The Distinctive Effects of Empathy and Hope in Intractable Conflicts

Rosler, Nimrod; Cohen‐Chen, Smadar; Halperin, Eran

doi:10.1177/0022002715569772

Cited by 79 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 87 publications

(137 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In terms of promoting conflict resolution, recent research has begun to address intergroup emotions as possible tools for reconciliation as well. For example, in the context of intergroup relations, empathy has been found to raise the motivation to alleviate the suffering of others (Batson, Chang, Orr, & Rowland, 2002), it frequently results in helping behavior and altruistic motivations (Cikara, Bruneau, Van Bavel, & Saxe, 2014;Waytz, Zaki, & Mitchell, 2012), and it is negatively correlated with any kind of aggression even in the context of intractable conflict (Rosler, Cohen-Chen, & Halperin, 2017;Shechtman & Basheer, 2005). Similarly, group-based guilt has been found to be a crucial step on the path toward reparation and reconciliation (Brown, Gonzalez, Zagefka, Manzi, & Cehajic, 2008) and to raise motivation to repair the damage caused by the behavior of one's in-group (Čehajić, Effron, Halperin, Liberman, & Ross, 2011;Doosje, Branscombe, Spears, & Manstead, 1998).…”

Section: Emotions In Intergroup Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergroup emotions and gateway groups: Introducing multiple social identities into the study of emotions in conflict

Levy

Zomeren

Saguy³

et al. 2017

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After 2 decades of extensive empirical studies on affective intergroup processes, it is now clear that emotional processes play a critical role in the dynamics of intergroup conflict. However, it seems that much of the research in this domain views intergroup relations in a dichotomous manner of pure in‐groups and out‐groups despite the developments in the realm of social identity that suggest otherwise. We here suggest that the incorporation of more complex social identity models into the study of affective social science can not only help to better understand intergroup conflict dynamics but can also offer new possible venues for conflict resolution. Specifically, we claim that the presence of groups with multiple identities, which include both the in‐group's and the out‐group's identity (e.g., biracial groups that encompass both a White and a Black social identity) can impact intergroup emotional processes between the different groups comprising those multiple identities (e.g., between Whites and Blacks). Accordingly, we review recent developments in the literatures of emotion in intergroup conflict and multiple social identity and offer a conceptual integration of the two. Thus, we attempt to enrich the theory in both fields, better explain intergroup conflict, and possibly pave the way for the development of novel conflict resolution methods.

show abstract

Section: Emotions In Intergroup Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergroup emotions and gateway groups: Introducing multiple social identities into the study of emotions in conflict

Levy

Zomeren

Saguy³

et al. 2017

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recent examinations have also shown that empathy can causally contribute to both support for constructive and humanitarian policies (Pliskin, Bar‐Tal, Sheppes, & Halperin, ) and actual helping behavior (Mashuri, Hasanah & Rahmawati, ) in intergroup contexts. Generally, however, it seems that empathy specifically results in increased willingness to help the group, through actions such as humanitarian aid, and is not a general motivator for policy change or conciliatory measures (Rosler, Halperin, & Cohen‐Chen, N.d.).…”

Section: Emotions In Intractable Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotions and Emotion Regulation in Intractable Conflict: Studying Emotional Processes Within a Unique Context

Halperin¹,

Pliskin

2015

Political Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent years have seen researchers making initial steps towards drawing on insights from emotion research in the study of intractable intergroup conflicts, but the knowledge on emotion and emotion regulation cannot simply be implanted “as is” into the study of these unique contexts. The present article begins with a discussion of the unique context of intractable conflicts and continues with an examination of the existing knowledge on emotion and emotion regulation in these conflicts. From there it proceeds to detail the contextual factors unique to intractable conflict that must be taken into account when studying these constructs, focusing on three such factors: long‐term emotional sentiments, entrenched conflict‐supporting ideology, and clinical factors related to the repeated exposure to violence associated with life in conflict. For each factor, the article examines existing theories and empirical knowledge on its influence over the type and magnitude of emotion experienced, the behavioral and political outcome of emotional experiences, and on emotion regulation processes. When existing theory and knowledge are limited, we present theory and propose directions for future research. Finally, the article discusses the challenges facing those wishing to integrate conflict studies and emotion research and benefit fully, theoretically, empirically, and on the applied level from such an interdisciplinary integration.

show abstract

“…A growing body of research has begun to explore the role of hope in promoting intergroup reconciliation. Hope involves an expectation of a positive anticipated outcome (Rosler, Cohen-Chen, & Halperin, 2015). In conflict settings, hope can increase concession-making (Cohen-Chen, Halperin, Crisp, & Gross, 2013), endorsement of problem-solving strategies to resolve conflict (Baron, Fortin, Frei, Hauver, & Shack, 1990;Čehajić, Brown, & Castano, 2008;Halperin, Bar-Tal, Nets-Zehngut, & Drori, 2008), support for humanitarian aid to out-groups (Halperin & Gross, 2011), and willingness to forgive the perpetrator group (Moeschberger, Dixon, Niens, & Cairns, 2005).…”

Section: The Role Of Emotions: Anger and Hopementioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of acknowledgement and denial of responsibility for harm on victim groups' perceptions of justice, power, and intergroup attitudes

Iqbal

Bilali

2017

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acknowledgement of responsibility for in‐group harmdoing is considered a precondition for reconciliation. However, we know little about its impact on victim groups. Using a mixed methods approach, in two studies in Bangladesh we examined the role of acknowledgement and denial of responsibility on intergroup outcomes. Study 1 used an open‐ended survey to assess Bangladeshis' perceptions about acknowledgement and denial of responsibility for the mass violence committed by the Pakistani army on Bangladeshis during the 1971 war. Study 2 experimentally examined the effects and the potential mechanisms (emotional reactions, perceived injustice, and relative power) through which acknowledgement and denial of responsibility impact two intergroup outcomes: out‐group animosity and willingness for contact. Both studies demonstrated the importance of anger and perceived injustice as mediators of the effects of acknowledgement and denial of responsibility on intergroup outcomes. We draw implications for theory and for strategies to address past victimization across different contexts of conflict.

show abstract

The Distinctive Effects of Empathy and Hope in Intractable Conflicts

Cited by 79 publications

References 87 publications

Intergroup emotions and gateway groups: Introducing multiple social identities into the study of emotions in conflict

Intergroup emotions and gateway groups: Introducing multiple social identities into the study of emotions in conflict

Emotions and Emotion Regulation in Intractable Conflict: Studying Emotional Processes Within a Unique Context

The impact of acknowledgement and denial of responsibility for harm on victim groups' perceptions of justice, power, and intergroup attitudes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About