Different forms of intergroup contact with former adversary are linked to distinct reconciliatory acts through symbolic and realistic threat

Rupar, Mirjana; Graf, Sylvie (2019). Different forms of intergroup contact with former adversary are linked to distinct reconciliatory acts through symbolic and realistic threat. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(2), pp. 63-74. Wiley-Blackwell 10.1111/jasp.12565

[img] Text
Rupar_Graf-2018-Journal_of_Applied_Social_Psychology.pdf - Published Version
Restricted to registered users only
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (666kB) | Request a copy

In a society burdened with the most severe type of intergroup conflict, we examined the association between willingness to reconcile with former adversary, intergroup contact with, and perceived threat from former adversary. We focused on three reconciliatory acts—forgiveness to the outgroup, support for ingroup apology and support for financial compensation to the outgroup. We included different forms of positive and negative intergroup contact—direct and indirect (extended and mass‐mediated). In the link between contact and reconciliation, we tested the mediating role of two types of intergroup threat—realistic and symbolic. The sample comprised Bosniaks (N = 267) and Croats (N = 278) from Bosnia and Herzegovina. In both samples, reconciliation associated with indirect forms of intergroup contact even when controlling for its link with direct contact. This indicates the potential of indirect contact to promote reconciliation in the lack of direct contact, characteristic for segregated post‐conflict societies. Symbolic threat mediated the relationship between intergroup contact and symbolic forms of reconciliation—forgiveness and support for ingroup apology. Realistic threat mediated the link between intergroup contact and a more tangible form of reconciliation—support for financial compensation. This highlights the importance of considering different types intergroup threat when targeting distinct reconciliatory acts. Our results suggest that practitioners promoting reconciliation in post‐conflict societies need to implement different means when tailoring interventions that should enhance different sides of peace‐making process.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

07 Faculty of Human Sciences > Institute of Psychology > Social Psychology and Social Neuroscience

UniBE Contributor:

Graf, Sylvie

Subjects:

100 Philosophy > 150 Psychology

ISSN:

0021-9029

Publisher:

Wiley-Blackwell

Language:

English

Submitter:

Sylvie Graf

Date Deposited:

30 Apr 2019 13:48

Last Modified:

24 Oct 2019 08:44

Publisher DOI:

10.1111/jasp.12565

BORIS DOI:

10.7892/boris.127825

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/127825

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback