The role of victim beliefs in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: Risk or potential for peace?

From Threat to Challenge: Understanding the Impact of Historical Collective Trauma on Contemporary Intergroup Conflict

Collective memories of trauma can have profound impact on the affected individuals and communities. In the context of intergroup conflict, in the present article, we propose a novel theoretical framework to understand the long-term impact of historical trauma on contemporary intergroup relations from both victim and perpetrator perspectives. Integrating past research on intergroup conflict and the biopsychosocial model of threat and challenge, we argue that people appraise their group's past victimization and perpetration differently, either as a threat or as a challenge. Shaped by contextual factors and individual differences, these differential appraisals will subsequently influence how group members respond to contemporary intergroup conflict, with both adaptive and maladaptive consequences. This model contributes to unifying the previous research that has shown diverse effects of historical trauma on present-day intergroup dynamics. We present preliminary empirical evidence in support of the framework and discuss its theoretical and practical implications.

Everybody hurts (sometimes): The role of victim category accessibility in prosocial responses towards victimized outgroups

Collective victimization can lead to competitiveness and reduced willingness to act on behalf of other victimized groups, but in some cases increases prosocial responses. We propose the concept of victim category accessibility (VCA) as one explanation for different reactions to victimization. Assuming that 'victims' is one among many categories into which individuals classify themselves and others, high VCA should increase the common categorization of ingroup and outgroup members as victims and increase prosocial responses towards victimized outgroups. Conversely, low VCA should increase the difficulty of identifying commonalities between ingroup and outgroup victims and reduce prosocial responses. In three studies, we develop a novel measure of VCA based on the Indirect Category Accessibility Task and demonstrate its association with willingness to act on behalf of victimized outgroups, but not ingroup members, beyond self-reported beliefs about victimization. The findings suggest a key role for VCA in understanding prosocial responses towards victimized outgroups.

Victimhood beliefs are linked to willingness to engage in intergroup contact with a former adversary through empathy and trust

After intergroup conflicts end, beliefs about past suffering of the ingroup compared to an outgroup influence relations between former adversaries. In Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina, we simultaneously examined the effects of inclusive victimhood (i.e., a belief that both the ingroup and a former adversary suffered similarly) and competitive victimhood (i.e., a belief that the ingroup suffered more than a former adversary) on willingness to engage in contact with a former adversary, a precursor of positive changes in postconflict societies. In one correlational ( nAlbanians = 159; nCroat s = 227) and two experimental studies ( NAlbanians = 161; NCroats = 341, preregistered), inclusive victimhood was linked to higher willingness to engage in contact with former adversaries through higher empathy (Studies 1 to 3) and trust (Studies 1 and 2). In contrast, competitive victimhood was associated with lower willingness to engage in contact through lower empathy (Study 1) and trust (Studies 1 and 3). We discuss the practical implications of our findings for interventions in postconflict societies.

Making sense of the past to understand the present: Attributions for historical trauma predict contemporary social and political attitudes

Research indicates that the memory of collective trauma influences attitudes towards contemporary social and political issues. We suggest that the specific attributions for trauma that members of victim and perpetrator groups make provide a more nuanced understanding of this relationship. Thus, we constructed and validated a measure of attributions for the Holocaust. Then, we ran a preregistered study on representative samples in Germany ( N = 504) and Israel ( N = 469) to examine whether attributing the Holocaust to essentialist or contextual causes influences attitudes towards the immigration crisis and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Results indicated that, among Germans, attributing the Holocaust to German character was associated with positive attitudes to immigration via collective guilt. Among Israelis, attributions to German character were associated with negative attitudes to non-Jewish immigration, a hawkish stance in the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, and pro-Israel attitudes via a sense of perpetual victimization. Results reveal how attributions about past trauma affect contemporary social and political attitudes among victims and perpetrators.

The role of identity transformations in comparative victim beliefs? Evidence from South Sudanese diaspora

There has been a growing interest in the study on collective victimhood and this research has increased our knowledge on how victim groups construe their victimization relative to other groups. However, most of this research has assumed that the groups involved in these construals were pre-existing prior to the conflict and remained fixed during and after the conflict. This study aimed to examine how conflict facilitates the transformation of social identities (i.e., how ingroups and outgroups are construed) and how these transformed social identities are used by group members in their construals of comparative victim beliefs. Eighteen South Sudanese immigrants were interviewed about their experiences during the Sudan civil wars. Thematic analysis revealed two broader themes: “1) “who is ‘us’ versus ‘them’?” (i.e., identity transformation in light of collective victimization and privilege; 2) “what happened to us?” (i.e., construal of ingroup victimization relative to other groups). These findings demonstrate the complexity in how immigrant groups construe social identities constructed in the context of intergroup conflicts, and how these transformed identities are then used in their construals of collective victimhood.

Challenges to Traditional Narratives of Intractable Conflict Decrease Ingroup Glorification

Conflict narratives are cornerstones of group identity, but often facilitate violence by framing the group's actions in ways that foster defensive forms of group identification (i.e., glorification). Three experiments tested whether alternative narratives inclusive of the ingroup's and the adversarial group's suffering can reduce glorification. Israeli Jews (Study 1) and Americans (Study 2) reported less glorification after reading inclusive narratives rather than narratives that dismiss the outgroup's suffering. Study 3 found that through reducing glorification, inclusive narratives indirectly weakened support for retributive justice and militaristic policies and strengthened support for reconciliation. These effects were specific to people high in both (preexisting) glorification and attachment-people identified by prior research as the strongest supporters of violent approaches to conflict. These findings suggest that alternative narratives can reduce glorification by challenging the myopic focus of traditional conflict narratives on ingroup victimization, helping societies move beyond intractable conflict toward lasting peace.

Renegotiating Israeli Identities, Collective Victimhood and Social Exclusion of Arab Israelis in a Changing Social Reality

This article discusses the changing nature of the Israeli identity and core values against the backdrop of political and social processes that took place in Israel in recent decades. Special attention was given to manifestations of collective victimhood within the framework of the Israeli society and politics and the way the latter obstructed social inclusion of Arab Israelis and of acknowledging commonalities between Jewish and non-Jewish Israelis.

A Warrior Society: Data From 30 Countries Show That Belief in a Zero-Sum Game Is Related to Military Expenditure and Low Civil Liberties

The aim of this paper was to investigate the relationship between a perceived antagonistic view of social relations (as a struggle for limited resources), measured by the Belief in a Zero-Sum Game (BZSG) Scale, national military expenditure, and civil liberties. We used multi-level modeling to analyze data on 5,520 participants from 30 countries, testing the hypothesis that a country's level of militarization and civil liberties would be associated with its people's belief in a zero-sum game. We hypothesized that BZSG is more typical of countries that try to gain more resources or defend their interests and thus have high military expenditure but low civil liberties. The results confirmed the stated hypothesis and showed that a country's high military expenditure and low level of civil liberties correlates positively with citizens' BZSG. The use of multi-level modeling to account for within- and across-country variation is a main contribution of the study. In conclusion, the reported triad of individual beliefs, military expenditure, and civil liberties seems to be beneficial in linking individual-level data with national-level indices that have major importance for the wellbeing of the world.

From victimhood to peace activism: The potential role of personal loss and inclusive victim beliefs

Most of the literature on collective victimhood has focused on its negative consequences for conflict resolution. Only recently has the understanding emerged that collective victimhood can also play a role in reconciliation. The present research aimed to test this recent insight in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. A sample of 200 Israeli Jews who participated in the 2015 Israeli–Palestinian Memorial Day ceremony organized by the Combatants for Peace organization completed online questionnaires. In line with our predictions, personal victimization (i.e., losing a significant other due to the conflict) and inclusive victim perceptions (i.e., perceptions of a “common victim identity,” namely, similarity between the ingroup’s and the outgroup’s suffering) predicted peace activism. However, perceptions of a common perpetrator identity failed to predict activism. These results were replicated in a sample of 106 Israeli Jews who participated in the 2016 ceremony. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Between tikkun olam and self-defense: Young Jewish Americans debate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

In this study, we examined processes associated with ingroup members’ break from their ingroup and solidarity with the outgroup. We explored these processes by observing the current dramatic social change in which a growing number of young Jewish Americans have come to reject Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. We conducted a yearlong participant observation and in-depth interviews with 27 Jewish American college students involved in Israel advocacy on a college campus. Findings suggest that Jewish Americans entering the Jewish community in college came to learn about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a lens of Jewish vulnerability. A bill proposed by Palestinian solidarity organizations to divest from companies associated with Israel (part of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions or BDS movement) was also interpreted through the lens of Israel's vulnerability. As the college’s Student Union debated the bill, a schism emerged in the Jewish community. Some Jewish students who had a strong sense of their Jewish identity and grounded their Judaism in principles of social justice exhibited a greater openness to the Palestinian narrative of the conflict. Understanding of Palestinian dispossession was associated with the rejection of the mainstream Jewish establishment’s unconditional support of Israel. Moreover, dissenting Jewish students were concerned that others in the campus community would perceive them as denying the demands of people of color. We discuss our observations of the process of social change in relation to social science theories on narrative acknowledgment and collective action.

Looking Backward to Move Forward

Two large-scale surveys conducted in Israel (Study 1A) and the Palestinian Authority (Study 1B) show that the belief by group members that people in the “enemy” group acknowledge their victimhood (i.e., Holocaust and Nakba for Jews and Palestinians, respectively) is associated with Israeli-Jews’ readiness to accept responsibility for Palestinian sufferings and offer apologies. For Palestinians, this belief is linked to a perceived higher likelihood of a reconciled future with Israelis. Three field experiments demonstrate that a manipulated high level of acknowledgment of Jewish victimhood by Palestinians (Studies 2 and 4) and of Palestinian victimhood by Israeli-Jews (Study 3) caused greater readiness to make concessions for the sake of peace on divisive issues (e.g., Jerusalem, the 1967 borders, the right of return) and increased conciliatory attitudes. Additional analyses indicate the mediating role of increased trust and reduced emotional needs in these relationships.

The Shadows of the Past

We examined associations between two orientations based on historical group trauma, a form of enduring group victimhood (Perpetual Ingroup Victimhood Orientation [PIVO]) and the belief that one’s group might itself become a victimizer (Fear of Victimizing [FOV]), and attitudes, cognitions, and emotions related to intergroup conflicts. PIVO was positively and FOV was negatively related to aggressive attitudes and emotions toward the outgroup (Studies 1a-1c, Israeli–Palestinian conflict), and to the attribution of responsibility for a series of hostilities to the outgroup (Study 3, Israeli–Palestinian conflict). PIVO was negatively and FOV positively related to support for forgiveness and reconciliation (Study 2, Northern Ireland conflict). In Experimental Study 4, FOV predicted greater accuracy in remembering harm, regardless of victims’ group identity, whereas PIVO was associated with reduced accuracy only when victims were Palestinians (outgroup members). Taken together, these findings indicate that both orientations have a significant impact on intergroup conflicts and their resolution.

A Whole Other Story: Inclusive Victimhood Narratives Reduce Competitive Victimhood and Intergroup Hostility

Conflict narratives, having at their core the belief that the ingroup suffered more than the outgroup (competitive victimhood), are key in maintaining conflicts. Three experiments conducted with Jewish Israelis (Study 1), Turkish Kurds (Study 2), and Americans (Study 3) tested whether conflict narratives can reduce conflict. Studies 1 and 3 showed that people respond to inclusive victimhood narratives that emphasize both ingroup and outgroup suffering with a reduction in competitive victimhood and, in turn, reduced support for aggressive policies-but only when people were relatively less concerned that acknowledgment of outgroup suffering might risk loss of third-party support. Study 2 further found that inclusive narratives reduce conflict for low-power groups, yet without being moderated by concern. Together, these studies show that inclusive victimhood narratives can reduce conflict when people are not concerned about losing third-party support. The important role of third parties in conflict resolution is discussed.

Unfreezing cognitions during an intractable conflict: Does an external incentive for negotiating peace and (low levels of) collective angst increase information seeking?

A core feature of intractable conflicts is the tendency to cognitively freeze on existing, pro-ingroup beliefs. In three experiments, conducted in the context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, we tested the idea that an external incentive for negotiating peace helps unfreeze cognitions. In Experiment 1, making salient that peace with the Palestinians would reduce the Iranian nuclear threat (an external incentive) led to a process of unfreezing. In Experiment 2, we examined whether collective angst as an emotional sentiment (i.e., concern for the ingroup's future vitality as a temporally stable emotional disposition) moderated the aforementioned external incentive-cognitive unfreezing link. As predicted, external incentive salience promoted cognitive unfreezing, but only among people low in collective angst (i.e., people who are not concerned for the ingroup's future). In Experiment 3, we sought to replicate the results of Experiment 2. However, socio-political forces (i.e., a significant upswing in tensions between Palestinians and Israelis) likely served to freeze cognitions to such an extent that thawing was not possible by the means demonstrated in Experiments 1 and 2. The importance of confidence in a peace process is discussed in the context of efforts to unfreeze cognitions during an intractable conflict.

When group members forgive: Antecedents and consequences

Whether forgiveness is essential for intergroup reconciliation may be disputable, but its potential ability to repair human relationships following offenses committed based on group membership remains of considerable importance. The primary focus of this Special Issue is on the social-contextual factors that encourage forgiveness of past wrongs and the extent to which forgiveness results in meaningful improvement in intergroup relations. The concept of intergroup forgiveness has only appeared on the research agenda of social psychologists over the last decade, so there is still much room for conceptual clarification, empirical validation, and applications to understanding intergroup reconciliation. Significant progress has been made by investigating predictors and correlates of intergroup forgiveness, and the research presented in this Special Issue further illuminates the processes involved in intergroup forgiveness, as well as important consequences. This collection of empirical articles, based on diverse theoretical perspectives and empirical approaches to studying the phenomenon of intergroup forgiveness inside and outside of the laboratory, advance our understanding of when and how improvement emerges across a wide range of real and enduring conflicts.

Peace vision and its socio-emotional antecedents: The role of forgiveness, trust, and inclusive victim perceptions

The present study conceptualized peace vision as the view of peace as desirable, feasible, and requiring substantial concessions by both parties and examined the social-emotional factors contributing to its endorsement among Israeli Jews ( N = 400). In line with our theorizing, we found that trust in Palestinians and inclusive victim perceptions (the view that both conflicting groups have suffered due to the conflict) were significantly and positively associated with peace vision endorsement both directly and indirectly, through facilitating forgiveness. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results in terms of the sustainability of peaceful coexistence between conflicting groups.

Gazing at suffering Gaza from suffering Sderot: Seeds of forgiveness and reconciliation amidst the turmoil?

Most studies on forgiveness and reconciliation in intergroup conflicts are conducted during the postresolution stages of conflict. The present research was conducted in the south of Israel to examine the issue of forgiveness among people currently enmeshed in active and violent conflict. Study 1 was conducted in the Israeli town of Sderot, which for more than a decade has been under frequent rocket fire from neighboring Palestinian Gaza and has also witnessed numerous Israeli retaliatory attacks on Gaza. Study 2 was conducted among residents of towns and communities close to the Gaza border during the 2014 war. We investigated the potential readiness for mutual forgiveness with Gaza residents, apology, and reparation and help to repair war damage. Mutual forgiveness received considerable support, but apology and reparations did not. Perspective-taking vis-à-vis the Palestinians predicted support for mutual forgiveness in the first but not the second study. Acceptance of moral responsibility and dismissal of exonerating cognitions regarding Israel’s conduct in Gaza predicted readiness for apology and reparations. Hence a step towards mutual forgiveness with the adversarial outgroup is feasible under active conflict mainly because it does not involve culpability.

Feeling Both Victim and Perpetrator

Victimized versus perpetrating individuals or groups are known to experience enhanced needs for empowerment or acceptance, respectively. The present research examined the emotional needs and consequent anti- and prosocial behaviors (e.g., vengefulness vs. helpfulness) of individuals or groups serving both as victims and perpetrators simultaneously (“duals”). Focusing on interpersonal transgressions, Study 1 used variations of the dictator game to induce participants with victimization, perpetration, duality, or none (control). Duals showed heightened needs for both empowerment and acceptance and equal willingness to reconcile following either empowering or accepting messages from their adversaries. However, duals’ need for empowerment overrode their need for acceptance in determining behavior. Similar to victims, and unlike perpetrators, duals showed greater antisocial (rather than prosocial) behavior. Study 2 replicated this pattern on the intergroup level, inducing Israeli Jews with victimization, perpetration, or duality using a recall task referring to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Who defines humanity? Psychological and cultural obstacles to omniculturalism

In this article we discuss the social-psychological limitations of using omniculturalism as a tool to improve intercultural relations between majority and minority groups. The omnicultural imperative suggests that intercultural interactions be framed in terms of human commonalities. This strategy might face severe psychological and cultural obstacles. Due to automatic mechanisms of ingroup projection, such framing might have adverse effects: People tend to construe their concepts of “humanity” based on their impressions about their own group. Such projection has been shown to have detrimental effects on intergroup relations, especially between groups differing in status (such as minority–majority relations). Psychological and anthropological evidence is provided to argue that the lay concept of “humanity” is often used as a tool of ingroup favouritism and discrimination. An extension of the omnicultural imperative is proposed—based on the indefinable character of humanity (inspired by Jahoda’s remarks on the definition of culture and Wittgenstein’s concept of family resemblance) and humananimal similarities.

When Suffering Begets Suffering

Inter-group competitive victimhood (CV) describes the efforts of members of groups involved in violent conflicts to establish that their group has suffered more than their adversarial group. Such efforts contribute to conflicts’ escalation and impede their peaceful resolution. CV stems from groups’ general tendency to compete with each other, along with the deep sense of victimization resulting from conflicts. The authors point to biases that contribute to groups’ engagement in CV, describe five dimensions of victimhood over which groups may compete, and contend that such competition serves various functions that contribute to the maintenance of conflicts. Drawing on the Needs-Based Model, they suggest that CV may reflect groups’ motivations to restore power or moral acceptance. They then review evidence of the negative consequences of CV for inter-group forgiveness and suggest potential strategies to reduce CV. Finally, the authors discuss potential moderators and directions for future research.

Interpreting rights and duties after mass violence

In our age of human rights, there has been an increased focus not only on the rights of people and collectives harmed through mass atrocities and other injustices, but also on the duty to redress this harm. Building on Passini’s (2011) call for an integration of rights and duties through responsibility, I argue that movements in this direction are already underway. This integration follows, for example, from growing recognition of the complexity in victim and perpetrator roles. Another way in which integration of rights and duties in the aftermath of mass violence has occurred is through alternative meanings of ingroup victimization drawn by victim groups throughout the world. Specifically, based on a sense of inclusive victim consciousness, some have expressed and advocated perceived responsibility to ensure rights for other victim groups as well. This phenomenon is an example of the moral inclusion and focus on responsibility that Passini (2011) argues is necessary in our age of human rights. Examples of moral inclusion among victim groups are reviewed and limitations are discussed, as well as conditions that might inhibit or facilitate a sense of moral responsibility to go beyond individual and ingroup rights and protect others from harm and injustice.