Ethno‐political socialization of young children in societies involved in intractable conflict: The case of Israel

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of the ethno-political socialization of young children in the context of intractable conflict, drawing on the case of Israeli society. The analysis is based on the integrative developmental-contextual theory (IDCT), which proposes that in the context of intractable conflict, from a very early age onward, in-group members acquire a socio-psychological repertoire that consists of narratives, beliefs, attitudes, and emotions related to the conflict and to the rival group. IDCT highlights three central components that dictate the nature of this socio-psychological repertoire: children's normative developmental trajectory, the context in which the development takes place, and the ethno-political socialization that is performed by societal agents. We discuss the interaction between these components in socializing children's sociopsychological repertoire, and ways to change the course of socialization in the context of intractable conflict towards peace-oriented socialization.

Political Ideology in Early Childhood: Making the Case for Studying Young Children in Political Psychology

“…However, a growing body of empirical work suggests that examining young children and their environments can be informative for political psychology and that the seeds of political awareness and attitudes germinate long before they manifest in their adult political form. For example, recent work shows that infants and toddlers (roughly, children before the age of 3 years) are attentive to basic cues of group membership and group boundaries (e.g., Buyukozer Dawkins et al, 2020; Diesendruck & Deblinger‐Tangi, 2014); that preschoolers (roughly, children between the ages of 3 and 5 years) demonstrate politically laden preferences and individual differences (e.g., Guidetti et al, 2017, 2021; Hussak & Cimpian, 2015, 2018; Reifen‐Tagar, Federico, et al, 2014; Reifen‐Tagar, Hetherington, et al, 2017; Reifen‐Tagar & Zreik, 2022); that children are exposed to political socialization already in the preschool years (e.g., Nasie et al, 2016; Nasie, Reifen‐Tagar, et al, 2021); and that by early elementary school, many children are curious about and have at least some basic knowledge regarding politics (e.g., Haug, 2017; Patterson et al, 2019; Van Deth et al, 2011).…”

“…Similarly, in the context of intergroup conflict, children tend to vilify outgroup members and their intentions. For example, initial data suggests that both Palestinian and Jewish‐Israeli preschoolers attribute negative intentions to the other group and see its members as “evil” (for review, see Nasie et al, 2016, Nasie, Reifen‐Tagar, & Bar‐Tal, 2021). Together, this evidence suggests that children see intergroup relations, at least in some contexts, as conflictual.…”

Through the looking glass: Ethnic racial socialization among children and adolescents

“…In the final paper in this section, Nasie et al. (2021) provide a comprehensive review of the literature on ethnic‐political socialization of young children living in intractable conflict in Israeli society. Their analysis is based on the integrative developmental‐contextual theory (IDCT, Bar‐Tal, 1997; Bar‐Tal & Teichman, 2005; Teichman & Bar‐Tal, 2008), which suggests that from a very early age in‐group members develop a shared psychological intergroup repertoire (SPIR) towards the rival outgroup and conflict.…”

Ethos of conflict as the prism to evaluate the Northern Irish and the Israeli-Palestinian conflicts by the involved societies: A comparative analysis.

“…In intractable conflicts, the perceptual, cognitive, and emotional system is influenced by the context, and growing up with intractable conflict is viewed as an imprinting experience that carries powerful weight on the way individuals make perceptions, impressions, interpretations, evaluations, and judgments within their society (Bar-Tal et al, 2017). Thus, we argue that experiences of conflict may have differential impact on the perception of groups in conflict (see Nasie et al, in press). Specifically, we hypothesize that while most of the individuals are unable to evaluate and judge the conflict in which they are involved personally (a conflict of their society) without being biased and favoring their ingroup, they are able, in many cases, to carry out a relatively unbiased appraisal of a conflict and its participants in which they are not part (not their conflict).…”