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:

Advancing research and practice of psychological intergroup interventions

Nature Reviews Psychology volume 3, pages 574–588 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The decline in intergroup relations evident in myriad conflicts around the world has far-reaching implications: it erodes trust and cooperation at both the individual and societal levels, hinders effective societal functioning and threatens the well-being of individuals living in such contexts. In response, researchers have developed evidence-based interventions aimed at improving intergroup relations and cultivating societies that are more inclusive, tolerant and peaceful. However, a ‘one intervention fits all’ approach persists. In this Review, we consolidate research from four domains in social psychology (prejudice reduction, conflict resolution, intergroup reconciliation and affective polarization) to elucidate the critical features necessary for successful intergroup interventions. Specifically, we consider the importance of identifying meaningful intervention goals (what), crucial characteristics of intervention recipients (who) and key contextual features (where) for optimizing interventions. We also describe how motivation and conformity might present barriers to the successful implementation of intergroup interventions in the real world and we suggest ways to overcome these challenges. A thorough understanding of the features that influence intervention outcomes will enable effective personalization and contextualization of existing interventions and development of new ones.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Fig. 1: Multilevel nested taxonomy of intergroup interventions.
Fig. 2: A procedure for designing and evaluating intergroup interventions.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Uppsala Conflict Data Program. UCDP https://ucdp.uu.se/ (2022).

  2. Esteban, J., Mayoral, L. & Ray, D. Ethnicity and conflict: an empirical study. Am. Econ. Rev. 102, 1310–1342 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Deutsch, M., Coleman, P. T. & Marcus, E. C. The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice (John Wiley & Sons, 2011).

  4. Hegre, H. & Nygård, H. M. Governance and conflict relapse. J. Confl. Resolut. 59, 984–1016 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Von Einsiedel, S., Bosetti, L., Cockayne, J., Salih, C. & Wan, W. Civil war trends and the changing nature of armed conflict. UNU CPR https://unu.edu/cpr/project/civil-war-trends-and-changing-nature-armed-conflict (2017).

  6. Cehajic, S., Brown, R. & Castano, E. Forgive and forget? Antecedents and consequences of intergroup forgiveness in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Polit. Psychol. 29, 351–367 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fiske, S. T. What we know now about bias and intergroup conflict, the problem of the century. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 11, 123–128 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J. & Cairns, E. Intergroup trust in Northern Ireland. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 35, 45–59 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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 

  10. Halperin, E., Hameiri, B. & Littman, R. Psychological Intergroup Interventions: Evidence-Based Approaches to Improve Intergroup Relations (Taylor & Francis, 2023). This handbook provides a systematic and comprehensive overview of existing psychological intergroup interventions.

  11. Čehajić-Clancy, S., Goldenberg, A., Gross, J. J. & Halperin, E. Social-psychological interventions for intergroup reconciliation: an emotion regulation perspective. Psychol. Inq. 27, 73–88 (2016). This paper proposed regulation of group-based emotions as an important process underlying the effectiveness of intergroup interventions.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hartman, R. et al. Interventions to reduce partisan animosity. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6, 1194–1205 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Čehajić‐Clancy, S., Janković, A., Opačin, N. & Bilewicz, M. The process of becoming ‘we’ in an intergroup conflict context: how enhancing intergroup moral similarities leads to common‐ingroup identity. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 62, 1251–1270 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Brewer, M. B. Intergroup Relations (Oxford Univ. Press, 2010).

  15. Paluck, E. L., Porat, R., Clark, C. S. & Green, D. P. Prejudice reduction: progress and challenges. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 72, 533–560 (2021). This paper reviews the effectiveness and limitations of experimental studies aimed at prejudice reduction by proposing specific limitations of the field and ways of overcoming those.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nadler, A., Malloy, T. & Fisher, J. D. Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (Oxford Univ. Press, 2008).

  17. Hameiri, B., Nabet, E., Bar-Tal, D. & Halperin, E. Paradoxical thinking as a conflict-resolution intervention: comparison to alternative interventions and examination of psychological mechanisms. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 44, 122–139 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bilali, R. & Staub, E. In The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice (eds Sibley, C. G. & Barlow, F. K.) 607–631 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).

  19. Halperin, E., Russell, A. G., Trzesniewski, K. H., Gross, J. J. & Dweck, C. S. Promoting the Middle East peace process by changing beliefs about group malleability. Science 333, 1767–1769 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Avichail, T., Tamir, M., Gross, J. J. & Halperin, E. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 99–113 (Routledge, 2023).

  21. Cohen-Chen, S., Goldenberg, A., Gross, J. J. & Halperin, E. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 86–98 (Routledge, 2023).

  22. Sherman, D. K., Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) ch. 6 (Routledge, 2023).

  23. Murrar, S. & Brauer, M. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) ch. 4 (Routledge, 2023).

  24. Hameiri, B., Bar-Tal, D. & Halperin, E. Challenges for peacemakers: how to overcome socio-psychological barriers. Policy Insights Behav. Brain Sci. 1, 164–171 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ditlmann, R. K., Samii, C. & Zeitzoff, T. Addressing violent intergroup conflict from the bottom up? Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 11, 38–77 (2017). This paper reviews the effectiveness of individual-level interventions.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 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 

  27. Littman, R., Scacco, A. & Weiss, C. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 3–16 (Routledge, 2024).

  28. Blaylock, D., Turner, R. N. & Crisp, R. J. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 17–30 (Routledge, 2023).

  29. Witkowska, M., Bilewicz, M. & Čehajić-Clancy, S. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 126–135 (Routledge, 2022).

  30. Mousa, S. Building social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq. Science 369, 866–870 (2020). This paper demonstrates the effectiveness and the limits of contact-based approaches to improving intergroup relations using field experiments.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Burrows, B., Tropp, L. R., Dehrone, T. A. & Čehajić-Clancy, S. How intergroup contact shapes intergroup attitudes and construals of relations between ethnic groups: evidence from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol. 28, 372–383 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Čehajić-Clancy, S. & Olsson, A. Threaten and affirm: the role of ingroup moral exemplars for promoting prosocial intergroup behavior through affirming moral identity. Group Process. Intergroup Relat 27, 136843022211483 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Shuman, E. et al. Advancing support for intergroup equality via a self-affirmation campaign. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 26, 1888–1908 (2022).

  34. Hameiri, B. & Moore-Berg, S. L. Intervention tournaments: an overview of concept, design, and implementation. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 17, 1525–1540 (2022). This paper proposes a new experimental design that compares several interventions against a single control condition.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Landry, A. P. & Halperin, E. Intergroup psychological interventions: the motivational challenge. Am. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001289 (2023). This paper addresses the issue of motivation in studying and implementing intergroup interventions.

  36. Bar‐Tal, D. & Hameiri, B. Interventions to change well‐anchored attitudes in the context of intergroup conflict. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 14, e12534 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 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). This paper presents a framework for personalization of intergroup interventions.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Čehajić-Clancy, S. & Bilewicz, M. Fostering reconciliation through historical moral exemplars in a postconflict society. Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol. 23, 288–296 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  39. 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. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 101, 256–270 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Halperin, E., Pliskin, R., Saguy, T., Liberman, V. & Gross, J. J. Emotion regulation and the cultivation of political tolerance: searching for a new track for intervention. J. Confl. Resolut. 58, 1110–1138 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Galinsky, A. D. & Ku, G. The effects of perspective-taking on prejudice: the moderating role of self-evaluation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 30, 594–604 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 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 

  43. Čehajić‐Clancy, S. & Bilewicz, M. Appealing to moral exemplars: shared perception of morality as an essential ingredient of intergroup reconciliation. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 14, 217–243 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 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 

  45. Levendusky, M. S. Americans, not partisans: can priming american national identity reduce affective polarization? J. Polit. 80, 59–70 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kubin, E., Puryear, C., Schein, C. & Gray, K. Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2008389118 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Walton, G. M. The new science of wise psychological interventions. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23, 73–82 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 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 

  49. Murrar, S., Campbell, M. R. & Brauer, M. Exposure to peers’ pro-diversity attitudes increases inclusion and reduces the achievement gap. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 889–897 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Endevelt, K., Halperin, E. & Porat, R. Zoom out: an intervention on the virtual learning environment improves minority students’ grades in two field experiments in Israel. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2313496121 (2024).

  51. Littman, R., Bilali, R. & Hameiri, B. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 165–177 (Routledge, 2023).

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 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 

  54. 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 

  55. Dixon, J., Tropp, L. R., Durrheim, K. & Tredoux, C. “Let them eat harmony”: prejudice-reduction strategies and attitudes of historically disadvantaged groups. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 19, 76–80 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Reimer, N. K. & Sengupta, N. K. Meta-analysis of the “ironic” effects of intergroup contact. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 124, 362–380 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Saguy, T., Tausch, N., Dovidio, J. F. & Pratto, F. The irony of harmony: intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychol. Sci. 20, 114–121 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Dixon, J. ‘Thinking ill of others without sufficient warrant?’ Transcending the accuracy–inaccuracy dualism in prejudice and stereotyping research. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 56, 4–27 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Brauer, M. Stuck on intergroup attitudes: the need to shift gears to change intergroup behaviors. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 19, 280–294 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ. Educ. Res. 8, 239–260 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Mortensen, C. R. et al. Trending norms: a lever for encouraging behaviors performed by the minority. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 10, 201–210 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 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 

  63. Tankard, M. E. & Paluck, E. L. The effect of a supreme court decision regarding gay marriage on social norms and personal attitudes. Psychol. Sci. 28, 1334–1344 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. 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. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 47, 906–920 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lees, J. & Cikara, M. Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 279–286 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Kteily, N., Hodson, G. & Bruneau, E. They see us as less than human: metadehumanization predicts intergroup conflict via reciprocal dehumanization. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 110, 343–370 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Moore-Berg, S. L., Ankori-Karlinsky, L.-O., Hameiri, B. & Bruneau, E. Exaggerated meta-perceptions predict intergroup hostility between American political partisans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 14864–14872 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Shnabel, N. & Nadler, A. A needs-based model of reconciliation: satisfying the differential emotional needs of victim and perpetrator as a key to promoting reconciliation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 94, 116–132 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Ford, B. Q., Feinberg, M., Lam, P., Mauss, I. B. & John, O. P. Using reappraisal to regulate negative emotion after the 2016 US Presidential election: does emotion regulation trump political action? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 117, 998–1015 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Solak, N., Tamir, M., Sümer, N., Jost, J. T. & Halperin, E. Expressive suppression as an obstacle to social change: linking system justification, emotion regulation, and collective action. Motiv. Emot. 45, 661–682 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Brock-Petroshius, K., Garcia-Perez, J., Gross, M. & Abrams, L. Colorblind attitudes, empathy, and shame: preparing white students for anti-racist social work practice. J. Soc. Work. Educ. 59, 346–360 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Iyer, A., Leach, C. W. & Crosby, F. J. White guilt and racial compensation: the benefits and limits of self-focus. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 29, 117–129 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Reifen Tagar, M., Morgan, G. S., Halperin, E. & Skitka, L. J. When ideology matters: moral conviction and the association between ideology and policy preferences in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44, 117–125 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Harel, T. O., Maoz, I. & Halperin, E. A conflict within a conflict: intragroup ideological polarization and intergroup intractable conflict. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 34, 52–57 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N. & Westwood, S. J. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 22, 129–146 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 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 

  77. Hitlin, S. & Pinkston, K. in Handbook of Social Psychology (eds DeLamater, J. & Ward, A.) 319–339 (Springer, 2013).

  78. Altemeyer, B. Enemies of Freedom: Understanding Right-Wing Authoritarianism (Jossey-Bass, 1988).

  79. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Van Laar, C. & Levin, S. Social dominance theory: its agenda and method. Polit. Psychol. 25, 845–880 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Zmigrod, L. The role of cognitive rigidity in political ideologies: theory, evidence, and future directions. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 34, 34–39 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Jost, J. T. & Amodio, D. M. Political ideology as motivated social cognition: behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motiv. Emot. 36, 55–64 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Piurko, Y., Schwartz, S. H. & Davidov, E. Basic personal values and the meaning of left‐right political orientations in 20 countries. Polit. Psychol. 32, 537–561 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Ruisch, B. C. et al. Examining the left–right divide through the lens of a global crisis: ideological differences and their implications for responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Polit. Psychol. 42, 795–816 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. 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 

  85. Voelkel, J. G. & Feinberg, M. Morally reframed arguments can affect support for political candidates. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 9, 917–924 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Winterich, K. P., Aquino, K., Mittal, V. & Swartz, R. When moral identity symbolization motivates prosocial behavior: the role of recognition and moral identity internalization. J. Appl. Psychol. 98, 759–770 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Brannon, T. N., Carter, E. R., Murdock‐Perriera, L. A. & Higginbotham, G. D. From backlash to inclusion for all: instituting diversity efforts to maximize benefits across group lines. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 12, 57–90 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Argüello-Gutiérrez, C., López-Rodríguez, L. & Vázquez, A. The effect of moral foundations on intergroup relations: the salience of fairness promotes the acceptance of minority groups. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 15, 194855062311621 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  89. Halperin, E. & Pliskin, R. Emotions and emotion regulation in intractable conflict: studying emotional processes within a unique context. Polit. Psychol. 36, 119–150 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Halperin, E. Emotional barriers to peace: emotions and public opinion of Jewish Israelis about the peace process in the Middle East. Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol. 17, 22–45 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Snyder, C. R. The past and possible futures of hope. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 19, 11–28 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Roseman, I. J. Cognitive determinants of emotion: a structural theory. Rev. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 5, 11–36 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Berkowitz, L. Aggression: Its Causes, Consequences, and Control (McGraw-Hill, 1993).

  95. Halperin, E. Group-based hatred in intractable conflict in Israel. J. Confl. Resolut. 52, 713–736 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Goldberg, L. R. An alternative ‘description of personality’: the big-five factor structure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59, 1216–1229 (1990).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. 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 

  99. Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M. & Zakrisson, I. What matters most to prejudice: big five personality, social dominance orientation, or right‐wing authoritarianism? Eur. J. Personal. 18, 463–482 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., Grob, A., Suh, E. M. & Shao, L. Cross-cultural evidence for the fundamental features of extraversion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79, 452–468 (2000).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H. & Knafo, A. The big five personality factors and personal values. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28, 789–801 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Graziano, W. G. & Eisenberg, N. in Handbook of Personality Psychology (eds. Hogan, R., Johnson, J. A. & Briggs S. R.) 795–824 (Elsevier, 1997).

  103. Roberts, B. W., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S. & Goldberg, L. R. The structure of conscientiousness: an empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Pers. Psychol. 58, 103–139 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Carver, C. S., Sutton, S. K. & Scheier, M. F. Action, emotion, and personality: emerging conceptual integration. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26, 741–751 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Hirsh, J. B. & Inzlicht, M. The devil you know: neuroticism predicts neural response to uncertainty. Psychol. Sci. 19, 962–967 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Fritsche, I., Jonas, E. & Kessler, T. Collective reactions to threat: implications for intergroup conflict and for solving societal crises: collective reactions to threat. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 5, 101–136 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Jonas, E. et al. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 49, 219–286 (Elsevier, 2014).

  108. Tajfel, H. Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 33, 1–39 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Brewer, M. B. Social identity, distinctiveness, and in-group homogeneity. Soc. Cogn. 11, 150–164 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Park, J. H. & Van Leeuwen, F. In Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology (eds Zeigler-Hill, V., Welling, L. L. M. & Shackelford, T. K.) 115–125 (Springer, 2015).

  111. Hirschberger, G. & Shuster, B. in The Tribal Mind: The Psychology of Collectivism (Visegrad International Symposium on Social Psychology) (ed. Forgas, J.) (2024).

  112. Noor, M., James Brown, R. & Prentice, G. Precursors and mediators of intergroup reconciliation in Northern Ireland: a new model. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 47, 481–495 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Harris, L. T. & Fiske, S. T. Dehumanizing the lowest of the low: neuroimaging responses to extreme out-groups. Psychol. Sci. 17, 847–853 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W. & Gaertner, S. L. Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: a meta-analytic review. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 10, 336–353 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Voelkel, J. G. et al. Interventions reducing affective polarization do not necessarily improve anti-democratic attitudes. Nat. Hum. Behav. 7, 55–64 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Pettigrew, T. F. The emergence of contextual social psychology. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 44, 963–971 (2018). This paper calls for an empirical approach to systematically examine the impact of social context in the field of social psychology.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Pettigrew, T. F. & Hewstone, M. The single factor fallacy: implications of missing critical variables from an analysis of intergroup contact theory. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 11, 8–37 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Christ, O. et al. Contextual effect of positive intergroup contact on outgroup prejudice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3996–4000 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Čehajić-Clancy, S., Lindner, C., Gelfort, P., Elad-Strenger, J. & Kessler, T. Where you live matters more than who you know: context-level contact as a stronger predictor of post-war reconciliation than individual-level contact. Preprint at PsyArXiv https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/skz5v (2023). This paper establishes the importance of social context for post-war reconciliation.

  120. Halperin, E., Russell, A. G., Dweck, C. S. & Gross, J. J. Anger, hatred, and the quest for peace: anger can be constructive in the absence of hatred. J. Confl. Resolut. 55, 274–291 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Cohen-Chen, S., Halperin, E., Crisp, R. J. & Gross, J. J. Hope in the Middle East: malleability beliefs, hope, and the willingness to compromise for peace. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 5, 67–75 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Cohen-Chen, S., Crisp, R. J. & Halperin, E. A new appraisal-based framework underlying hope in conflict resolution. Emot. Rev. 9, 208–214 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Hässler, T. et al. Need satisfaction in intergroup contact: a multinational study of pathways toward social change. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 122, 634 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Hakim, N. et al. Turning the lens in the study of precarity: on experimental social psychology’s acquiescence to the settler–colonial status quo in historic Palestine. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 62, 21–38 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Dovidio, J. F. et al. in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (eds Nadler, A., Malloy, T. E. & Fisher, J. D.) 227–253 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2008).

  127. Wagner, U., Christ, O., Pettigrew, T. F., Stellmacher, J. & Wolf, C. Prejudice and minority proportion: contact instead of threat effects. Soc. Psychol. Q. 69, 380–390 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Binder, J. et al. Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 96, 843–856 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. 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 

  130. 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 

  131. Pratto, F. & Stewart, A. L. Power dynamics in intergroup relations. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 33, 250–255 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Knowles, E. D., Lowery, B. S., Chow, R. M. & Unzueta, M. M. Deny, distance, or dismantle? How white Americans manage a privileged identity. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 9, 594–609 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Shuman, E., Saguy, T., van Zomeren, M. & Halperin, E. Disrupting the system constructively: testing the effectiveness of nonnormative nonviolent collective action. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 121, 819–841 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Hässler, T., Shnabel, N., Ullrich, J., Arditti-Vogel, A. & SimanTov-Nachlieli, I. Individual differences in system justification predict power and morality-related needs in advantaged and disadvantaged groups in response to group disparity. Group. Process. Intergroup Relat. 22, 746–766 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Kahalon, R., Shnabel, N., Halabi, S. & SimanTov‐Nachlieli, I. Power matters: the role of power and morality needs in competitive victimhood among advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 58, 452–472 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Sharvit, K., Brambilla, M., Babush, M. & Colucci, F. P. To feel or not to feel when my group harms others? the regulation of collective guilt as motivated reasoning. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 41, 1223–1235 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Blanchard, F. A., Lilly, T. & Vaughn, L. A. Reducing the expression of racial prejudice. Psychol. Sci. 2, 101–105 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Kelman, H. C. in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (eds Nadler, A., Malloy, T. E. & Fisher, J. D.) 15–32 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2008).

  139. Crocker, J., Garcia, J. A. & Nuer, N. in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (eds Nadler, A., Malloy, T. E. & Fisher, J. D.) 171–194 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2008).

  140. Sherif, M. The Psychology of Social Norms (Harper, 1936).

  141. Saguy, T. & Reifen-Tagar, M. The social psychological roots of violent intergroup conflict. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 1, 577–589 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. Mackie, D. M. & Smith, E. R. Intergroup relations: insights from a theoretically integrative approach. Psychol. Rev. 105, 499 (1998).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Yzerbyt, V. & Demoulin, S. in Handbook of Social Psychology 5th edn (eds Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T. & Lindzey, G.) 1024–1083 (John Wiley & Sons, 2010).

  144. Mironova, V. & Whitt, S. Social norms after conflict exposure and victimization by violence: experimental evidence from Kosovo. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 48, 749–765 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. Sharvit, K., Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Raviv, A. & Gurevich, R. Ideological orientation and social context as moderators of the effect of terrorism: the case of Israeli-Jewish public opinion regarding peace. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 40, 105–121 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Moore-Berg, S. L., Hameiri, B. & Bruneau, E. The prime psychological suspects of toxic political polarization. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 34, 199–204 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Pasek, M. H., Ankori-Karlinsky, L.-O., Levy-Vene, A. & Moore-Berg, S. L. Misperceptions about out-partisans’ democratic values may erode democracy. Sci. Rep. 12, 16284 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  148. Moore-Berg, S. L. in Psychological Intergroup Interventions (Sherman, D. K, Gibbs, W. C. & Binning, K. R.) 136–148 (Routledge, 2024).

  149. Kruglanski, A. W. The Psychology of Closed Mindedness (Psychology Press, 2013).

  150. Bar-Tal, D. & Halperin, E. in Intergroup Conflicts and their Resolution: A Social Psychological Perspective (ed. Bar-Tal, D.) 217–239 (Psychology Press, 2011).

  151. Ross, L. & Ward, A. Psychological barriers to dispute resolution. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 27, 255–304 (Elsevier, 1995).

  152. Schwartz, S. H. et al. Refining the theory of basic individual values. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 103, 663 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Nasie, M., Bar-Tal, D., Pliskin, R., Nahhas, E. & Halperin, E. Overcoming the barrier of narrative adherence in conflicts through awareness of the psychological bias of naïve realism. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 40, 1543–1556 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Hasson, Y. et al. The enemy’s gaze: immersive virtual environments enhance peace promoting attitudes and emotions in violent intergroup conflicts. PLoS One 14, e0222342 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  156. Porat, R., Tamir, M. & Halperin, E. Group-based emotion regulation: a motivated approach. Emotion 20, 16–20 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Čehajić-Clancy, S., Jamshed, N., Olsson. A. & Momčilović, A. From inspiration to restoration: moral elevation as a catalyst for improving intergroup relations in contexts of conflict. J. Person. Social Psychol. (in the press).

  158. De La Sablonnière, R. et al. The impact of national integration policies on prejudice and psychological well‐being: the fundamental role of the clarity and coherence of integration policies. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 50, 614–633 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Schlueter, E., Meuleman, B. & Davidov, E. Immigrant integration policies and perceived group threat: a multilevel study of 27 western and eastern European countries. Soc. Sci. Res. 42, 670–682 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  162. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. 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. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1015–1026 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B. & Griskevicius, V. A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. J. Consum. Res. 35, 472–482 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Paluck, E. L., Shepherd, H. & Aronow, P. M. Changing climates of conflict: a social network experiment in 56 schools. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 566–571 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  167. Mertens, S., Herberz, M., Hahnel, U. J. J. & Brosch, T. The effectiveness of nudging: a meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions across behavioral domains. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2107346118 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Epley, N., Caruso, E. M. & Bazerman, M. H. When perspective taking increases taking: reactive egoism in social interaction. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 91, 872–889 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Okimoto, T. G. & Wenzel, M. The other side of perspective taking: transgression ambiguity and victims’ revenge against their offender. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 2, 373–378 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Vorauer, J. D. & Sasaki, S. J. Helpful only in the abstract?: ironic effects of empathy in intergroup interaction. Psychol. Sci. 20, 191–197 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Borinca, I., Andrighetto, L., Valsecchi, G. & Berent, J. Ingroup norms shape understanding of outgroup prosocial behaviors. Group. Process. Intergroup Relat. 25, 1084–1106 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  173. Moran, D. & Taylor, L. K. Outgroup prosocial behaviour among children and adolescents in conflict settings. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 44, 69–73 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  174. Paluck, E. L. Is it better not to talk? Group polarization, extended contact, and perspective taking in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36, 1170–1185 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  175. Hogg, M. A. & van Knippenberg, D. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 35 (ed. Zanna, M. P.) 1–52 (Elsevier, 2003).

  176. Paluck, E. L. & Shepherd, H. The salience of social referents: a field experiment on collective norms and harassment behavior in a school social network. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 103, 899 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  177. Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A. & Turner, J. C. Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: self‐categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarization. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 29, 97–119 (1990).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  178. Terry, D. J. & Hogg, M. A. Group norms and the attitude–behavior relationship: a role for group identification. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22, 776–793 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. Crandall, C. S. & Eshleman, A. A justification–suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychol. Bull. 129, 414 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Durrheim, K., Quayle, M. & Dixon, J. The struggle for the nature of “prejudice”: “prejudice” expression as identity performance. Polit. Psychol. 37, 17–35 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  182. Pinus, M. et al. Emotion regulation contagion. Preprint at OSF Preprints https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/8ndz2 (2023).

  183. Villamil, F. & Balcells, L. Do TJ policies cause backlash? Evidence from street name changes in Spain. Res. Polit. 8, 205316802110585 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  184. Bilewicz, M. The dark side of emotion regulation: historical defensiveness as an obstacle in reconciliation. Psychol. Inq. 27, 89–95 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  185. Psaltis, C., Carretero, M. & Čehajić-Clancy, S. (eds.) History Education and Conflict Transformation: Social Psychological Theories, History Teaching and Reconciliation (Springer Nature, 2017).

  186. Janković, A. & Čehajić-Clancy, S. The power of the media on peace and reconciliation processes: representing former enemy groups as moral versus immoral matters. J. Pacif. Rim Psychol. 15, 183449092110025 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  187. Weiss, C. M., Ran, S. & Halperin, E. Educating for inclusion: diversity education programs can reduce prejudice toward outgroups in Israel. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2218621120 (2023). This paper demonstrates the long-term impact of interventions implemented in the field of education using field experiments.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  188. Bruneau, E., Casas, A., Hameiri, B. & Kteily, N. Exposure to a media intervention helps promote support for peace in Colombia. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6, 847–857 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  189. Casas, A. & Hameiri, B. Giving peace a chance: lessons from translational research in Colombia. Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol. 28, 284–291 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  190. Murrar, S. & Brauer, M. Overcoming resistance to change: using narratives to create more positive intergroup attitudes. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 28, 164–169 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  191. Tropp, L. R. in The Social Psychology of Intractable Conflicts Vol. 27 (eds Halperin, E. & Sharvit, K.) 159–171 (Springer, 2015).

  192. 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 

  193. Schumann, K. An affirmed self and a better apology: the effect of self-affirmation on transgressors’ responses to victims. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 54, 89–96 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  194. 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, 193–212 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  195. Voelkel, J. G., Ren, D. & Brandt, M. J. Inclusion reduces political prejudice. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 95, 104149 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  196. Moss, S. M., Uluğ, Ö. M. & Acar, Y. G. Doing research in conflict contexts: practical and ethical challenges for researchers when conducting fieldwork. Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol. 25, 86–99 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Production of this article was supported by a grant awarded to S.C.-C. by the Swedish Research Council (grant number 2020-01674).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

    Sabina Čehajić-Clancy

  2. Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

    Eran Halperin

Authors
  1. Sabina Čehajić-Clancy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eran Halperin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.C.-C. researched data for the article. All authors contributed substantially to discussion of the content, wrote the article and reviewed and/or edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sabina Čehajić-Clancy.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Psychology thanks the anonymous reviewers 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 (e.g. a society or other partner) 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

Čehajić-Clancy, S., Halperin, E. Advancing research and practice of psychological intergroup interventions. Nat Rev Psychol 3, 574–588 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00330-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00330-z

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