Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

The social psychological roots of violent intergroup conflict

Nature Reviews Psychology volume 1, pages 577–589 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Violent intergroup conflicts continue to be one of the most pressing issues of our time. One key factor that instigates and perpetuates conflict is people’s support for violence against the outgroup. Thus, understanding the psychology behind such support is essential for developing strategies to reduce conflict. In this Review, we offer a new umbrella term, the conflict-supporting mindset (CSM), to tie together findings across the extensive literature on the psychology of conflict. A CSM captures a set of interrelated negative attitudes, feelings and beliefs regarding the outgroup, which devalues and demonizes its members. As such, a CSM is pivotal in making violence seem permissible and even necessary. We consider the sources of a CSM: basic cognitive and motivational roots, personal inclinations, group-level influences, situational influences and post-hoc justifications of violence. We then discuss conflict reduction interventions that draw on the psychology underlying a CSM. Finally, we reflect on the limitations of efforts towards conflict reduction, both from a practical and an ethical perspective, and suggest directions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: The social-psychological roots of intergroup conflict.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Roser, M., Hasell, J., Herre, B., & Macdonald, B. War and Peace. OurWorldInData.org https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace (2016).

  2. Dupuy, K. & Rustad, S. A. Trends in armed conflict, 1946–2018. In Conflict Trends Vol. 5 (PRIO Policy Brief, 2018).

  3. Jawad, M. et al. Estimating indirect mortality impacts of armed conflict in civilian populations: panel regression analyses of 193 countries, 1990–2017. BMC Med. 18, 266 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Raleigh, C., Linke, A., Hegre, H. & Karlsen, J. Introducing ACLED: an armed conflict location and event dataset: special data feature. J. Peace Res. 47, 651–660 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Christie, D. J., Tint, B. S., Wagner, R. V. & Winter, D. D. Peace psychology for a peaceful world. Am. Psychol. 63, 543–552 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Reifen-Tagar, M., Morgan, G. S., Skitka, L. & Halperin, E. Moral conviction in the context of protracted intergroup conflict: when ideology matters in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44, 117–125 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Schori-Eyal, N., Halperin, E. & Saguy, T. Intergroup commonality, political ideology, and tolerance of enemy collateral casualties in intergroup conflicts. J. Peace Res. 56, 425–439 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. David, Y., Rosler, N., Ellis, D. & Maoz, I. Gendering human rights: threat and gender perceptions as predictors of attitudes towards violating human rights in asymmetric conflict. Peace Confl. Stud. 23, 1 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Daly, S. Z. Voting for victors: why violent actors win postwar elections. World Politics 71, 747–805 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kruglanski, A. W. et al. The psychology of radicalization and deradicalization: how significance quest impacts violent extremism. Polit. Psych. 35, 69–93 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Correll, J., Hudson, S. M., Guillermo, S. & Ma, D. S. The police officer’s dilemma: a decade of research on racial bias in the decision to shoot. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 8, 201–213 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Correll, J., Park, B., Judd, C. M. & Wittenbrink, B. The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 37, 1102–1117 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mange, J., Chun, W. Y., Sharvit, K. & Belanger, J. J. Thinking about Arabs and Muslims makes Americans shoot faster: effects of category accessibility on aggressive responses in a shooter paradigm. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 42, 552–556 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mekawi, Y. & Bresin, K. Is the evidence from racial bias shooting task studies a smoking gun? Results from a meta-analysis. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 61, 120–130 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dukes, K. N. & Gaither, S. E. Black racial stereotypes and victim blaming: implications for media coverage and criminal proceedings in cases of police violence against racial and ethnic minorities. J. Soc. Issues 73, 789–807 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Claassen, C. Group entitlement, anger and participation in intergroup violence. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 46, 127–148 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Halperin, E., Porat, R., Tamir, M. & Gross, J. J. Can emotion regulation change political attitudes in intractable conflicts? From the laboratory to the field. Psychol. Sci. 24, 106–111 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Huddy, L., Feldman, S. & Cassese, E. On the distinct political effects of anxiety and anger. In The Affect Effect: Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior 202–230 (Univ. Chicago, 2007).

  19. Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., Aramovich, N. P. & Morgan, G. S. Confrontational and preventative policy responses to terrorism: anger wants a fight and fear wants ‘them’ to go away. Basic. Appl. Soc. Psych. 28, 375–384 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Halperin, E. Emotions In Conflict: Inhibitors And Facilitators of Peace Making (Routledge, 2015).

  21. Halperin, E. & Reifen-Tagar, M. Emotions in conflicts: understanding emotional processes sheds light on the nature and potential resolution of intractable conflicts. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 17, 94–98 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bar-Tal, D. & Avrahamzon, T. Development of delegitimization and animosity in the context of intractable conflict. In Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice (eds Sibley, C. & Barlow, F. K.) 582–606 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).

  23. Szabó, Z. P., Vollhardt, J. R. & Mészáros, N. Z. Through the lens of history: the effects of beliefs about historical victimization on responses to refugees. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 74, 94–114 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hadarics, M. & Kende, A. Moral foundations of positive and negative intergroup behavior: moral exclusion fills the gap. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 64, 67–76 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Opotow, S. Social justice theory and practice: fostering inclusion in exclusionary contexts. In Oxford Handbook of Social Psychology and Social Justice (ed. Hammack Jr., P. L.) 41–56 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2018).

  26. Bai, H., Euh, H., Federico, C. M. & Borgida, E. Thou shalt not kill, unless it is not a human: target dehumanization may influence decision difficulty and response patterns for moral dilemmas. Soc. Cogn. 39, 657–686 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bruneau, E. & Kteily, N. The enemy as animal: symmetric dehumanization during asymmetric warfare. PLoS ONE 12, e0181422 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Leidner, B., Castano, E. & Ginges, J. Dehumanization, retributive and restorative justice, and aggressive versus diplomatic intergroup conflict resolution strategies. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 39, 181–192 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lindén, M., Björklund, F. & Bäckström, M. What makes authoritarian and socially dominant people more positive to using torture in the war on terrorism? Pers. Individ. Diff. 91, 98–101 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Allport, G. W. The Nature Of Prejudice (Addison-Wesley, 1954).

  31. Bar-Tal, D. Intractable Conflicts: Socio-psychological Foundations And Dynamics (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  32. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T. & Glick, P. Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: the stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40, 61–149 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nagar, R. & Maoz, I. (Non) acknowledgment of rights as a barrier to conflict resolution: predicting Jewish Israeli attitudes towards the Palestinian demand for national self-determination. Dyn. Asymm. Confl. 7, 150–164 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Haslam, N. Dehumanization: an integrative review. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 10, 252–264 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Roberts, S. O. & Rizzo, M. T. The psychology of American racism. Am. Psychol. 76, 475–487 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pietraszewski, D. Intergroup processes: principles from an evolutionary perspective. In Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles 3rd edn (eds Van Lange, P., Higgins, E. T. & Kruglanski, A. W.) 373–391 (Guilford, 2020).

  37. Kahneman, D. & Renshon, J. Why hawks win. Foreign Policy https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/13/why-hawks-win/ (2007).

  38. Fiske, S. T. & Taylor, S. E. Social Cognition: From Brains To Culture (Sage, 2013).

  39. Macrae, C. N., Milne, A. B. & Bodenhausen, G. V. Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: a peek inside the cognitive toolbox. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 66, 37–47 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Freeman, J. B. & Johnson, K. L. More than meets the eye: split-second social perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20, 362–374 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Cikara, M. & Van Bavel, J. J. The neuroscience of intergroup relations: an integrative review. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 9, 245–274 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Scheepers, D., Ellemers, N. & Derks, B. The “nature” of prejudice: what neuroscience has to offer to the study of intergroup relations. In Neuroscience Of Prejudice And Intergroup Relations 1–21 (Psychology Press, 2013).

  43. Kubota, J. T. & Ito, T. A. Multiple cues in social perception: the time course of processing race and facial expression. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 43, 738–752 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Eberhardt, J. L., Goff, P. A., Purdie, V. J. & Davies, P. G. Seeing black: race, crime, and visual processing. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 87, 876–893 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Tajfel, H. Cognitive aspects of prejudice. J. Biosoc. Sci. 1, 173–191 (1969).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Wilder, D. A. Empirical contributions: predictions of belief homogeneity and similarity following social categorization. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 23, 323–333 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D. & Wetherell, M. S. Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (Basil Blackwell, 1987).

  48. Baumeister, R. F. & Leary, M. R. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 117, 497–529 (1995).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Brewer, M. B. & Caporael, L. R. An evolutionary perspective on social identity: revisiting groups. In Evolution and Social Psychology 143–162 (Psychosocial Press, 2006).

  50. Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. Groups in mind: the coalitional roots of war and morality. In Human Morality and Sociality: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives (ed. Høgh-Olesen, H.) 191–234 (Red Globe, 2010).

  51. Sloan Wilson, D., Van Vugt, M. & O’Gorman, R. Multilevel selection theory and major evolutionary transitions. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 17, 6–9 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Pratto, F. & Glasford, D. E. Ethnocentrism and the value of a human life. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 95, 1411–1428 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Levy, J. et al. Adolescents growing up amidst intractable conflict attenuate brain response to pain of outgroup. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 13696–13701 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Hogg, M. Social identity theory. In Understanding Peace and Conflict Through Social Identity Theory (ed. McKeown, S.) 112–138 (Springer, 2020).

  55. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (eds Austin, W. G. & Worchel, S.) 33–47 (Brooks/Cole, 1979).

  56. Alicke, M. D. & Sedikides, C. Handbook Of Self-enhancement And Self-protection (Guilford Press, 2011).

  57. Dufner, M., Gebauer, J. E., Sedikides, C. & Denissen, J. J. A. Self-enhancement and psychological adjustment: a meta-analytic review. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 23, 48–72 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Scheepers, D. & Ellemers, N. Social identity theory. In Social Psychology in Action 129–143 (Springer, 2019).

  59. Cadinu, M. R. & Rothbart, M. Self-anchoring and differentiation processes in the minimal group setting. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 70, 661–677 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Otten, S. The minimal group paradigm and its maximal impact in research on social categorization. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 11, 85–89 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Gaertner, L. & Insko, C. A. Intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm: categorization, reciprocation, or fear? J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 79, 77 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Brewer, M. B. Intergroup discrimination: ingroup love or outgroup hate? (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).

  63. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M. & Willis, H. Intergroup bias. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53, 575–604 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Jetten, J., Spears, R. & Postmes, T. Intergroup distinctiveness and differentiation: a meta-analytic integration. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 86, 862–879 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Hodson, G. & Dhont, K. The person-based nature of prejudice: individual difference predictors of intergroup negativity. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 26, 1–42 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Sibley, C. G., Harding, J. F., Perry, R., Asbrock, F. & Duckitt, J. Personality and prejudice: extension to the HEXACO personality model. Eur. J. Pers. 24, 515–534 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Costa, P. T. Jr & McCrae, R. R. The five-factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. J. Pers. Disord. 6, 343–359 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Crawford, J. T. & Brandt, M. J. Who is prejudiced, and toward whom? The big five traits and generalized prejudice. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 45, 1455–1467 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sibley, C. G. & Duckitt, J. Personality and prejudice: a meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 12, 248–279 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Kruglanski, A. W. Lay epistemics and human knowledge: cognitive and motivational bases (Springer, 1989).

  71. Dhont, K., Roets, A. & Van Hiel, A. The intergenerational transmission of need for closure underlies the transmission of authoritarianism and anti-immigrant prejudice. Pers. Individ. Diff. 54, 779–784 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Roets, A. & Van Hiel, A. Allport’s prejudiced personality today: need for closure as the motivated cognitive basis of prejudice. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 20, 349–354 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Reed, A. II & Aquino, K. F. Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 84, 1270–1286 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Bar-Tal, D. Intractable Conflicts: Socio-psychological Foundations And Dynamics (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  75. Cohrs, J. C. Ideological bases of violent conflict. The Oxford Handbook Intergroup Conflict (ed. Tropp, L. R.) 53–71 (Oxford, 2012).

  76. Van Hiel, A. et al. A meta-analytic integration of research on the relationship between right-wing ideological attitudes and aggressive tendencies. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 31, 183–221 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Zmigrod, L., Eisenberg, I. W., Bissett, P. G., Robbins, T. W. & Poldrack, R. A. The cognitive and perceptual correlates of ideological attitudes: a data-driven approach. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 376, 20200424 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M. & Napier, J. L. Political ideology: its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 60, 307–337 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Claessens, S., Fischer, K., Chaudhuri, A., Sibley, C. G. & Atkinson, Q. D. The dual evolutionary foundations of political ideology. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 336–345 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Duckitt, J. & Sibley, C. G. A dual-process motivational model of ideology, politics, and prejudice. Psychol. Inq. 20, 98–109 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Feldman, S. & Johnston, C. Understanding the determinants of political ideology: implications of structural complexity. Polit. Psychol. 35, 337–358 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Golec, A. & Federico, C. M. Understanding responses to political conflict: interactive effects of the need for closure and salient conflict schemas. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 87, 750–762 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Maoz, I. & McCauley, C. Psychological correlates of support for compromise: a polling study of Jewish–Israeli attitudes toward solutions to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Polit. Psychol. 26, 791–808 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Kesgin, B. Features of foreign policy birds: Israeli prime ministers as hawks and doves. Coop. Confl. 55, 107–126 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Husnu, S. & Lajunen, T. Predictors of intergroup bias in Turkish Cypriots. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 44, 63–71 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Porat, R., Halperin, E. & Tamir, M. What we want is what we get: group-based emotional preferences and conflict resolution. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 110, 167–190 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Ran, S., Reifen-Tagar, M., Tamir, M. & Halperin, E. The apple doesn’t “feel” far from the tree: mother–child socialization of intergroup empathy. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211047373 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Nagar, R. & Maoz, I. Predicting Jewish–Israeli recognition of Palestinian pain and suffering. J. Confl. Resolut. 61, 372–397 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Noor, M., Shnabel, N., Halabi, S. & Doosje, B. Peace vision and its socio-emotional antecedents: the role of forgiveness, trust, and inclusive victim perceptions. Group. Process. Intergroup Relat. 18, 644–654 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Adorno, T. W. The Authoritarian Personality (Harper & Brothers, 1950).

  91. Altemeyer, R. A. & Altemeyer, B. The Authoritarian Specter (Harvard Univ. Press, 1996).

  92. Feldman, S. Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. In Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (eds Sears, D.O., Huddy, L. & Jervis, R.) 447–508 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2003).

  93. Stenner, K. in The Authoritarian Dynamic 71–94 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

  94. Choma, B. L., Jagayat, A., Hodson, G. & Turner, R. Prejudice in the wake of terrorism: the role of temporal distance, ideology, and intergroup emotions. Pers. Individ. Diff. 123, 65–75 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Van Assche, J., Roets, A., Van Hiel, A. & Dhont, K. Diverse reactions to ethnic diversity: the role of individual differences in authoritarianism. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 28, 523–527 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Kteily, N., Bruneau, E., Waytz, A. & Cotterill, S. The ascent of man: theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 109, 901–931 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Canetti, D., Halperin, E., Hobfoll, S. E., Shapira, O. & Hirsch-Hoefler, S. Authoritarianism, perceived threat and exclusionism on the eve of the disengagement: evidence from Gaza. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 33, 463–474 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Nariman, H. S., Hadarics, M., Soufizadeh, A. M. & Kende, A. The mediating role of moral exclusion between authoritarianism and outgroup discrimination. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 74, 1–6 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Feldman, S. Authoritarianism, threat, and intolerance. In At The Forefront Of Political Psychology 35–54 (Routledge, 2020).

  100. Schnelle, C., Baier, D., Hadjar, A. & Boehnke, K. Authoritarianism beyond disposition: a literature review of research on contextual antecedents. Front. Psychol. 12, 676093 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M. & Malle, B. F. Social dominance orientation: a personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 67, 741–763 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Sidanius, J. & Pratto, F. Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory Of Social Hierarchy And Oppression (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001).

  103. Sidanius, J., Cotterill, S., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Kteily, N. & Carvacho, H. Social dominance theory: explorations in the psychology of oppression. In The Cambridge Handbook Of The Psychology Of Prejudice 149–187 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).

  104. Cichocka, A., Dhont, K. & Makwana, A. P. On self–love and outgroup hate: opposite effects of narcissism on prejudice via social dominance orientation and right–wing authoritarianism. Eur. J. Personal. 31, 366–384 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Mandalaywala, T. M., Amodio, D. M. & Rhodes, M. Essentialism promotes racial prejudice by increasing endorsement of social hierarchies. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 9, 461–469 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. McFarland, S. G. On the eve of war: authoritarianism, social dominance, and American students’ attitudes toward attacking Iraq. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 31, 360–367 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Osborne, D., Satherley, N., Little, T. D. & Sibley, C. G. Authoritarianism and social dominance predict annual increases in generalized prejudice. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 12, 1136–1145 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Gulevich, O., Nevruev, A. & Sarieva, I. War as a method of conflict resolution: the link between social beliefs, ideological orientations, and military attitudes in Russia. Peace Conflict. J. Peace Psychol. 26, 192 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Jackson, L. E. & Gaertner, L. Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their differential use by right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation in support of war. Aggress. Behav. 36, 238–250 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Iyer, A. & Leach, C. W. Emotion in inter-group relations. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 19, 86–125 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Spears, R. et al. Intergroup emotions: more than the sum of the parts. In Emotion Regulation And Well-being 121–145 (Springer, 2011).

  112. Kende, A., Hadarics, M. & Szabó, Z. P. Inglorious glorification and attachment: national and European identities as predictors of anti-and pro-immigrant attitudes. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 58, 569–590 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Leidner, B., Castano, E., Zaiser, E. & Giner-Sorolla, R. Ingroup glorification, moral disengagement, and justice in the context of collective violence. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36, 1115–1129 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Mackie, D. M., Devos, T. & Smith, E. R. Intergroup emotions: explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 79, 602–616 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Mackie, D. M. & Smith, E. R. Intergroup emotions theory: production, regulation, and modification of group-based emotions. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1–69 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Van Zomeren, M., Spears, R., Fischer, A. H. & Leach, C. W. Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 87, 649–664 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Obaidi, M., Bergh, R., Sidanius, J. & Thomsen, L. The mistreatment of my people: victimization by proxy and behavioral intentions to commit violence among Muslims in Denmark. Polit. Psychol. 39, 577–593 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Kuppens, T., Yzerbyt, V. Y., Dandache, S., Fischer, A. H. & Van Der Schalk, J. Social identity salience shapes group-based emotions through group-based appraisals. Cogn. Emot. 27, 1359–1377 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Li, M., Leidner, B., Petrović, N., Orazani, S. N. & Rad, M. S. The role of retributive justice and the use of international criminal tribunals in post-conflict reconciliation. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 48, O133–O151 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Tausch, N. et al. Explaining radical group behavior: developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 101, 129–148 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Vollhardt, J. R. & Bilali, R. The role of inclusive and exclusive victim consciousness in predicting intergroup attitudes: findings from Rwanda, Burundi, and DRC. Polit. Psychol. 36, 489–506 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Vollhardt, J. The Social Psychology Of Collective Victimhood (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).

  123. Demoulin, S. et al. The role of in-group identification in infra-humanization. Int. J. Psychol. 44, 4–11 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Cialdini, R. B. & Trost, M. R. Social influence: social norms, conformity and compliance. In The Handbook of Social Psychology (eds Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., & Lindzey, G.). 151–192 (McGraw-Hill, 1998).

  125. Miller, D. T. & Prentice, D. A. Changing norms to change behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 67, 339–361 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Prentice, D. & Paluck, E. L. Engineering social change using social norms: lessons from the study of collective action. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 35, 138–142 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R. & Kallgren, C. A. A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1015–1026 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Cialdini, R. B. & Goldstein, N. J. Social influence: compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55, 591–621 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Jackson, J. C. & Gelfand, M. J. On the evolution of tightness–looseness in cultural ecosystems. Religion Brain Behav. 7, 155–158 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. van Kleef, G. A., Gelfand, M. J. & Jetten, J. The dynamic nature of social norms: new perspectives on norm development, impact, violation, and enforcement. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 84, 103814 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Tropp, L. R., O’Brien, T. C. & Migacheva, K. How peer norms of inclusion and exclusion predict children’s interest in cross-ethnic friendships. J. Soc. Issues 70, 151–166 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Sherif, M. An Outline Of Social Psychology (Harper, 1948).

  133. Crandall, C. S., Eshleman, A. & O’brien, L. Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: the struggle for internalization. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 82, 359–378 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Crandall, C. S. & Stangor, C. Conformity and prejudice. In On The Nature Of Prejudice: Fifty Years After Allport (eds Dovidio, J. F., Glick, P. & Rudman, L. A.) 295–309 (Wiley, 2005).

  135. Duguid, M. M. & Thomas-Hunt, M. C. Condoning stereotyping? How awareness of stereotyping prevalence impacts expression of stereotypes. J. App. Psychol. 100, 343 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Abrams, D. & Hogg, M. A. Social identification, self-categorization and social influence. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 1, 195–228 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Jetten, J., Postmes, T. & McAuliffe, B. J. ‘We’re all individuals’: group norms of individualism and collectivism, levels of identification and identity threat. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 32, 189–207 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Ross, L. & Nisbett, R. E. The Person And The Situation: Perspectives Of Social Psychology (Pinter & Martin Publishers, 2011).

  139. Singh, B. et al. When practice fails to reduce racial bias in the decision to shoot: the case of cognitive load. Soc. Cogn. 38, 555–570 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Corvalan, A. & Vargas, M. Segregation and conflict: an empirical analysis. J. Dev. Econ. 116, 212–222 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  141. Enos, R. D. & Celaya, C. The effect of segregation on intergroup relations. J. Exp. Polit. Sci. 5, 26–38 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. O’Driscoll, D., Taylor, L. K. & Dautel, J. B. Intergroup resource distribution among children living in segregated neighborhoods amid protracted conflict. Peace Confl. 24, 464–474 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M. & Park, B. Spontaneous prejudice in context: variability in automatically activated attitudes. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 81, 815–827 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O. & Rios, K. Intergroup threat theory. In Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination (ed. Nelson, T. D.) 255–278 (Psychology Press, 2016).

  145. Nasie, M., Reifen-Tagar, M. & Bar-Tal, D. Ethno-political socialization of young children in societies involved in intractable conflict: the case of Israel. J. Soc. Issues 77, 1257–1281 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Berger, R., Gelkopf, M., Heineberg, Y. & Zimbardo, P. A school-based intervention for reducing posttraumatic symptomatology and intolerance during political violence. J. Edu. Psychol. 108, 761 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Canetti, D. Emotional distress, conflict ideology, and radicalization. PS Polit. Sci. Polit 50, 940–943 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Canetti, D., Hirsch-Hoefler, S., Rapaport, C., Lowe, R. D. & Muldoon, O. T. Psychological barriers to a peaceful resolution: longitudinal evidence from the Middle East and Northern Ireland. Stud. Confl. Terror. 41, 660–676 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Bar-Tal, D. Sociopsychological foundations of intractable conflicts. Am. Behav. Sci. 50, 1430–1453 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. Sharvit, K. How conflict begets conflict: activation of the ethos of conflict in times of distress in a society involved in an intractable conflict. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 55, 252–261 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Dong, M., van Prooijen, J.-W. & van Lange, P. A. M. Self-enhancement in moral hypocrisy: moral superiority and moral identity are about better appearances. PLoS ONE 14, e0219382 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  152. Bandura, A. Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 3, 193–209 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  153. Bandura, A. Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm And Live With Themselves (Worth Publishers, 2016).

  154. Shalvi, S., Gino, F., Barkan, R. & Ayal, S. Self-serving justifications: doing wrong and feeling moral. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24, 125–130 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  155. Gausel, N. & Leach, C. W. Concern for self-image and social image in the management of moral failure: rethinking shame. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 41, 468–478 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  156. Badea, C. & Sherman, D. K. Self-affirmation and prejudice reduction: when and why? Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 28, 40–46 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  157. Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N. & Barreto, M. Group virtue: the importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 93, 234–249 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  158. Čehajić-Clancy, S., Effron, D. A., Halperin, E., Liberman, V. & Ross, L. D. Affirmation, acknowledgment of in-group responsibility, group-based guilt, and support for reparative measures. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 101, 256–270 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Gausel, N., Leach, C. W., Mazziotta, A. & Feuchte, F. Seeking revenge or seeking reconciliation? How concern for social-image and felt shame helps explain responses in reciprocal intergroup conflict. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 48, O62–O72 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  160. Leach, C. W., Zeineddine, F. B. & Čehajić-Clancy, S. Moral immemorial: the rarity of self-criticism for previous generations’ genocide or mass violence. J. Soc. Issues 69, 34–53 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  161. Valdesolo, P. & DeSteno, D. The duality of virtue: deconstructing the moral hypocrite. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 44, 1334–1338 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  162. Young, I. F. & Sullivan, D. Competitive victimhood: a review of the theoretical and empirical literature. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 11, 30–34 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  163. Schmid, K. & Muldoon, O. T. Perceived threat, social identification, and psychological well-being: the effects of political conflict exposure. Polit. Psychol. 36, 75–92 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. Simon, B. & Brown, R. Perceived intragroup homogeneity in minority–majority contexts. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 53, 703–711 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Kemmelmeier, M. Authoritarianism and its relationship with intuitive-experiential cognitive style and heuristic processing. Pers. Individ. Diff. 48, 44–48 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Manchi Chao, M., Zhang, Z.-X. & Chiu, C. Adherence to perceived norms across cultural boundaries: the role of need for cognitive closure and ingroup identification. Group Process. Intergr. Relat. 13, 69–89 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  167. Fu, J. H. et al. Epistemic motives and cultural conformity: need for closure, culture, and context as determinants of conflict judgments. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 92, 191–207 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  168. Goldenberg, A. et al. Testing the impact and durability of a group malleability intervention in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 696–701 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  169. Wohl, M. J. A. et al. Belief in the malleability of groups strengthens the tenuous link between a collective apology and intergroup forgiveness. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 41, 714–725 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  170. Beneda, M., Witkowska, M., Khachatryan, N., Grigoryan, N. & Bilewicz, M. Change in perceived outgroup morality increases forgiveness in post-genocide settings — study of the moral exemplars. TPM Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 25, 35–54 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  171. Čehajić-Clancy, S. & Bilewicz, M. Moral-exemplar intervention: a new paradigm for conflict resolution and intergroup reconciliation. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 30, 335–342 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  172. Devine, P. G. & Ash, T. L. Diversity training goals, limitations, and promise: a review of the multidisciplinary literature. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 73, 403–429 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. Devine, P. G., Forscher, P. S., Austin, A. J. & Cox, W. T. L. Long-term reduction in implicit race bias: a prejudice habit-breaking intervention. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 48, 1267–1278 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  174. Idan, O., Halperin, E., Hameiri, B. & Reifen-Tagar, M. A rose by any other name? A subtle linguistic cue impacts anger and corresponding policy support in intractable conflict. Psychol. Sci. 29, 972–983 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  175. Porat, R., Erel, L., Pnueli, V. & Halperin, E. Developing ReApp: an emotion regulation mobile intervention for intergroup conflict. Cogn. Emot. 34, 1326–1342 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  176. Saguy, T. et al. Awareness of intergroup help can rehumanize the out-group. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 6, 551–558 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  177. Laham, S. M. Expanding the moral circle: inclusion and exclusion mindsets and the circle of moral regard. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45, 250–253 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. Shulman, D., Halperin, E., Elron, Z. & Reifen-Tagar, M. R. Moral elevation increases support for humanitarian policies, but not political concessions, in intractable conflict. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 94, 104113 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. Gaertner, S. L. & Dovidio, J. F. Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model (Psychology Press, 2014).

  180. Römpke, A., Fritsche, I. & Reese, G. Get together, feel together, act together: International personal contact increases identification with humanity and global collective action. J. Theor. Soc. Psychol. 3, 35–48 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  181. Turner, R. N. Reducing prejudice and discrimination. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology (Oxford, 2020).

  182. Lemmer, G. & Wagner, U. Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 45, 152–168 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  183. Paluck, E. L., Green, S. A. & Green, D. P. The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behav. Public. Policy 3, 129–158 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  184. Sharan, S. & Kussell, P. Cooperative Learning In The Classroom: Research In Desegregated Schools (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1984).

  185. Bruneau, E., Hameiri, B., Moore-Berg, S. L. & Kteily, N. Intergroup contact reduces dehumanization and meta-dehumanization: cross-sectional, longitudinal, and quasi-experimental evidence from 16 samples in five countries. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 47, 906–920 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  186. Alimo, C. J. From dialogue to action: the impact of cross-race intergroup dialogue on the development of white college students as racial allies. Equity Excell. Educ. 45, 36–59 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  187. Hodges, S. D., Denning, K. R. & Lieber, S. Perspective taking: motivation and impediment to shared reality. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 23, 104–108 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  188. Wang, C. S., Kenneth, T., Ku, G. & Galinsky, A. D. Perspective-taking increases willingness to engage in intergroup contact. PLoS ONE 9, e85681 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  189. Banakou, D., Hanumanthu, P. D. & Slater, M. Virtual embodiment of white people in a black virtual body leads to a sustained reduction in their implicit racial bias. Front. Human Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00601 (2016).

  190. Hasler, B. et al. Virtual reality-based conflict resolution: the impact of immersive 360 video on changing view points and moral judgment in the context of violent intergroup conflict. N. Media Soc. 23, 2255–2278 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  191. Bilali, R. & Vollhardt, J. R. Priming effects of a reconciliation radio drama on historical perspective-taking in the aftermath of mass violence in Rwanda. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49, 144–151 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  192. Galinsky, A. D. & Moskowitz, G. B. Perspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 78, 708–724 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  193. Todd, A. R., Bodenhausen, G. V., Richeson, J. A. & Galinsky, A. D. Perspective taking combats automatic expressions of racial bias. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 100, 1027–1042 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  194. Sherman, D. K., Brookfield, J. & Ortosky, L. Intergroup conflict and barriers to common ground: a self-affirmation perspective. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 11, e12364 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  195. Fein, S. & Spencer, S. J. Prejudice as self-image maintenance: affirming the self through derogating others. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 73, 31 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  196. Badea, C., Binning, K., Verlhiac, J.-F. & Sherman, D. K. In the aftermath of terrorism: effects of self versus group affirmation on support for discriminatory policies. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 76, 421–428 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  197. Stone, J., Whitehead, J., Schmader, T. & Focella, E. Thanks for asking: self-affirming questions reduce backlash when stigmatized targets confront prejudice. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 47, 589–598 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  198. Halperin, E. & Schori-Eyal, N. Towards a new framework of personalized psychological interventions to improve intergroup relations and promote peace. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 14, 255–270 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  199. Feinberg, M. & Willer, R. Moral reframing: a technique for effective and persuasive communication across political divides. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 13, e12501 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  200. Hirsh, J. B., Kang, S. K. & Bodenhausen, G. V. Personalized persuasion: tailoring persuasive appeals to recipients’ personality traits. Psychol. Sci. 23, 578–581 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  201. Bloemraad, I., Silva, F. & Voss, K. Rights, economics, or family? Frame resonance, political ideology, and the immigrant rights movement. Soc. Forces 94, 1647–1674 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  202. Bilewicz, M., Soral, W., Marchlewska, M. & Winiewski, M. When authoritarians confront prejudice. Differential effects of SDO and RWA on support for hate-speech prohibition. Polit. Psychol. 38, 87–99 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  203. Górska, P. et al. Authoritarians go with the flow: social norms moderate the link between right-wing authoritarianism and outgroup-directed attitudes. Polit. Psychol. 43, 131–152 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  204. Roets, A., Au, E. W. M. & Van Hiel, A. Can authoritarianism lead to greater liking of out-groups? The intriguing case of Singapore. Psychol. Sci. 26, 1972–1974 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  205. Dhont, K., Roets, A. & Van Hiel, A. Opening closed minds: the combined effects of intergroup contact and need for closure on prejudice. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 37, 514–528 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  206. Tankard, M. E. & Paluck, E. L. Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 10, 181–211 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  207. Gómez, Á., Tropp, L. R., Vázquez, A., Voci, A. & Hewstone, M. Depersonalized extended contact and injunctive norms about cross-group friendship impact intergroup orientations. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 76, 356–370 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  208. Borinca, I., Andrighetto, L., Valsecchi, G. & Berent, J. Ingroup norms shape undertanding of outgroup prosocial behaviors. Group Process. Intergr. Relat. 25, 1084–1106 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  209. Paluck, E. L. Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: a field experiment in Rwanda. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 96, 574–587 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  210. Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D. & Van Bavel, J. J. Rethinking the nature of cruelty: the role of identity leadership in the Stanford Prison experiment. Am. Psychol. 74, 809 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  211. Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A. & Van Bavel, J. The road to Christchurch: a tale of two leaderships. NZ J. Psychol. 47, 11–14 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  212. Reardon, S. F. & Owens, A. 60 years after Brown: trends and consequences of school segregation. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 40, 199–218 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  213. Reimer, N. K., Kamble, S. V., Schmid, K. & Hewstone, M. Intergroup contact fosters more inclusive social identities. Group Process. Intergr. Relations 25, 133–157 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  214. Weiss, C. M. Diversity in health care institutions reduces Israeli patients’ prejudice toward Arabs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2022634118 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  215. Shulman, D., Halperin, E., Kessler, T., Schori-Eyal, N. & Reifen-Tagar, M. Exposure to analogous harmdoing increases acknowledgment of ingroup transgressions in intergroup conflicts. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 46, 1649–1664 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  216. Bar-Tal, D., Hameiri, B. & Halperin, E. Paradoxical thinking as a paradigm of attitude change in the context of intractable conflict. In Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 63, 129–187 (Academic Press, 2021).

  217. Knab, N., Winter, K. & Steffens, M. C. Flexing the extremes: increasing cognitive flexibility with a paradoxical leading questions intervention. Soc. Cogn. 39, 225–242 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  218. Paluck, E. L., Porat, R., Clark, C. S. & Green, D. P. Prejudice reduction: progress and challenges. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72, 533–560 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  219. Schroeder, J. & Risen, J. L. Befriending the enemy: outgroup friendship longitudinally predicts intergroup attitudes in a coexistence program for Israelis and Palestinians. Group. Process. Intergr. Relat. 19, 72–93 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  220. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. & Norenzayan, A. The weirdest people in the world? Behav. Brain Sci. 33, 61–83 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  221. Kalla, J. L. & Broockman, D. E. Reducing exclusionary attitudes through interpersonal conversation: evidence from three field experiments. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 114, 410–425 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  222. Lowe, M. Types of contact: a field experiment on collaborative and adversarial caste integration. Am. Econ. Rev. 111, 1807–1844 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  223. Munger, K. Tweetment effects on the tweeted: experimentally reducing racist harassment. Polit. Behav. 39, 629–649 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  224. Mousa, S. Building social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq. Science 369, 866–870 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  225. Scacco, A. & Warren, S. S. Can social contact reduce prejudice and discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in Nigeria. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 112, 654–677 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  226. Ditlmann, R. K., Samii, C. & Zeitzoff, T. Addressing violent intergroup conflict from the bottom up? Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 11, 38–77 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  227. Saguy, T. & Kteily, N. Power, negotiations, and the anticipation of intergroup encounters. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 25, 107–141 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  228. Tropp, L. R. Perceived discrimination and interracial contact: predicting interracial closeness among Black and white Americans. Soc. Psychol. Q. 70, 70–81 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  229. Pettigrew, T. F. & Tropp, L. R. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 90, 751–783 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  230. Bruneau, E. G. & Saxe, R. The power of being heard: the benefits of ‘perspective-giving’ in the context of intergroup conflict. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 48, 855–866 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  231. Kteily, N. S. & McClanahan, K. J. Incorporating insights about intergroup power and dominance to help increase harmony and equality between groups in conflict. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 33, 80–85 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  232. Nadler, A. & Shnabel, N. Intergroup reconciliation: instrumental and socio-emotional processes and the needs-based model. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 26, 93–125 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  233. Ron, Y., Solomon, J., Halperin, E. & Saguy, T. Willingness to engage in intergroup contact: a multilevel approach. Peace Confl. 23, 210 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  234. Bergsieker, H. B., Shelton, J. N. & Richeson, J. A. To be liked versus respected: divergent goals in interracial interactions. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 99, 248–264 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  235. Ein-Dor, T. & Hirschberger, G. On sentinels and rapid responders: the adaptive functions of emotion dysregulation. In The Function of Emotions 25–43 (Springer, 2018).

  236. Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T. & Spears, R. Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: a quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychol. Bull. 134, 504 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  237. Becker, J. C. & Tausch, N. A dynamic model of engagement in normative and non-normative collective action: psychological antecedents, consequences, and barriers. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 26, 43–92 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  238. Jost, J. T. A quarter century of system justification theory: questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 58, 263–314 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  239. Jost, J. T., Becker, J., Osborne, D. & Badaan, V. Missing in (collective) action: ideology, system justification, and the motivational antecedents of two types of protest behavior. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 26, 99–108 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  240. Becker, J. C. & Wright, S. C. Yet another dark side of chivalry: benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 101, 62–77 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  241. Durrheim, K. & Dixon, J. 21 Intergroup contact and the struggle for social justice. In The Oxford Handbook of Social Psychology and Social Justice Vol. 367 (ed. Hammack, P. L), 367–378 (Oxford, 2018).

  242. Jackman, M. R. The Velvet Glove (Univ. California Press, 1994).

  243. McKeown, S. & Dixon, J. The “contact hypothesis”: critical reflections and future directions. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 11, e12295 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  244. Saguy, T. Downside of intergroup harmony? When reconciliation might backfire and what to do. Policy Insights Behav. Brain Sci. 5, 75–81 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  245. Hässler, T. et al. A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 380–386 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  246. Dunham, Y. Mere membership. Trends Cogn. Sci. 22, 780–793 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  247. Rutland, A., Killen, M. & Abrams, D. A new social-cognitive developmental perspective on prejudice: the interplay between morality and group identity. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 5, 279–291 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  248. Rhodes, M. & Baron, A. The development of social categorization. Annu. Rev. Dev. Psychol. 1, 359–386 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  249. Diesendruck, G. & HaLevi, H. The role of language, appearance, and culture in children’s social category-based induction. Child. Dev. 77, 539–553 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  250. Buyukozer Dawkins, M., Ting, F., Stavans, M. & Baillargeon, R. Early moral cognition: a principle-based approach. Rev. Psychol. 67, 159–186 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  251. Guidetti, M., Carraro, L. & Castelli, L. An exploration of the differential effects of parents’ authoritarianism dimensions on pre-school children’s epistemic, existential, and relational needs. Front. Psychol. 7, 2079 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  252. Guidetti, M., Carraro, L. & Castelli, L. Children’s inequality aversion in intergroup contexts: the role of parents’ social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism and moral foundations. PLoS ONE 16, e0261603 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  253. Reifen-Tagar, M., Federico, C. M., Lyons, K., Ludeke, S. & Koenig, M. Heralding the authoritarian: early expressions of selective trust in authorities. Psychol. Sci. 25, 883–892 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  254. Reifen-Tagar, M., Hetherington, C., Shulman, D. & Koenig, M. On the path to social dominance? Individual differences in sensitivity to intergroup fairness violations in early childhood. Pers. Individ. Diff. 113, 246–250 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  255. Reifen-Tagar, M. & Saguy, T. Early sociopolitical development matters for inequality: SDO and the gender gap in leadership. Psychol. Inq. 32, 124–130 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  256. Hussak, L. J., & Cimpian, A. Investigating the origins of political views: biases in explanation predict conservative attitudes in children and adults. Dev. Sci. 213, e12567 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  257. Nasie, M., Diamond, A. H. & Bar-Tal, D. Young children in intractable conflicts: the Israeli case. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 20, 365–392 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  258. Taylor, L. K. The developmental peacebuilding model (DPM) of children’s prosocial behaviors in settings of intergroup conflict. Child. Dev. Perspect. 14, 127–134 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  259. Saguy, T. & Sobol-Sarag, D. The consequences of a sense of loss in common identity: an over-time examination. TPM Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 29, 71–84 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  260. Saguy, T. et al. When a sense of “we” is lost: investigating the consequences of a lost common identity among Druze in Israel. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 11, 667–675 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  261. Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L. & Kawakami, K. Intergroup contact: the past, present, and the future. Group Process. Intergr. Relat. 6, 5–21 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  262. Brown, R. & Hewstone, M. An integrative theory of intergroup contact. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 37, 255–343 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  263. Hodson, G., Hewstone, M. & Swart, H. Advances In Intergroup Contact: Epilogue And Future Directions (Psychology Press, 2013).

  264. Tausch, N., Saguy, T. & Bryson, J. How does intergroup contact affect social change? Its impact on collective action and individual mobility intentions among members of a disadvantaged group. J. Soc. Issues https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12127 (2015).

  265. van Zalk, M. H. W., Kotzur, P. F., Schmid, K., Al Ramiah, A. & Hewstone, M. Adolescent development of interethnic attitudes following a social intervention to increase intergroup contact: the moderating role of affective forecasting. Dev. Psychol. 57, 1000–1017 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  266. Levin, S., Van Laar, C. & Sidanius, J. The effects of ingroup and outgroup friendships on ethnic attitudes in college: a longitudinal study. Group Process. Intergr. Relat. 6, 76–92 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  267. Finseraas, H. & Kotsadam, A. Does personal contact with ethnic minorities affect anti-immigrant sentiments? Evidence from a field experiment. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 56, 703–722 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  268. Al Ramiah, A. & Hewstone, M. ‘Rallying around the flag’: can an intergroup contact intervention promote national unity? Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 51, 239–256 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  269. Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., Kupermintz, H. & Lang, J. Arab–Jewish student encounters: the Beit Hagefen co-existence program. Handb. Interethnic Coexistence 565, 584 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  270. Yablon, Y. B. Contact as a means of inter-religious engagement: the role of religious culture in peace-building activities. in International Handbook of Inter-Religious Education 497–512 (Springer, 2010).

  271. Horenczyk, G. & Bekerman, Z. The effects of intercultural acquaintance and structured intergroup interaction on ingroup, outgroup, and reflected ingroup stereotypes. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 21, 71–83 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  272. Maoz, I. An experiment in peace: reconciliation-aimed workshops of Jewish–Israeli and Palestinian youth. J. Peace Res. 37, 721–736 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  273. Wayne, E. K. Is it just talk? Understanding and evaluating intergroup dialogue. Confl. Resolut. Q. 25, 451–478 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  274. Hammack, P. L. & Pilecki, A. Power in history: contrasting theoretical approaches to intergroup dialogue. J. Soc. Issues 71, 371–385 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  275. Green, D. P. & Wong, J. S. Tolerance and the contact hypothesis: a field experiment. In The Political Psychology of Democratic Citizenship (eds Borgida, E., Federico, C. M. & Sullivan J. L.) 1–23 (Oxford, 2009).

  276. Schuitema, J. & Veugelers, W. Multicultural contacts in education: a case study of an exchange project between different ethnic groups. Educ. Stud. 37, 101–114 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  277. Capozza, D., Di Bernardo, G. A. & Falvo, R. Intergroup contact and outgroup humanization: is the causal relationship uni-or bidirectional? PLoS ONE 12, e0170554 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  278. Capozza, D., Falvo, R., Di Bernardo, G. A., Vezzali, L. & Visintin, E. P. Intergroup contact as a strategy to improve humanness attributions: a review of studies. TPM Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 21, 349–362 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  279. Rothbart, M. & John, O. P. Social categorization and behavioral episodes: a cognitive analysis of the effects of intergroup contact. J. Soc. Issues 41, 81–104 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  280. Crisp, R. J. & Turner, R. N. Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions? Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. Am. Psychol. 64, 231 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  281. White, F. A. et al. Beyond direct contact: the theoretical and societal relevance of indirect contact for improving intergroup relations. J. Soc. Issues 77, 132–153 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  282. Imperato, C., Schneider, B. H., Caricati, L., Amichai-Hamburger, Y. & Mancini, T. Allport meets internet: a meta-analytical investigation of online intergroup contact and prejudice reduction. Int. J. Intercult. Relations. 81, 131–141 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  283. Amichai-Hamburger, Y. & McKenna, K. Y. The contact hypothesis reconsidered: interacting via the internet. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 11, 825–843 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  284. Vezzali, L., Hewstone, M., Capozza, D., Giovannini, D. & Wölfer, R. Improving intergroup relations with extended and vicarious contact: an integrative review. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 25, 314–389 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  285. Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T. & Ropp, S. A. The extended contact effect: knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 73, 73 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  286. Zhou, S., Page-Gould, E., Aron, A., Moyer, A. & Hewstone, M. The extended contact hypothesis: a meta-analysis on 20 years of research. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 23, 132–160 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the Israeli Science Foundation grant no. 910/21 awarded to T.S. and grant no. 2436/19 awarded to M.R.T.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel

    Tamar Saguy & Michal Reifen-Tagar

Authors
  1. Tamar Saguy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michal Reifen-Tagar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors contributed equally to all aspects of the article and share first authorship.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Tamar Saguy or Michal Reifen-Tagar.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Psychology thanks Michal Bilewicz, Rebecca Wolfe and the other, anonymous, reviewer for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saguy, T., Reifen-Tagar, M. The social psychological roots of violent intergroup conflict. Nat Rev Psychol 1, 577–589 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00083-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00083-7

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing