Three Fish at One Hook? Future-Oriented, Reconciliatory, and Defensive Claims for Historical Closure as Expressions of the Same Defensive Desire

Historical perpetrator groups seek to shield themselves from image threat by advocating for closing the discussion of their crimes. However, from a broader theoretical perspective, such demand for historical closure (HC) may also reflect willingness to reconcile with the victim group or to focus on the future rather than the past. In nine studies across four different contexts (Germany, United States, Italy, and Australia; N = 3405), we analyzed whether these three facets of HC (defensive, reconciliatory, and future-oriented) indeed substantially differ. Contrary to expectations, nomological network analyses suggested that all three facets reflect the same defensive desire (Studies 1a-2c) and are perceived as overall similar from a third-party perspective (Study 3). Finally, all three HC facets showed a positive trend toward costly avoidance of confrontation with the ingroup's perpetrator past (Studies 4a-c). We discuss implications for (and against) a more nuanced understanding of the demand for HC.

Pursuing Safety in Social Connection: A Flexibly Fluid Perspective on Risk Regulation in Relationships

People are fundamentally motivated to be included in social connections that feel safe, connections where they are consistently cared for and protected, not hurt or exploited. Romantic relationships have long played a crucial role in satisfying this fundamental need. This article reconceptualizes the risk-regulation model to argue that people draw on experiences from inside and outside their romantic relationships to satisfy their fundamental need to feel safe depending on others. We first review the direct relational cues (i.e., a partner's affectionate touch, responsive versus unresponsive behavior, and relative power) and indirect cues (i.e., bodily sensations, collective value in the eyes of others, and living conditions) that signal the current safety of social connection and motivate people to connect to others or protect themselves against them. We then review how people's chronic capacity to trust in others controls their sensitivity and reactivity to the safety cues. The article concludes with future research directions.

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.

'You don't compare horrors, you just don't do that': Examining assumptions and extending the scope of comparative victim beliefs

Social psychological research on collective victimhood has often focused on comparisons between the ingroup's and outgroups' collective victimization (i.e. comparative victim beliefs such as competitive victimhood or inclusive victim beliefs). This qualitative study examines how people in different contexts of collective victimization and its aftermath make sense of items commonly used to assess comparative victim beliefs, and how they extend or challenge these constructs and their underlying assumptions. We used thematic analysis to analyse eight focus group discussions among four minority groups in the United States with historical or more recent experiences of collective victimization (Armenian Americans, Burundian refugees, Jewish Americans and Nepali-speaking Bhutanese refugees). Findings extend commonly assessed comparative victim beliefs and reveal participants' critical perspectives on these constructs. The findings also highlight the dialectical structure of collective victim beliefs: Participants not only endorsed but also rejected comparative victim beliefs, and relatedly described both ingroup power and outgroup power in the context of their group's victimization. These findings extend existing social psychological literature on comparative victim beliefs and intergroup relations.

Turning the lens in the study of precarity: On experimental social psychology's acquiescence to the settler-colonial status quo in historic Palestine

This review examines the coloniality infused within the conduct and third reporting of experimental research in what is commonly referred to as the 'Israeli-Palestinian conflict'. Informed by a settler colonial framework and decolonial theory, our review measured the appearance of sociopolitical terms and critically analysed the reconciliation measures. We found that papers were three times more likely to describe the context through the framework of intractable conflict compared to occupation. Power asymmetry was often acknowledged and then flattened via, for instance, adjacent mentions of Israeli and Palestinian physical violence. Two-thirds of the dependent variables were not related to material claims (e.g. land, settlements, or Palestinian refugees) but rather to the feelings and attitudes of Jewish Israelis and Palestinians. Of the dependent measures that did consider material issues, they nearly universally privileged conditions of the two-state solution and compromises on refugees' right of return that would violate international law. The majority of the studies sampled Jewish-Israeli participants exclusively, and the majority of authors were affiliated with Israeli institutions. We argue that for social psychology to offer insights that coincide with the decolonization of historic Palestine, the discipline will have to begin by contextualizing its research within the material conditions and history that socially stratify the groups.

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.

Adjusting to the canon

The purpose of the present study is to explore the organization of communicative memory among Hungarians. We were also interested in the factors possibly influencing the composition of communicative memory, such as conspiracy beliefs and system justification. The study involved 339 participants who were asked to name the three historical events that have occurred during the lifetime of people they personally knew and had the most significant impact on their country. A latent class analysis was conducted to explore possible associations of event choice with conspiracy beliefs and system justification. The results showed that the most frequently selected events partly corresponded to the Hungarian national historical canon, but progressive events significant on a European scale were also frequently nominated. The latent class analysis revealed two historical profiles. One was characterized by a progressive and Eurocentric view of history, whereas the other showed a canonical historical view with victimhood orientation. The analysis showed that individuals who believe in conspiracy theories were more likely to select events corresponding to the national historical canon, whereas system justification was unrelated to event choice. The results are discussed in terms of the importance of cultural memory and the measured individual constructs in the forming of communicative memory.

When Past Group Events and Identities Define the Present: Effect of Perceived Collective Continuity on Defensive Behaviors of the French In-Group

Previous studies have highlighted the benefits of perceived collective continuity. However, to the authors’ knowledge, none have considered the negative effects of such perceptions when they concern a negative past or take the form of a break with a positive past. The authors therefore conducted three studies to examine the influence of perceived continuity (or a break) with positive versus negative events or identities on French in-groups’ defensive behaviors (i.e., perceptions of and attitudes toward refugees and intention to engage in collective actions). They expected to observe the positive impact of a positive (rather than negative) past continuity and a negative (rather than positive) past break. The results of Experiment 1 partially confirmed this hypothesis, as individuals who identified strongly expressed a greater intention to engage in collective actions when they perceived continuity with positive past events. Similarly, participants were more opposed to the reception of refugees when they perceived continuity with a positive past French identity (Experiment 2). Finally, high-identifier participants who perceived a break with a negative past identity expressed greater opposition to the reception of refugees and saw them more as a threat (Experiment 3). The authors discuss the importance of considering the emotional valence of past group memories for the continuity literature and a better comprehension of actual in- and between-group dynamics.

The paradoxical thinking ‘sweet spot’: The role of recipients’ latitude of rejection in the effectiveness of paradoxical thinking messages targeting anti-refugee attitudes in Israel

The current research examined whether for a message that is based on the paradoxical thinking principles—i.e., providing extreme, exaggerated, or even absurd views, that are congruent with the held views of the message recipients—to be effective, it needs to hit a ‘sweet spot’ and lead to a contrast effect. That is, it moderates the view of the message's recipients. In the framework of attitudes toward African refugees and asylum seekers in Israel by Israeli Jews, we found that compared to more moderate messages, an extreme, but not too extreme, message was effective in leading to unfreezing for high morally convicted recipients. The very extreme message similarly led to high levels of surprise and identity threat as the extreme message that was found to be effective. However, it was so extreme and absurd that it was rejected automatically. This was manifested in high levels of disagreement compared to all other messages, rendering it less effective compared to the extreme, paradoxical thinking, message. We discuss these findings’ practical and theoretical implications for the paradoxical thinking conceptual framework as an attitude change intervention, and for social judgment theory.

Power dynamics in intergroup relations

Power and intergroup relations are complex, multilevel, and dynamic. Using Power Basis Theory, we explain our criteria for deciding whether theory or research addresses intergroup power dynamics: it must (a) address power and not authority or other topics, (b) involve attempted or real change regarding groups and power, or the prevention of change, (c) involve protracted interactions among multiple actors through more than one channel, (d) involve more than one level of social organization (e.g. person, group, superordinate group). We organize our 10-year review by these criteria. Research meeting all our criteria is rare. We explain relevant new theory and new research tools, including multi-level modelling, multi-player games, agent-based models, big data, and machine-learning, that can help fill the gap.

The case for and causes of intraminority solidarity in support for reparations: Evidence from community and student samples in Canada

In three studies, we examined how racial/ethnic majority (i.e., White) and non-Indigenous minority participants in Canada responded to reparations for Indigenous peoples in Canada. Our goal was to understand whether and why there may be intraminority solidarity in this context. In Study 1, with a large, national survey (N = 1,947), we examined the extent to which participants agreed the government should be responsible for addressing human rights violations committed by previous governments as well as whether the government has done enough to address the wrongs committed against Indigenous peoples in Canada. With a sample of undergraduate students in Study 2 (N = 144) and another community sample in Study 3 (N = 233), we examined possible mediators of the relationship between ethnic status and support for reparations. Taken together, the results of three studies suggest that, compared to White majority Canadians, non-Indigenous minority Canadians were more supportive of providing reparations to Indigenous peoples through a complex chain of collective victimhood, inclusive victim consciousness, continued victim suffering, and solidarity.

Inclusivity of past collective trauma and its implications for current intractable conflict: The mediating role of moral lessons

How are perceptions of past collective trauma related to moral lessons derived, and how are those in turn associated with conflict-related policy preferences of those presently involved in intractable conflict? We hypothesized that inclusive conceptions of past trauma will be positively associated with moral obligations and negatively with moral entitlement, and that moral obligations will be positively associated with humanitarian policies and negatively with militaristic policies, while moral entitlement will be positively associated with militaristic policies and negatively with humanitarian policies. In a cross-sectional study with a representative sample of Jewish Israelis (N = 504), moral obligations mediated the association between higher inclusivity of past collective trauma and humanitarian policy support, while moral entitlement mediated between lower inclusivity and increased militant policy support. Inclusive perceptions of past trauma and its moral lessons may play a critical role in advancing conflict resolution in intractable conflicts settings unrelated to the initial trauma.

Traumatic Rift: How Conspiracy Beliefs Undermine Cohesion After Societal Trauma?

Collective traumas may often lead to deep societal divides and internal conflicts. In this article, we propose that conspiracy theories emerging in response to victimizing events may play a key role in the breakdown of social cohesion. We performed a nationally representative survey in Poland (N = 965) two years after the Smoleńsk airplane crash in which the Polish president was killed, together with 95 political officials and high-ranking military officers. The survey found that people endorsing conspiratorial accounts of the Smoleńsk catastrophe preferred to distance themselves from conspiracy non-believers, while skeptics preferred greater distance to conspiracy believers. We also examined the role of people’s belief in the uniqueness of in-group historical suffering as an important antecedent of both conspiracy thinking and hostility towards outgroups (conspiracy believers and non-believers).

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

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of appeals to ingroup wrongdoings, as opposed to ingroup rightdoings, on reconciliation between groups in a real-world conflict. We conducted an experiment in Indonesia, where separatist conflict in the province West Papua is currently unresolved. Participants were a sample of Javanese residents (N = 502), representing the majority group in Indonesia. Compared to ingroup rightdoings, being reminded of ingroup wrongdoings significantly increased participants' sense of perpetratorhood. These feelings of being a perpetrator in turn fostered participants' reconciliatory attitudes towards the separatist group. These findings reveal that an appeal to ingroup wrongdoings can be effective in promoting intergroup reconciliation. In addition to theoretical implications, we discuss practical implications in terms of highlighting the importance of acknowledging ingroup wrongdoings as part of an intervention programme.

Toward a more comprehensive theory of self-sacrificial violence

We argue that limiting the theory of extreme self-sacrifice to two determinants, namely, identity fusion and group threats, results in logical and conceptual difficulties. To strengthen Whitehouse's theory, we encourage a more holistic approach. In particular, we suggest that the theory include exogenous sociopolitical factors and constituents of the religious system as additional predictors of extreme self-sacrifice.

Self-sacrifice for in-group's history: A diachronic perspective

The problem of extended fusion and identification can be approached from a diachronic perspective. Based on our own research, as well as findings from the fields of social, political, and clinical psychology, we argue that the way contemporary emotional events shape local fusion is similar to the way in which historical experiences shape extended fusion. We propose a reciprocal process in which historical events shape contemporary identities, whereas contemporary identities shape interpretations of past traumas.

It’s about valence: Historical continuity or historical discontinuity as a threat to social identity

National identity is underpinned by historical representations. Recent research shows that narratives presenting an in-group’s history as discontinuous rather than continuous raise collective angst, suggesting that historical discontinuity threatens social identity. This previous research has focused on positive aspects of an in-group’s past. The present research aims to extend the findings to go beyond positive histories. We suggest that when the in-group’s actions in the past are presented as negative, historical continuity instead of discontinuity will increase perceived identity threat because a negative, continuous history threatens group members’ need for a positive social identity in the present. In an experiment with a sample size of N = 316, we manipulated the narrated valence of in-group actions during the historical event of the approval of the German constitutional law by framing the group’s actions in either positive or negative terms. In addition, we presented the in-group’s history as connected or disconnected to the in-group’s present. Results demonstrate that historical continuity only decreased identity threat compared to historical discontinuity when the in-group’s past behavior was presented as positive. When the in-group’s past was presented as negative, continuity even increased identity threat compared to historical discontinuity. These results were particularly pronounced for people who strongly identified with their national in-group. We discuss implications of the findings for political communication and managing a nation’s perception of social identity threat.

Group-centric attitudes mediate the relationship between need for closure and intergroup hostility

A model of the relationship between need for closure (NFC) and intergroup hostility was tested in four studies. According to the model, heightened NFC promotes glorification of the ingroup which fosters support for extreme measures against the group’s perceived enemies. In a parallel process, high level of NFC induces perceptions of ingroup victimhood, which also adds support for aggressive actions toward rival outgroups. In the first two studies, conducted in Palestine’s West Bank (Study 1) and in the United States (Study 2), NFC promoted a greater sense of moral entitlement to engage in violence against the outgroup, and this was mediated by perceived ingroup victimhood. The subsequent two studies tested the full hypothesized parallel mediation model among students in Northern Ireland (Study 3) and Jewish-Israelis (Study 4). Results largely supported the proposed model. Findings are discussed in relation to additional evidence linking NFC to phenomena of intergroup hostility.