Previous research has shown that positive intergroup contact among disadvantaged group members may predict a so-called sedative effect according to which positive contact is associated with reduced support for social change. Conversely, positive contact is associated with increased support for social change toward equality among advantaged group members. This raises the important question of under which circumstances intergroup contact can encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged groups. In this theoretical article, we tackle this question by introducing a new Integrated Contact-Collective Action Model (ICCAM). We first provide an upto-date review of how intergroup contact may promote or hinder social change for both disadvantaged and advantaged groups. We, then, use ICCAM to examine when the many forms of intergroup contact promote or hinder support for social change, proposing the existence of two different paths for disadvantaged and advantaged group members. Finally, we discuss the implications of the model for social intervention and make policy recommendations stemming from a review of available evidence.

Intuitively, we have an implicit understanding of trust, yet when trying to describe the concept, it becomes clear that trust is complex and elusive. Although it is widely recognized that a lack of trust propels groups toward conflict and prevents them from reaching a settlement, there is currently no shared understanding of what shapes trust in intergroup conflict. Further, even though scholars widely acknowledge trust's multidimensional nature, there is no shared understanding on which dimensions exactly constitute trust. This work presents 2 qualitative studies detailing a comprehensive set of 7 superordinate dimensions which foster intergroup trust. Through expert interviews, Study 1 finds 20 distinctive, yet related, subthemes and organizes them into 7 superordinate dimensions: competence, integrity, predictability, compassion, compatibility, collaboration, and security. Study 2, a field study of the frozen Transdniestrian conflict, confirms that these 7 dimensions indeed provide a comprehensive set that is able to capture the elusive construct of trust. Thus, this work, the first of its kind, advances our understanding of trust in intergroup conflict by offering a comprehensive breakdown of the trust construct's multidimensional components. It further suggests a possible path for fostering trust and reconciliation.

Previous research has shown that positive intergroup contact among disadvantaged groupmembers may predict a so-called ‘sedative’ effect according to which positive contact isassociated with reduced support for social change. Conversely, positive contact is associatedwith increased support for social change toward equality among advantaged group members.This raises the important question of under which circumstances intergroup contact canencourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged groups. Inthis theoretical article, we tackle this question by introducing a new Integrated Contact-Collective Action Model (ICCAM). We first provide an up-to-date review of how intergroupcontact may promote or hinder social change for both disadvantaged and advantaged groups.We, then, use ICCAM to examine when the many forms of intergroup contact promote orhinder support for social change, proposing the existence of two different paths fordisadvantaged and advantaged group members. Finally, we discuss the implications of themodel for social intervention and make policy recommendations stemming from a review ofavailable evidence.

Conflict does not end when violence ceases. Societies faced with overcoming conflict are confronted with many obstacles in the long process of reconciliation as they move from cold war to warm peace. They have to bridge the divide of disparate collective memory while overcoming deep-rooted inter-group distrust. Disparate collective memories fuel the conflict by preserving hatred and distrust. We suggest that one step towards warm peace is the establishment of an overarching superordinate group memory, or Shared Collective Memory. Our paper introduces a theoretical reconciliation model that proposes three incremental reconciliation cycles to build a Shared Collective Memory through the parallel development of intergroup trust. It combines and expands on the existing conceptualizations of trust and of collective memory and provides a framework for future empirical research.

No abstract