For decades, increasing intergroup contact has been the preferred method for improving cooperation between groups. However, even proponents of this approach acknowledge that intergroup contact may not be effective in the context of intractable conflicts. One question is whether anything can be done to increase the impact of intergroup contact on cooperation. In the present study, we tested whether changing perceptions of group malleability in a pre-encounter intervention could increase the degree of cooperation during contact encounters. Jewish and Palestinian-Israeli adolescents ( N = 141) were randomly assigned either to a condition that taught that groups are malleable or to a coping, control condition. During a subsequent intergroup encounter, we used two behavioral tasks to estimate the levels of cooperation. Results indicated that relative to controls, participants in the group malleability condition showed enhanced cooperation. These findings suggest new avenues for enhancing the impact of contact in the context of intractable conflicts.
Double standard—that is, employing a separate set of norms according to the actor’s and observer’s identity—is common in various contexts, but has not been given much empirical attention in the context of violent conflicts. We introduce group entitlement as a predictor of moral double standard in intergroup conflict. Three studies were conducted to test our research hypothesis. In Study 1, (Jewish Israelis) group entitlement predicted more lenient punishment for ingroup transgressors compared with unspecified outgroup transgressors. In Study 2, (Jewish Israelis) group entitlement predicted lower support for basic human rights for outgroup members compared with ingroup members. Study 3 replicated the results of Study 2 in the context of White Americans and African Americans, and showed that when presented with false feedback indicating substantial double standard among White Americans, high-group-entitlement participants experienced lower levels of moral emotions regarding the purported gap and were less willing to amend their responses compared with low-group-entitlement respondents. Implications of group entitlement in various contexts, its relation to existing constructs, and potential implications are discussed.
Improving minority’s achievements in higher education is a crucial step towards closing the inequality gap. In this paper we introduce a new psycho-institutional approach targeting institutional changes that affect psychological processes that are necessary for minority’s success. We tested this approach in two field experiments in Israel (n > 20,000). Our intervention involved reconstructing institutional virtual spaces in a manner that signals to minority students that they belong. This was achieved by manipulating how lecturer’s name appeared on Zoom so that instead of the default option (i.e., Hebrew or English only) it appeared in three languages: Arabic, Hebrew, and English. This approach positively affected minority students’ sense of belonging, class participation, and grades (a 7.5-point class grade increase in experiment 1, and a 4-point semester grade increase in experiment 2). Taken together, these studies provide a new framework for designing interventions that can meaningfully impact minority’s outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.