Michal Reifen Tagar

Heralding the Authoritarian? Orientation Toward Authority in Early Childhood

In the research reported here, we examined whether individual differences in authoritarianism have expressions in early childhood. We expected that young children would be more responsive to cues of deviance and status to the extent that their parents endorsed authoritarian values. Using a sample of 43 preschoolers and their parents, we found support for both expectations. Children of parents high in authoritarianism trusted adults who adhered to convention (vs. adults who did not) more than did children of parents low in authoritarianism. Furthermore, compared with children of parents low in authoritarianism, children of parents high in authoritarianism gave greater weight to a status-based “adult = reliable” heuristic in trusting an ambiguously conventional adult. Findings were consistent using two different measures of parents’ authoritarian values. These findings demonstrate that children’s trust-related behaviors vary reliably with their parents’ orientations toward authority and convention, and suggest that individual differences in authoritarianism express themselves well before early adulthood.

Intergroup emotional similarity reduces dehumanization and promotes conciliatory attitudes in prolonged conflict

Creating a sense of interpersonal similarity of attitudes and values is associated with increased attraction and liking. Applying these findings in an intergroup setting, though, has yielded mixed support. Theorizing from a social identity perspective suggests that highlighting intergroup similarity may lead to increased antipathy to the extent that it is perceived as a threat to one’s unique social identity. To circumvent this process, we examine the influence of emotional similarity, rather than attitudinal or value similarity, with the expectation that the short-term nature of emotions may evoke less threat to one’s social identity. Moreover, given the importance of emotions in intergroup humanization processes, we expected that emotional similarity would be associated with greater conciliatory attitudes due to an increase in humanization of the outgroup. We report results from two studies supporting these predictions. Following exposure to an anger-eliciting news story, Jewish Israeli participants were given information that their own emotional reaction to the story was similar (or not) to an individual member of the outgroup (Study 1: Palestinian citizen of Israel) or the outgroup as a whole (Study 2: Palestinians of the West Bank). As predicted, emotional similarity was associated with increased humanization of the outgroup, and a subsequent increase in one’s willingness to support conciliatory political policies toward the outgroup. We conclude that emotional similarity may be a productive avenue for future intergroup interventions, particularly between groups where differences in attitudes and values are foundational to the intergroup conflict.

Epistemic Motivation and the Structure of Moral Intuition: Dispositional Need for Closure as a Predictor of Individualizing and Binding Morality

Moral foundations theory argues that morality encompasses both group–preserving binding concerns about in–group loyalty, authority and purity and individualizing concerns about harm avoidance and fairness. Although studies have examined the relationship between sociopolitical attitudes and the moral foundations, the relationship between individual differences in epistemic motivation—as indexed by need for cognitive closure—and moral intuition remains unexplored. Given the role of groups in providing epistemic security, we hypothesized that the need for closure would be most strongly related to support for the foundations most central to the regulation of group ties, that is, the binding foundations as opposed to the individualizing ones. Data from three samples provided evidence for this. Unpacking this pattern, we also found that those high in need for closure endorsed all foundations, whereas those low in need for closure emphasized only the individualizing ones. Finally, we found that the relationship between need for closure and the binding foundations was mediated by right–wing authoritarianism, an orientation closely linked to a desire for the preservation of conventional in–group morality. Copyright

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

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

Anger as a catalyst for change? Incremental beliefs and anger’s constructive effects in conflict

The traditional understanding of the role of anger in conflicts is that it leads to aggressive actions that escalate conflict. However, recent research has found that under certain circumstances anger can have constructive effects such as increasing support for more risky conciliatory steps in negotiation. The current study aims to identify a psychological moderator that determines whether anger has such destructive or constructive effects. We propose that people’s beliefs about the malleability of groups (i.e., implicit theories about groups) moderate whether anger leads to conciliatory, constructive behaviors or destructive, aggressive behaviors. We test this hypothesis in two different contexts (a) race relations in the US in the context of recent protests against police brutality, and (b) the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Results indicated that induced anger (compared to control condition) increased support for aggressive policies for participants who believed that groups cannot change. In contrast, for those who believed groups can change, inducing anger actually increased support for conciliatory policies compared to a control condition. Together, this indicates that anger can have constructive effects in conflict when people believe that groups can change.

A Rose by Any Other Name? A Subtle Linguistic Cue Impacts Anger and Corresponding Policy Support in Intractable Conflict:

Given the central role of anger in shaping adversarial policy preferences in the context of intergroup conflict, its reduction may promote conflict resolution. In the current work, we drew on psycholinguistic research on the role of language in generating emotions to explore a novel, extremely subtle means of intervention. Specifically, we hypothesized that phrasing conflict-relevant policies in noun form (vs. verb form) would reduce anger and impact policy support correspondingly. Results across three experimental studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict supported these expectations for both support for concessions (Studies 1–3) and retaliatory policies (Study 3), with reduction in anger mediating the salutary impact of noun form (vs. verb form) on policy support. These results expand our understanding of the influence of language on emotions and policies in the context of conflict and have applied relevance for conflict-resolution efforts.

Studying the Opposing Effects of Robot Presence on Human Corruption

Social presence has two opposing effects on human corruption: the collaborative and contagious nature of another persons presence can cause people to behave in a more corrupt manner. In contrast, the monitoring nature of another persons presence can decrease corruption. We hypothesize that a robots presence can provide the best of both worlds: Decreasing corruption by providing a monitoring presence, without increasing it by collusion. We describe an experimental study currently underway that examines this hypothesis, and report on initial findings from pilot runs of our experimental protocol.