Remember your crimes: How an appeal to ingroup wrongdoings fosters reconciliation in separatist conflict

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Leeuwen

2020

Self Cite

In separatist conflict, the majority group and the separatist group alternate in their roles as victim and perpetrator. We examined how framing prior ingroup wrongdoings in terms of violations of moral ideals or violations of moral obligations affects the majority’s willingness to reconcile with the separatist group. We conducted a field experiment ( N = 208) in the Republic of Indonesia, where separatist conflict is rife. As expected, among members of the majority who were high in national identification, a moral ideals violation frame produced stronger positive intergroup orientations (e.g., perspective-taking, intergroup trust) and collective emotions of guilt and shame, whereas a moral obligations violation frame produced stronger positive intergroup orientations and collective emotions among low identifiers. In turn, positive intergroup orientations and collective emotions promoted reconciliatory attitudes (e.g., willingness to apologise, support for intergroup cooperation). These findings suggest that policymakers can gain a better insight into the effect of framing ingroup wrongdoings as violations of either moral ideals or moral obligations when taking national identification into account.

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Moral Side Of Separatist Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Promoting reconciliation in separatist conflict: The effect of morality framing

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Leeuwen

2020

Self Cite

“…Subsequently following this information was seven items to assess intergroup trust (e.g. ‘Non-Muslims in Indonesia generally have good intentions’; ‘When non-Muslims in Indonesia make statements, they are usually telling the truth’; α = .83), adapted from Mashuri, van Leeuwen and van Vugt (2018), and three items to assess perspective-taking (e.g. ‘I find myself moved by the accounts of suffering by non-Muslims in Indonesia’; ‘I can empathise with the hardships non-Muslims in Indonesia have experienced’; α = .75), adapted from Mashuri and van Leeuwen (in press).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On being moderate and peaceful: Why Islamic political moderateness promotes outgroup tolerance and reconciliation

Zaduqisti

Archive for the Psychology of Religion

Zuhri

et al. 2020

Self Cite

Islamic moderateness is said to be one of the key factors that contribute to the promotion of peace in Muslim societies. We present an empirical study conducted in Indonesia ( N = 299) that assessed Islamic political moderateness and examined its role in explaining Muslims’ tolerance towards non-Muslims, as well as the first group’s support for making reconciliation with the latter group. We found as hypothesised that Islamic political moderateness was a positive predictor of outgroup tolerance, because of the role it had in positively predicting the sense of national identity as a higher order identity vis-à-vis Islamic identity (i.e. higher order nested identity). Outgroup tolerance positively predicted and, in turn, fully mediated the positive association between Islamic political moderateness and Muslims’ reconciliatory tendencies, including feelings of collective guilt and shame, intergroup trust and perspective-taking, intergroup cooperation, willingness to apologise, as well as support for intergroup empowerment and reparative actions. These findings suggest the benefit of Islamic political moderateness to drive Muslims to appreciate the existence of non-Muslims. We discuss these empirical findings in terms of theoretical implications, research limitations and practical implications.

“…Contentious majority-minority relations or intergroup conflicts arise from plural, multi-ethnic, religious, and cultural societies across countries in Southeast Asia (Clarke, 2001;Montiel & Noor, 2009). Therefore, Southeast Asia serves as an important example of a setting within which models of reconciliation (Mashuri et al, 2018) and multiculturalism are implemented (Noor & Leong, 2013) to manage ethnoreligious tensions and prevent intergroup violence.…”

Section: Political Psychology Of Southeast Asia: Common Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Political psychology of Southeast Asia

Putra²,

Montiel

2022

J. Soc. Polit. Psych.

Self Cite

This special thematic section spotlights the current state of political psychology in Southeast Asia. Drawing from various research methodologies, five papers published in this special thematic section provide psychological insights into different political topics in the past and present-day Southeast Asia, including 1) Islam and politics; 2) terrorist labelling; 3) violence against minorities; 4) moralised policies; and 5) vote-buying. Overall, this special thematic section contributes to the understanding of the political psychology of non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) populations, particularly in Southeast Asia. The need for more publications with non-WEIRD samples in the field of political psychology is discussed, as are some strategies to actualise this goal.