensive review of research and theory on reactions to help, organized in terms of four conceptual orientations (i.e., equity, attribution, reactance, and threat to self-esteem). For each orientation, the basic assumptions and predictions are discussed, supportive and nonsupportive data are reviewed, and an overall appraisal is offered. Threat to self-esteem is proposed as an organizing construct for research on reactions to help, and a model based on this construct is presented. It is argued that a formalized threat-to-self-esteem model is more comprehensive and parsimonious for predicting reactions to help than are equity, attribution, or reactance models.Over the last 15 years, there has been a great deal of psychological research on prosocial behavior. Most of this work has investigated the conditions that elicit help-giving (e.g., Berkowitz, 1972;Krebs, 1970;Staub, 1978). The other side of the paradigm, the recipient's reactions to help, has received much less attention. From both a conceptual and an applied perspective, however, the experience of receiving help is an important area for investigation. The importance of this topic is highlighted by research indicating that help is often experienced as a mixed blessing (e.g., Fisher & This article represents an elaboration and extension of ideas presented in August 1974 in a technical report by J. D. Fisher and A. Nadler titled "Recipient Reactions to Aid: Literature Review and a Conceptual Framework.

The article presents a model which proposes that groups may establish or challenge dominance through helping. It begins by noting the centrality of inequality in helping and inter-group relations. The implications of this to affirmative action programs are noted. Following this, a model of inter-group helping relations is proposed. It suggests that when the high status group provides to the low status group dependency oriented help, it may do so in order to establish dominance. The willing receptivity of the low status group may indicate its acceptance of the inequality, and lack of receptivity for such help may be motivated by the desire to achieve social equality. Empirical findings that are relevant to this analysis are presented in studies using Israeli students as research participants. Inter-Group Helping Relations: IntroductionResearch on the social psychology of helping behavior has focused on interpersonal helping and has paid less attention to the problem of inter-group helping (Schroeder, Penner, Dovidio & Piliavin, 1995). Yet many helping relations occur between groups (e.g., international aid, assistance given by an advantaged to a less advantaged group); moreover, the self categorization theory maintains that when the group affiliations of the helper and recipient are salient, helping interactions between individuals must be viewed as inter-group helping interactions (Turner,

The present study explores the effects of expressions of empathy for the ingroup's conflict-related suffering and assumed responsibility for causing it by a representative of the rival outgroup on recipient's willingness for reconciliation. It is suggested that such positive expressions by an adversary will have positive effects on reconciliation only in the presence of a basic level of trust in the outgroup. In two studies, Israeli-Jewish participants were exposed to a Palestinian leader who either expressed or did not express empathy and/or Palestinian responsibility for Israelis' suffering. After reading the speech, participants completed a questionnaire that measured their attitudes toward reconciliation with Palestinians. Results of both studies show that whereas expression of empathy led to more positive attitudes when trust was high, it tended to have adverse effects when trust was low. Similar effects were not found for assumed responsibility. Implications for research on intergroup conflict and reconciliation are discussed.

Guided by the Needs-Based Model of Reconciliation, we hypothesized that being a member of a victimized group would be associated with a threat to the status and power of one's ingroup, whereas being a member of a perpetrating group would threaten the image of the ingroup as moral and socially acceptable. A social exchange interaction through which victims feel empowered by their perpetrators and perpetrators feel accepted by their victims was thus predicted to enhance the parties' willingness to reconcile. Supporting the predictions across two experiments, members of the perpetrator group (Jews in Study 1 and Germans in Study 2) showed greater willingness to reconcile when they received a message of acceptance, rather than empowerment, from a member of the victimized group. Members of the victimized group (Arabs in Study 1 and Jews in Study 2) demonstrated the opposite effect. Applied and theoretical implications of these results are discussed.