1,721,190 research outputs found

    Promoting Harmonious Relations and Equitable Well-Being: Peace Psychology and “Intractable” Conflicts

    No full text
    The chapter explores Bar-Tal’s legacy in relation to key concepts, perspectives, and findings that comprise the growing field of peace psychology, specifically the promotion of sustainable peace through the indivisible constructs of harmonious relations and equitable wellbeing. Analyzed through a peace psychology lens, Bar-Tal’s work highlights both the barriers to and bridges for achieving sustainable peace. Central concepts from his work, such as fear, insecurity, and an ethos of conflict, demonstrate key obstacles to fostering harmonious intergroup relations based on social justice. Bar-Tal’s work also identifies processes that can overcome these barriers, which is consistent with peace psychology’s emphasis on the development of constructive responses to violence and conflict. For example, the chapter outlines how confidence-building mechanisms, mutually respectful identities, and reconciliation processes, may help foster an ethos of peace that can be embedded in the structure of societies through peace education. The chapter concludes with implications and suggestions for future research, with a focus on the role of young people in settings of prolonged intergroup division and generational approaches to peacebuilding, as conceptualized through a peace psychology lens

    Dynamics of emotions in protracted intergroup conflict as microfoundations for violent action : insights for conflict transformation from the Palestinian territories

    Full text link
    Living within prolonged intergroup conflict has detrimental psychosocial and societal consequences, especially for members of low-power groups. Experiencing repression creates intense emotions and raises serious dilemmas about handling resistance to achieve social change. In recent years, novel approaches that focus on microlevel factors, particularly emotions, have been suggested as useful predictors to understand how and why violent conflicts persist. Details of the exact dynamics between emotions and collective action, such as how emotional mechanisms predict violent action under different types of conflict escalation, remain an open question. Despite the theoretical and practical importance of the subject, limited data is available from a low-power group perspective. In this dissertation research, I investigate how emotional mechanisms predict how – mainly violent – collective action is moderated by different types of conflict escalation. These insights inform and support conflict transformation from a psychological perspective. The research is based on extensive longitudinal mixed methods fieldwork in Israel and the Palestinian Territories over three years. To contextually comprehend the complex issues, I first ‘mapped the space' between emotions and action, using explorative participatory-observation. Then, to investigate the exact mechanisms of these interrelations, particularly how emotions predict violent action under different conflict escalation settings, I surveyed two samples of West Bank Palestinians (N = 200, 450) before and during different escalations using a longitudinal design. Escalation contexts included the US embassy's highly publicized move to Jerusalem which led to widespread unrest in Palestine, the so-called 'Gaza Marches of Return', and a full lockdown of Ramallah by the Israeli army. Particular focus was placed on negative high-agency emotions such as anger, humiliation, and hate, as well as on the distinction between individual- versus group emotions. Finally, using activist narratives, I outlined how – in the light of these escalatory interrelations – constructive social change from violence to nonviolent action is possible. Results confirmed an oppressive conflict reality for low-power group members, in which years of standstill alternate with acute phases of conflict escalation. The participatory data showed how people employ agentic coping patterns similar to established interpersonal conflict styles. Situational context such as conflict escalation substantially affects how and which specific emotional dynamics predict violent responses. For example, in conditions of low conflict salience, anger was associated with citizens' support for violent action while after conflict aggravation feelings of humiliation elicited support for violent resistance. Furthermore, distinctive profiles of individual- versus group emotions shape an agentic response. For mainly indirectly experienced conflict escalations, group emotions predicted violent collective action, while for closely experienced conflict events, individual emotions were associated with violent engagement. The qualitative narratives of formerly violent activists showed change pathways including emotional, cognitive, and behavioral aspects. For most participants, the change sequence was triggered by an unforeseen respectful intergroup encounter. This encounter elicited empathy towards the outgroup and reduced negative emotions, resulting in the cognitive reappraisal of their situation concerning the conflict context. Despite experiencing difficult conflict events and against the mechanisms outlined above, emotional and behavioral change from radical violent to nonviolent activism was possible. The data collected during different surges of conflict escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories shows how emotional mechanisms contribute to violence. Understanding psychological microfoundations, namely emotional dynamics, provides novel inroads for individual conflict transformation. The research contributes to current approaches of integrating political science with social psychology and adds more profound insights into the causes of violence, which is notoriously difficult to study. The gained insights hold the potential to positively influence detrimental intergroup behaviour in the Middle East and beyond

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore