Daniel Bar-Tal

From Intractable Conflict Through Conflict Resolution To Reconciliation: Psychological Analysis

Intractable intergroup conflicts require the formation of a conflictive ethos that enables a society to adapt to the conflict situation, survive the stressful period, and struggle successfully with the adversary. The formal termination of such a conflict begins with the elimination of the perceived incompatibility between the opposing parties through negotiation by their representatives—that is, a conflict resolution process. But this is only part of the long-term reconciliation process, which requires the formation of peaceful relations based on mutual trust and acceptance, cooperation, and consideration of mutual needs. The psychological aspect of reconciliation requires a change in the conflictive ethos, especially with respect to societal beliefs about group goals, about the adversary group, about the ingroup, about intergroup relations, and about the nature of peace. In essence, psychological reconciliation requires the formation of an ethos of peace, but this is extremely difficult in cases of intractable conflict. Political psychologists can and should work to improve the state of knowledge about reconciliation, which until now has received much less attention than conflict resolution. Conflicts are a natural part of human interaction. People in conflicts, whether at the individual or group level, perceive that their goals or interests are contradicted by the goals or interests of the other party (Kriesberg, 1998a; Mitchell, 1981; Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994). When we focus on intergroup conflicts, they concern contradictory, concrete goals in the domains of territories, resources, trade, selfdetermination, religious rights, cultural values, and so on. But a conflict becomes a reality for society members 1 only when a particular situation is identified as

Sociopsychological Foundations of Intractable Conflicts

The article presents a conceptual framework that concerns the sociopsychological foundation and dynamics of intractable conflict. First, it defines and characterizes the nature of intractable conflict, and then it describes how societies involved in this reality adapt to the conditions of intractable conflict. This adaptation meets three fundamental challenges: satisfying the needs of the society members, coping with stress, and withstanding the rival. In trying to confront them successfully, societies develop appropriate sociopsychological infrastructure, which includes collective memory, ethos of conflict, and collective emotional orientations. This infrastructure fulfills important individual and collective level functions, including the important role of formation, maintenance, and strengthening of a social identity that reflects this conflict. Special attempts are made to disseminate this infrastructure via societal channels of communication and institutionalize it. The evolved sociopsychological infrastructure becomes a prism through which society members construe their reality, collect new information, interpret their experiences, and make decisions about their course of action. This infrastructure becomes hegemonic, rigid, and resistant to change as long as the intractable conflict continues. It ends up serving as a major factor fueling the continuation of the conflict, thus becoming part of a vicious cycle of intractable conflict.

Why Does Fear Override Hope in Societies Engulfed by Intractable Conflict, as It Does in the Israeli Society?

The question of why fear overrides hope in societies embarked on the road of peacemaking after years of intractable conflict is answered on the basis of accumulated knowledge in the psychology and sociology of emotions. This knowledge suggests that fear is an automatic emotion, grounded in the perceived present and often based on the memorized past (also processed unconsciously), that leads to freezing of beliefs, conservatism, and sometimes preemptive aggression. Hope, in contrast, involves mostly cognitive activity, which requires the search for new ideas and thus is based on creativity and flexibility. Because hope is based on thinking, it can be seriously impeded by the spontaneous and unconscious interference of fear. Both fear and hope can become collective emotional orientations that organize society’s views and direct its forms of action. It is assumed that societies involved in intractable conflict are dominated by a collective emotional orientation of fear, which is functional in their coping with the stressful and demanding situation. But such an orientation serves as a psychological obstacle to a peace process once it starts. The Israeli Jewish case of collective fear orientation is offered as an example. The presentation includes the roots of this orientation, the ways in which it is reflected and disseminated, and its expressions among the Israeli Jewish public; it ends optimistically with the suggestion that societies can determine to overcome their fear and establish a collective orientation of hope for peace.

Development of social categories and stereotypes in early childhood: The case of “The Arab” concept formation, stereotype and attitudes by Jewish children in Israel

Abstract Stereotypes, which are based on the categorization process, are learned. Children first acquire a category of a social group and subsequently attribute characteristics to the group (i.e., form a stereotype). This paper illuminates the development of stereotypes among young children on the basis of cognitive theories of conceptual development. Specifically, several studies investigating the concept formation of “the Arab” among Jewish children in Israel are reported. These studies concern the five following research questions: When do children acquire the concept “an Arab”? On what basis do children form the concept “an Arab”? How do children understand the concept “an Arab”? What is the affective meaning of the concept “an Arab”? What is the visual image of “an Arab” in the minds of children? The results of the reported studies show that children acquire the word and the concept “an Arab” very early. From the beginning, even though little knowledge is associated with the concept, it has negative connotations. Young children described Arabs mostly by referring to violent and aggressive behaviors, and the characterization was unidimensional. These results demonstrate the strength of the Israeli cultural stereotype of Arabs and its influence on young children on the one hand, and show the general principles of category and stereotype development, on the other.

Delegitimization: The Extreme Case of Stereotyping and Prejudice

Social psychology has devoted much effort to the exploration of various social representations in the form of beliefs and attitudes, which serve to characterize social categories of individuals within the context of intergroup relations (Hamilton, 1981; Stephan, 1985). One outcome of this effort has been extensive study of two social representations — stereotypes and prejudice. Stereotypes are beliefs about another group in such terms as personality traits, attributions, or behavioral descriptions (Brewer & Kramer, 1985; Hamilton, 1981). Prejudice refers to negative attitudes toward another group that express negative affective or emotional reactions (Allport, 1954; Jones, 1972; Pettigrew, 1971; Stephan, 1985). Both categories, being loosely defined, are highly general concepts that lack explicit specifications regarding their outcomes in terms of the nature of intergroup relations. Thus, the contents of stereotypes are of a wide scope, ranging from descriptions with negative to positive connotations (e.g., lazy, superstitious, industrious, shrewd — see Katz & Braly, 1933). Likewise, although the conception of prejudice implies negative affective reaction, it does not specify the intensity of such reactions, and, therefore, may range from mildly to extremely negative. In addition, the two concepts focus mainly on cognitive and affective components of intergroup relations, and do not necessarily specify their role in guiding actual behavior towards the other group.

A sense of self-perceived collective victimhood in intractable conflicts

A sense of self-perceived collective victimhood emerges as a major theme in the ethos of conflict of societies involved in intractable conflict and is a fundamental part of the collective memory of the conflict. This sense is defined as a mindset shared by group members that results from a perceived intentional harm with severe consequences, inflicted on the collective by another group. This harm is viewed as undeserved, unjust and immoral, and one that the group could not prevent. The article analyses the nature of the self-perceived collective sense of victimhood in the conflict, its antecedents, the functions that it fulfils for the society and the consequences that result from this view.

Group beliefs : a conception for analyzing group structure, processes, and behavior

Individuals who live in groups hold common beliefs which define their reality, not only as persons, but also as group members. This reality becomes especially important when group members become aware that they share beliefs and are convinced that these beliefs characterize them as a group. In this case common beliefs become group beliefs. With this statement, Dr. Bar-Tal begins his far-reaching analysis of beliefs as a group phenomenon. Group beliefs are shown to have important behavioral, cognitive, and affective implications for group members and the group as a whole. They may contribute to the behavioral direction a group takes, coordinate group activities, determine the intensity and involvement of group members, and influence the way group members affect the leaders. This book introduces and articulates the implications of a new concept of group beliefs, shedding new light on the structure and processes of groups, focusing on such phenomena as group formation, subgrouping, splits, mergence and group disintegration. By taking an interdisciplinary approach, this integrative conception opens new avenues to the study and understanding of group behavior.

Formation and change of ethnic and national stereotypes: An integrative model

Abstract The paper suggests an integrative model which explains the formation and change of the contents, as well as their intensity and extensiveness, of ethnic and national stereotypes. The model focuses on three categories of variables which determine the Stereotypic contents and their intensity and extensiveness. The first category, labelled as Background Variables, consists of the history of intergroup relations, political-social climate, economic conditions, behavior of other groups, characteristics of the outgroup and nature of intergroup relations. These variables, being interrelated, influence the second category, labelled as Transmitting Variables. This includes political-social-cultural-educational mechanisms, familys channel and direct contact. Finally, the influence of the above-mentioned factors is mediated by the category of Personal Mediating Variables consisting of a persons values, attitudes, personality, motivations, and cognitive styles. The paper describes the essence of the variables and discusses their interrelationships by analyzing previously proposed theories of prejudice formation and by reviewing the supporting empirical evidence. Finally, the implications of the integrative model are presented and especially the social nature of stereotyping phenomenon is emphasized, which is influenced not only by intrapersonal processes, but also by intergroup, intragroup, and interpersonal ones.

Says Who?: Epistemic Authority Effects in Social Judgment

Publisher Summary This chapter features the concept of ascribed epistemic authority offered as a unique perspective on source effects in social judgment. It assumes that both the self and external sources may be assigned different degrees of epistemic authority in different domains and that this determines the ways in which individuals process information, make decisions, and undertake actions. The present framework traces the socio-developmental aspects of epistemic authority assignments and considers individual differences in the distribution of authority assignments across sources. The chapter conceives of epistemic authority ascriptions as meta-cognitive beliefs about a source of information. It introduces a perspective on source effects framed from the subjective standpoint of the informations recipient. This perspective highlights the developmental, individual differences, self-related, and applied aspects of source phenomena. The treatment of source effects in several major models of persuasion is reviewed. A final discussion highlights the unique properties of the epistemic authority and considers its implications for the place of source effects in notions of information processing and human judgment.

Socio-psychological barriers to peace making: An empirical examination within the Israeli Jewish Society

Socio-psychological barriers play a major role in the continuation of intractable conflicts. They are responsible for the socio-psychological closure that resists and prevents the entertainment of alternative information that could potentially facilitate the acceptance of ideas advancing peacemaking processes. In an attempt to validate a process model that depicts the functioning of the socio-psychological barriers to conflict resolution, an empirical study was conducted among a nationwide representative sample of Jews in Israel, within the context of the Middle Eastern conflict. The reported study utilized a large scale survey, based on a nationwide representative sample of Israeli Jews who were asked to respond to a questionnaire which included the model’s selected variables. As hypothesized, the results showed a path leading from general worldviews (e.g. General values, Right Wing Authoritarianism, Implicit theories about groups) to openness to new information and readiness to compromise through the mediation of the conflict-related societal beliefs (e.g. victimhood, delegitimization). These results indicate that closure to new information that may shed new light on both the rival and the conflict emerges as a crucial factor in the maintenance of society members’ non-compromising views. The theoretical as well as the applied implications of the findings are discussed.