Integrative emotion regulation relates to sympathy and support for outgroups-Independent of situational outgroup behaviour

Intergroup emotions powerfully shape intergroup relations. Anger and fear fuel, while hope and sympathy reduce intergroup strife. This implies that emotion regulation may play an important role in improving intergroup relations. Broadening the scope of prior research, we herein investigate the potential benefits of integrative emotion regulation for improving intergroup relations. Integrative emotion regulation involves actively paying attention to emotions to determine which information they provide. Interindividual differences in the use of integrative emotion regulation correlate with sympathy and supportiveness towards outgroups, but why this is the case is unclear. We tested two possible explanations: a person effect (i.e., interindividual differences in integrative emotion regulation shape respondents' general outlook on outgroups) and a person-situation interaction effect (i.e., integrative emotion regulation reduces the impact of situational factors that would typically dampen sympathy, thereby shaping situation-specific responses to outgroups). In four experiments (total N = 984), we manipulated outgroup behaviour and measured interindividual differences in integrative emotion regulation. We found no interaction between integrative emotion regulation and outgroup behaviour in predicting outgroup-directed sympathy and supportiveness. Instead, integrative emotion regulation consistently correlated positively with supportiveness, mediated by sympathy. These findings suggest that those high in integrative emotion regulation have a more positive, general outlook on outgroups than those low in integrative emotion regulation, but being high in integrative emotion does not alter situational responses.

Can Emotion Regulation Affect Aggressive Responses? A Study on the Ukrainian-Russian Conflict in a Non-Directly Exposed Sample

On 24 February, Russian President Vladimir Putin gave the order to invade neighbouring Ukraine; a typical trend during the war is considering events in a one-sided way, emphasising the exclusive contribution of one opponent over the other for the outbreak of war. War may trigger the experience of emotions, such as anger, shame, and disgust. The present study reproduces previous studies on the influence of emotional regulation in support of aggressive reactions (AR) in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A questionnaire referring to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has been implemented and spread in the Italian territory. A multiple moderated mediation model was proposed to evaluate the effect of emotional cognitive reappraisal on the propensity for AR, including conflict-related emotions (anger, shame, disgust) as mediators and political alignment and the appraisal of one's own emotions subscale of the brief emotional intelligence scale as moderators. The results show that cognitive reappraisal of emotions has a negative effect on AR; moreover, recognising and regulating emotions decreases anger, while taking sides with Ukraine or not siding seems to have an effect on AR depending on the emotion felt (anger or shame). The results are discussed according to the current literature on the topic, highlighting the practical implications and limits of the research.

Apology and Its Acceptance: Perceived Reconciliatory Attitudes Reduce Outgroup Dehumanization

Based on real-life intergroup animosities originating from a historical conflict, the current study examined how the perceived stance of the outgroup about the conflict affects the dehumanization of the outgroup. In Study 1 (N = 120), Korean undergraduates attributed more human nature to the Japanese after reading an article that the Japanese government did (vs. refused to) issue an official apology for a historical wrong. In turn, the more human nature assigned to the Japanese predicted higher expectations about positive mutual relations in the future. Similarly, in Study 2 (N = 209), Japanese undergraduates attributed more human uniqueness to Koreans after reading an article that an official apology for a historical wrong from Japan was accepted (vs. rejected) by Koreans. The higher the perceived human uniqueness of Koreans was, the higher were the willingness to help and the expectations of a positive relationship in the future. The findings demonstrate how mutual dehumanization can be reduced as a result of the other side’s reconciliatory stances and can further contribute to improving intergroup relations.

Reduced helping intentions are better explained by the attribution of antisocial emotions than by 'infrahumanization'

We challenge the explanatory value of one of the most prominent psychological models of dehumanization—infrahumanization theory—which holds that outgroup members are subtly dehumanized by being denied human emotions. Of central importance to this theory is the claim that, to the extent that other people are ‘infrahumanized’, they are less likely to be helped. We examine this hypothesised relationship across four pre-registered and well powered studies. We do not find that attributing all uniquely human emotions to others is positively associated with helping intentions towards them. Instead, we find that attributing prosocial emotions is positively associated with helping intentions and attributing antisocial emotions is negatively associated with helping intentions, regardless of emotion humanness. In our data, what previously appeared to be an association between subtle dehumanization and reduced helping is better explained by the tendency to avoid helping others when we view them negatively.

Trust, Forgiveness, and Peace: The Influence of Adolescent Social Identity in a Setting of Intergroup Conflict

Following the signing of peace agreements, post-accord societies often remain deeply divided across group lines. There is a need to identify antecedents of youth's support for peace and establish more constructive intergroup relations. This article explored the effect of out-group trust, intergroup forgiveness and social identity on support for the peace process among youth from the historic majority and minorities communities in Belfast, Northern Ireland. The sample comprised of 667 adolescents (49% male; M=15.74, SD=1.99 years old) across two time points. Results from the structural equation model suggested that out-group trust was related to intergroup forgiveness over time, while forgiveness related to later support for the peace process. Strength of in-group social identity differentially moderated how out-group trust and intergroup forgiveness relate to later support for peace among youth from the conflict-related groups (i.e., Protestants and Catholics). Implications for consolidating peace in Northern Ireland are discussed, which may be relevant to other settings affected by intergroup conflict.

Competing collective narratives in intergroup rapprochement: A transgenerational perspective

In the context of an ethnically divided community, we explored the role of competing group narratives for intergroup rapprochement after violent conflict. In Study 1, data from a community survey conducted in Vukovar, Croatia, among 198 Croats, the local majority, and 119 Serbs, the local minority, were analysed to gain perspective on different narratives about the recent war and effects they may have on intergroup relations. In Study 2, focus groups with Croat and Serb children provided data to explore how these narratives were transmitted and transformed in living experience within the second generation. The quantitative results confirm the existence of opposing narratives of war among local Croats and Serbs. Multiple regression analyses show that, after controlling for exposure to war event and their personal impact, different factors predict rapprochement within the two groups. In the minority status group, that displayed higher overall levels of readiness for rapprochement, perceived ingroup victimization and outgroup stereotypes appeared more predictive than the outgroup affect. In contrast, within the majority group, variations in readiness for intergroup rapprochement were primarily predicted by outgroup affect, followed by perceived ingroup victimization. The qualitative inquiry complemented the findings from the survey. Despite the overwhelming dominant narrative, some alternative positions exist, but not consistent enough to be declared publicly. Perception of one’s own group as the primary victim of the war influences not only interpretations of the past, but also shapes identity, everyday life and future expectations. Mechanisms of perpetuating opposed narratives, as well as possible interventions, are discussed.

Intergroup preference, not dehumanization, explains social biases in emotion attribution

Psychological models can only help improve intergroup relations if they accurately characterise the mechanisms underlying social biases. The claim that outgroups suffer dehumanization is near ubiquitous in the social sciences. We challenge the most prominent psychological model of dehumanization - infrahumanization theory - which holds outgroup members are subtly dehumanized by being denied human emotions. We examine the theory across seven intergroup contexts in thirteen pre-registered and highly powered experiments (N = 1690). We find outgroup members are not denied uniquely human emotions relative to ingroup members. Rather, they are ascribed prosocial emotions to a lesser extent but antisocial emotions to a greater extent. Apparent evidence for infrahumanization is better explained by ingroup preference, outgroup derogation and stereotyping. Infrahumanization theory may obscure more than it reveals about intergroup bias.

•

Infrahumanization theory predicts outgroups are often denied uniquely human emotions.

•

However, to date, antisocial uniquely human emotions have not been investigated.

•

We test attributions of prosocial and antisocial emotions to social groups.

•

Attributions of antisocial human emotions were stronger for outgroups than ingroups.

•

We find no support for the predictions of infrahumanization theory.

Variations in subjective definitions of everyday situations as intergroup contact

Intergroup contact encompasses a wide range of contact situations. Yet, how 'contact' is conceptualized by those involved has rarely been examined. We argue that understanding the range of subjective definitions of contact is important for intergroup contact measurement and wider impact work. In Study 1, 17 participants completed a 3-day diary and a semi-structured interview about their experiences of contact with other nationalities. We examined the threshold at which encounters are subjectively defined as intergroup contact. Results showed that subjective definitions of intergroup contact were disparate and diverse, particularly when contact was fleeting or online. In Study 2, we asked a British sample (N = 498) to rate the extent to which 67 different contact scenarios with non-British people represented 'intergroup contact'. Findings show that contact situations which diverge from positive, verbal, face-to-face encounters, such as negative contact or online contact, were less likely to be understood as contact, with strong variation in ratings. The extent to which situations were seen as contact was positively correlated with the amount of self-reported intergroup contact. Together, these findings demonstrate the need to recognize and account for the variability in subjective definitions of contact, which ultimately shape self-reports of intergroup contact.

Developing ReApp: an emotion regulation mobile intervention for intergroup conflict

People living in areas of intractable conflicts experience extreme negative emotions which ultimately lead to support of aggressive policies. Emotion regulation and particularly cognitive reappraisal has been found to be effective in reducing negative emotional experiences and shifting policy preferences. Therefore, it is important to develop scalable, evidence-based interventions aimed at regulating negative emotions in such contexts. In this paper, we introduce ReApp - a mobile game, aimed at training people to regulate their emotions using cognitive reappraisal. We examine the game's effectiveness in reducing negative emotions and support for aggressive policies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Results indicate that people who played ReApp experienced lower levels of anger and disgust, and were less supportive of aggressive political policies targeted at the outgroup. We believe that games such as ReApp could potentially influence mass audiences and by that promote conflict resolution.

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid! Motivated Intergroup Emotion Regulation

Group-based emotions can shape group members' behaviors and intergroup relations. Therefore, we propose that people may try to regulate emotions of outgroup members to attain ingroup goals. We call this phenomenon "motivated intergroup emotion regulation." In four studies, conducted in both hypothetical and real-world contexts, we show that deterrence and reconciliation goals influence how fearful or calm people want outgroup members to feel, respectively. We further show that such motivated intergroup emotion regulation can guide behavior toward the outgroup, influencing how outgroup members feel (Studies 1, 2, and 4) and behave (Study 4). We demonstrate how affiliation with the ingroup, which renders ingroup goals more salient, shapes what ingroup members want outgroup members to feel (Studies 3 and 4) and subsequently how outgroup members feel and behave (Study 4). Finally, we discuss how motivated intergroup emotion regulation might contribute to understanding motivation in emotion regulation, group-based emotions, and intergroup relations.

Intergroup contact and willingness for renewed cohabitation in Cyprus: Exploring the mediating and moderating mechanisms

One of the major challenges in divided societies is finding ways to overcome geographical partition by increasing readiness for cohabitation in mixed areas. Cyprus has faced a protracted situation of division (between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots) for the last 44 years. In this paper, we explore the role of intergroup contact (both quantity and quality of contact) in enhancing the willingness of members of these two communities to reestablish cohabitation, using representative survey samples from both communities. We hypothesize that such an effect is mediated by a decrease in the levels of prejudice between the two communities and an increase in the levels of trust. In addition, we hypothesize that the direct effect of intergroup contact and the indirect effect of intergroup contact through trust and prejudice are both moderated by age. To explore these hypotheses, we collected data from a representative sample of 502 Greek Cypriots and 504 Turkish Cypriots. The hypotheses are tested among the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot samples separately. In both samples, the results show that the positive effect of intergroup contact on willingness for renewed cohabitation is mediated by both trust and prejudice. There is also some support for the moderating effect of age for both the direct and indirect effects of intergroup contact.

How to address the caveat of avoiding direct contact: Reducing prejudice towards gay and lesbian people in five Balkan countries

In the Balkans, contact with gays and lesbians is typically hostile or avoided. Drawing from probability samples of young people from five Balkan countries (N = 1046), we examined whether it is possible to transfer the effects of contact with other marginalized outgroups (largest ethnic minority in every country, Roma, the extremely poor and physically disabled) to acceptance of gays and lesbians (secondary outgroup), and whether this relationship could be explained by attitude generalization and increased intergroup trust. Path analyses supported the secondary transfer effect: it confirmed that, while controlling for direct contact, contact with other marginalized groups was related to more acceptance of a secondary group; this relationship was mediated by trust. This was found across all primary groups in the combined samples, while the effect varied for different groups in country samples. The results add to the value of intergroup contact as a mean of prejudice-reduction.

Explaining Muslims’ Aggressive Tendencies Towards the West: The Role of Negative Stereotypes, Anger, Perceived Conflict and Islamic Fundamentalism

The current research was to investigate what psychological factors predict Muslims’ negative stereotypes of the West, and the underlying mechanism by which the negative stereotypes can translate into Muslims’ aggressive tendencies towards the West. A correlational survey among a sample of Indonesian Muslims ( N = 360) demonstrated that the more participants negatively stereotyped the West, the more they thought that Muslims should aggress the latter group. We also found as expected that Muslims’ negative stereotypes of the West were positively predicted by the perceived conflict between Islam and the West, and this perceived intergroup conflict in turn mediated the role of Islamic fundamentalism in predicting the negative stereotypes. These findings in sum highlight the role of contextual and individual factors in predicting Muslims’ negative stereotypes of the West, as well as the impact of these stereotypes on Muslims’ aggressive tendencies towards the West. Theoretical implications and research limitations of these empirical findings are discussed.

Humanization of critical care-psychological effects on healthcare professionals and relatives: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To systematically review and evaluate the effects of humanized care of the critically ill on empathy among healthcare professionals, anxiety among relatives, and burnout and compassion fatigue in both groups.

SOURCE

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ProQuest Dissertations were searched from inception to 29 June 2017 for studies that investigated the effects of interventions with potential to humanize care of the critically ill on the following outcomes: empathy among critical care professionals, anxiety among relatives, and burnout and compassion fatigue in either group. We defined a humanizing intervention as one with substantial potential to increase physical or emotional proximity to the patient. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and data quality.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Twelve studies addressing four discrete interventions (liberal visitation, diaries, family participation in basic care, and witnessed resuscitation) and one mixed intervention were included. Ten studies measured anxiety among 1,055 relatives. Two studies measured burnout in 288 critical care professionals. None addressed empathy or compassion fatigue. Eleven of the included studies had an overall high risk of bias. No pooled estimates of effect were calculated as a priori criteria for data synthesis were not met.

CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence to make any quantitative assessment of the effect of humanizing interventions on any of these psychologic outcomes. We observed a trend towards reduced anxiety among family members who participated in basic patient care, liberal visitation, and diary keeping. We found conflicting effects of liberal visitation on burnout among healthcare professionals.

Toward a Comprehensive Understanding of Intergroup Contact: Descriptions and Mediators of Positive and Negative Contact Among Majority and Minority Groups

Positive contact predicts reduced prejudice, but negative contact may increase prejudice at a stronger rate. The current project builds on this work in four ways: establishing an understanding of contact that is grounded in subjective experience, examining the affective mediators involved in the negative contact-prejudice relationship, extending research on the effects of positive and negative contact to minority groups, and examining the contact asymmetry experimentally. Study 1 introduced anger as a mediator of the relationships between positive and negative contact and prejudice among White Americans ( N = 371), using a contact measure that reflected the frequency and intensity of a wide range of experiences. Study 2 found a contact asymmetry among Black and Hispanic Americans ( N = 365). Study 3 found initial experimental evidence of a contact asymmetry ( N = 309). We conclude by calling for a more nuanced understanding of intergroup contact that recognizes its multifaceted and subjective nature.

Human like me: Evidence that I-sharing humanizes the otherwise dehumanized

People persistently undermine the humanness of outgroup members, leaving researchers perplexed as to how to address this problem of 'dehumanization' (Haslam & Loughnan, , Ann Rev of Psychol, 65, 399; Leyens, , Group Process Intergroup Relat, 12, 807). Here, we test whether I-sharing (i.e., sharing a subjective experience) counters this tendency by promoting the humanization of outgroup members. In Study 1, White participants had a face-to-face meeting with a White or Black confederate and either did or did not I-share with this confederate. The extent to which participants humanized the outgroup member depended on whether or not they I-shared with her. Study 2 tested the effect of I-sharing on the two distinct dimensions of dehumanization (Haslam, , Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 10, 252). Conceptually replicating the results of Study 1, participants who I-shared with a social class ingroup or outgroup member rated their partner as higher in human nature than those who did not I-share with their partner. These results add to the growing literature on I-sharing's implications for intergroup processes and suggest effective ways of tackling a persistent problem.

Collective Victimhood and Ingroup Identity Jointly Shape Intergroup Relations, Even in a Non-violent Conflict: The Case of the Belgians

Collective victimhood is the belief that one’s own group has been intentionally and undeservingly harmed by another group (Bar-Tal, Chernyak-Hai, Schori, & Gundar, 2009). While previous research has established the link between collective victimhood and negative intergroup behaviors, the underlying mechanism is virtually unexplored. In the current study, we test the idea that intergroup emotions play an important role, particularly for those group members who are highly identified. Whereas previous research has primarily studied collective victimhood in violent contexts, the current study focuses on its role in the intergroup relations in Belgium, known as a non-violent conflict between French and Dutch speakers.

The associations between collective victimhood, intergroup emotions, and action tendencies were studied in an online survey. The sample consisted of both French-speaking and Dutch-speaking Belgians (N_total = 1774). Structural equation modeling showed that collective victimhood was negatively related to intergroup affiliative emotions (i.e., sympathy) and positively to intergroup distancing emotions (i.e., anger). In addition, these relationships were stronger for participants who strongly identified with their ingroup. Furthermore, intergroup affiliative emotions positively predicted fostering contact with outgroup members, and negatively predicted the tendencies to exclude and take revenge on the outgroup; intergroup distancing emotions positively predicted outgroup exclusion and revenge, and negatively predicted fostering contact with them. The established associations were no different between the linguistic groups. Our results confirm that collective victimhood, and the emotions associated, can help to understand intergroup conflict in non-violent contexts, in addition to violent ones.

Intergroup Reconciliation between Flemings and Walloons: The Predictive Value of Cognitive Style, Authoritarian Ideology, and Intergroup Emotions

Testifying to the gap in fundamental research on positive intergroup outcomes, we investigated reconciliation attitudes in a non-violent intergroup context (i.e., the linguistic conflict in Belgium). By incorporating both important predictors of negative outgroup attitudes (i.e., individual differences in rigid cognitive styles and authoritarian ideologies), and important predictors of reconciliation (i.e., intergroup emotions), we aimed to contribute to a more comprehensive theoretical framework for the analysis of intergroup relations. We recruited one Flemish (N = 310) and one Walloon (N = 365) undergraduate students sample to test the proposed model. Structural equation analyses with maximum likelihood estimation were conducted using the Lavaan package. In both samples, similar patterns were found. More in particular, the need for cognitive closure appeared to be the basic predictor of right-wing attitudes (i.e., right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation) and essentialist thinking, which were then associated with less outgroup empathy and trust, and more outgroup anger. Furthermore, outgroup trust and empathy were positively related to reconciliation. Interestingly, some differences between the Flemish and Walloon sample were found, such as the direct effects of need for closure and social dominance orientation in the first sample, and the non-significant effects of essentialism in the latter sample. Considering the ongoing public and political debate about the linguistic conflict in Belgium, these findings shed a new light on how individual differences relate to specific outgroup emotions, and how these are associated with important intergroup outcomes in the face of intergroup conflict.

Reconciliación Social como estrategia para la transformación de los conflictos socio-políticos, variables asociadas e instrumentos de medición

La reconciliación social ha sido propuesta como una de las estrategias que permite la transformación de los conflictos y el restablecimiento de las relaciones intergrupales pacíficas. El objetivo de este trabajo es hacer una revisión sistemática de la reconciliación, las variables con las que se asocia y los instrumentos para medirla. La búsqueda se hizo en Psycinfo y en la Web of Science, los resultados indican que el mayor porcentaje de artículos surge en los años 90, las publicaciones abordan conflictos que se desarrollan a lo largo de todo el planeta: América, Europa, Oriente medio y África. Las variables con las cuales se relaciona estadística y teóricamente a la reconciliación se agrupan en cinco categorias de variables: recuperación psicosocial, acercamiento de las partes confrontadas, resignificación endo y exogrupal, emociones y gestión del conflicto. Se registran 12 instrumentos con una fiabilidad adecuada para evaluar la reconciliación. Se concluye que con las cinco categorías de variables se podrían diseñar modelos explicativos y de diagnóstico que contribuyan a la promoción de los procesos de reconciliación social temprana, particularmente para aquellos paises que requieren transformar las dinámicas de confrontación violenta.

Emotions in conflicts: understanding emotional processes sheds light on the nature and potential resolution of intractable conflicts

In recent years, researchers have been making substantial advances in understanding the central role of emotions in intractable conflict. We now know that discrete emotions uniquely shape policy preferences in conflict through their unique emotional goals and action tendencies in all stages of conflict including conflict management, conflict resolution and reconciliation. Drawing on this understanding, recent research also points to emotion regulation as a path to reduce conflict and advance peace, exploring both direct and indirect strategies of emotion regulation.

Dehumanization increases instrumental violence, but not moral violence

Across five experiments, we show that dehumanization-the act of perceiving victims as not completely human-increases instrumental, but not moral, violence. In attitude surveys, ascribing reduced capacities for cognitive, experiential, and emotional states to victims predicted support for practices where victims are harmed to achieve instrumental goals, including sweatshop labor, animal experimentation, and drone strikes that result in civilian casualties, but not practices where harm is perceived as morally righteous, including capital punishment, killing in war, and drone strikes that kill terrorists. In vignette experiments, using dehumanizing compared with humanizing language increased participants' willingness to harm strangers for money, but not participants' willingness to harm strangers for their immoral behavior. Participants also spontaneously dehumanized strangers when they imagined harming them for money, but not when they imagined harming them for their immoral behavior. Finally, participants humanized strangers who were low in humanity if they imagined harming them for immoral behavior, but not money, suggesting that morally motivated perpetrators may humanize victims to justify violence against them. Our findings indicate that dehumanization enables violence that perpetrators see as unethical, but instrumentally beneficial. In contrast, dehumanization does not contribute to moral violence because morally motivated perpetrators wish to harm complete human beings who are capable of deserving blame, experiencing suffering, and understanding its meaning.

Specific emotions as mediators of the effect of intergroup contact on prejudice: findings across multiple participant and target groups

Emotions are increasingly being recognised as important aspects of prejudice and intergroup behaviour. Specifically, emotional mediators play a key role in the process by which intergroup contact reduces prejudice towards outgroups. However, which particular emotions are most important for prejudice reduction, as well as the consistency and generality of emotion-prejudice relations across different in-group-out-group relations, remain uncertain. To address these issues, in Study 1 we examined six distinct positive and negative emotions as mediators of the contact-prejudice relations using representative samples of U.S. White, Black, and Asian American respondents (N = 639). Admiration and anger (but not other emotions) were significant mediators of the effects of previous contact on prejudice, consistently across different perceiver and target ethnic groups. Study 2 examined the same relations with student participants and gay men as the out-group. Admiration and disgust mediated the effect of past contact on attitude. The findings confirm that not only negative emotions (anger or disgust, based on the specific types of threat perceived to be posed by an out-group), but also positive, status- and esteem-related emotions (admiration) mediate effects of contact on prejudice, robustly across several different respondent and target groups.

Petitioning for Social Change: Letters to Religious Leaders From Gay Men and Their Family Allies

Coming out is often described as challenging, especially for individuals from conservative religious communities (Etengoff, 2013). In an effort to explore how these sociocultural conflicts are mediated, gay men (n = 16) and their family allies (n = 9) from Christian and Jewish communities wrote letters to religious leaders regarding current sexual minority policies and whether they should change or remain the same. Petitioning tasks were selected as letters can shift author-audience relations to allow for non-normative and unscripted expressions (Daiute & Lightfoot, 2004). Sixteen of the 25 participants addressed their letters to a specific religious figure, illustrating the sociorelational applicability of the task. Ninety-three problems and 75 solutions were discussed, supporting prior discussions of petitioning tasks as a form of living history and conflict mediation (Daiute, 2010). Moreover, 20 of the 25 participants wrote about humanization needs (e.g., "We are not freaks at a freak show"), providing new conceptual structures for participatory research efforts, policy initiatives, and clinical applications.

Humanizing Outgroups Through Multiple Categorization: The Roles of Individuation and Threat

In three studies, we examined the impact of multiple categorization on intergroup dehumanization. Study 1 showed that perceiving members of a rival university along multiple versus simple categorical dimensions enhanced the tendency to attribute human traits to this group. Study 2 showed that multiple versus simple categorization of immigrants increased the attribution of uniquely human emotions to them. This effect was explained by the sequential mediation of increased individuation of the outgroup and reduced outgroup threat. Study 3 replicated this sequential mediation model and introduced a novel way of measuring humanization in which participants generated attributes corresponding to the outgroup in a free response format. Participants generated more uniquely human traits in the multiple versus simple categorization conditions. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings and consider their role in informing and improving efforts to ameliorate contemporary forms of intergroup discrimination.

The Chain of Being: A Hierarchy of Morality

For centuries, philosophers, theologians, and scientists have used the idea of the Great Chain of Being to rank all beings, from demons to animals, humans, and gods, along a vertical dimension of morality. Although the idea of a chain of being has largely fallen out of academic favor, we propose that people still use an embodied vertical moral hierarchy to understand their moral world. This social cognitive chain of being (SCCB) encapsulates a range of research on moral perception including dehumanization (the perception of people as lower on the SCCB), anthropomorphism (the perception of animals as higher and the perceptions of gods as lower on the SCCB), and sanctification (the perception of people as higher on the SCCB). Moral emotions provide affective evidence that guide the perception of social targets as moral (e.g., elevation) or immoral (e.g., disgust). Perceptions of social targets along the SCCB enable people to fulfill group and self-serving, effectance, and existential motivations. The SCCB serves as a unifying theoretical framework that organizes research on moral perception, highlights unique interconnections, and provides a roadmap for future research.

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.

Predictors of Beliefs in Intergroup Forgiveness in a Chilean General Population Sample

Original survey data from a Chilean sample (N = 1267) are used to study the socio-demographic and psychosocial determinants of belief in forgiveness attitudes in the context of measuring the impact of truth and reconciliation reports (NTRC, 1991) and Political Imprisonment and Torture (NPIC, 2004) commissions. A linear multiple regression analysis (R 2 = .15; F(8, 1269) = 14.65; p < .001; effect size f 2 = .18) revealed the positive effect of perceived apology sincerity (β = 0.22; p < .001), emotions of anger (β = -0.08; p < .05), and positive social climate (β = 0.08; p < .05). People who believe in the victims' forgiveness feel less anger, have more positive perceptions of the sincerity and efficacy of the apologies, agree to a greater extent that the commission helped to find out the truth about what happened to the victims, and have a greater perception of the social climate as positive. The results show the importance of psychosocial and institutional variables in beliefs about forgiveness, and they suggest differences between interpersonal and intergroup forgiveness processes.

“We forgive”: A group’s act of forgiveness and its restorative effects on members’ feelings of justice and sentiments towards the offender group

Although typically conceptualized as a reconciliation outcome, we propose that intergroup forgiveness can also be construed as a decision or course of action that advances justice and positive intergroup sentiments among members of the victimized group. However, the process through which this occurs depends on the perceived differentiation between the groups. Following intergroup transgressions staged in the laboratory (Study 1) or reported in news article scenarios (Study 2), participants whose victimized ingroup expressed forgiveness perceived less injustice than those whose group did not forgive, which indirectly improved intergroup sentiments. Among high ingroup identifiers and in victim groups with low relative status (i.e., more salient intergroup boundaries), forgiveness diminished feelings of injustice by reducing the perceived threat to the ingroup’s status/power. In contrast, among low ingroup identifiers and in groups with high relative status, forgiveness diminished feelings of injustice by reducing the perceived threat to collectively shared values.

How can intergroup interaction be bad if intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the science of intergroup relations

The outcomes of social interactions among members of different groups (e.g., racial groups, political groups, sexual orientation groups) have long been of interest to psychologists. Two related literatures on the topic have emerged-the intergroup interaction literature and the intergroup contact literature-in which divergent conclusions have been reported. Intergroup interaction is typically found to have negative effects tied to intergroup bias, producing heightened stress, intergroup anxiety, or outgroup avoidance, whereas intergroup contact is typically found to have positive effects tied to intergroup bias, predicting lower intergroup anxiety and lower prejudice. We examine these paradoxical findings, proposing that researchers contributing to the two literatures are examining different levels of the same phenomenon and that methodological differences can account for the divide between the literatures. Further, we introduce a mathematical model by which the findings of the two literatures can be reconciled. We believe that adopting this model will streamline thinking in the field and will generate integrative new research in which investigators examine how a person's experiences with diversity unfold.

Refining the association between intergroup contact and intergroup forgiveness in Northern Ireland: Type of contact, prior conflict experience, and group identification

We conducted a secondary analysis of a general sample of the population in Northern Ireland, including a significant proportion of respondents with “personal experience” of the sectarian conflict, to provide a refined test of whether contact was associated with more forgiveness and less prejudice. We tested the association between two measures of intergroup contact (outgroup friendship and generic contact) and both intergroup forgiveness and prejudice among people who varied in their personal experience of conflict, while simultaneously considering the role of ingroup identification as an inhibitor of forgiveness, and accounting for relevant demographic variables. Contact was positively associated with forgiveness, marginally more so in the case of friendship than general outgroup contact, whereas both conflict experience and identification were negatively associated with forgiveness. While outgroup friendship robustly predicted forgiveness, generic outgroup contact was moderated by conflict experience and ingroup identification. Effects of both forms of contact on prejudice were not moderated. Results are discussed in terms of the greater impact of friendship contact, forgiveness as a more demanding criterion, and the need to pursue research on intergroup forgiveness among large samples of people directly impacted by the events for which forgiveness is relevant.

Forgiving the terrorists of the Years of Lead in Italy: The role of restorative justice beliefs and sociocognitive determinants

The period of political terrorism named the “Years of Lead” ( Anni di Piombo) started in Italy at the end of the 1960s and lasted until the late 1980s. The social wounds of this bloody time are still not healed, and there is a social debate about the opportunity to concede forgiveness to those responsible for those crimes. Drawing from the intergroup forgiveness literature, we tested a model explaining under which conditions forgiveness towards terrorists could be supported by Italian citizens. The model was tested in two generations: 331 Italian citizens who were adolescents or adults during the terrorism period and 208 Italian young adults born after the end of the Years of Lead. Findings showed that restorative justice beliefs and sociocognitive variables, like outgroup empathy and trust, were uniquely linked to forgiveness towards the terrorists.

Groups’ search for meaning: Redemption on the path to intergroup reconciliation

Four studies investigated the utility of finding meaning in past wrongdoing to promote intergroup reconciliation. Studies 1a, 1b, and 2 demonstrated that prompting members of perpetrator groups to engage in redemption narratives increases collective guilt and willingness to make reparations—both important in obtaining victims’ forgiveness. Further, Study 2 suggests that redemption narratives (but not sense-making) increase willingness to reconcile and reduce perceived justification. Study 3 suggests that perpetrators’ redemption, but not simply sense-making, narratives led victims to perceive greater change in the perpetrator group and increased victims’ willingness to reconcile, but not forgive. Taken together, the present work highlights the potential for redemption narratives to serve as an intervention for past intergroup conflict, increasing the chance for intergroup reconciliation.