No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
When Israeli Students Encounter Palestinian Narratives
The goal of this study was to explore the contribution to reflexive learning about conflict reality when encountering narratives of the other in intragroup dialogue. That is, dialogue within one national group in the context of a binational conflict. This dialogue was with a group of Jewish-Israeli undergraduate students. The study explored the contribution of the dialogue to the capacity to relate to ongoing conflict relations from perspectives that go beyond binary and oppositional assumptions and positions. This research is based on detailed observations of the dialogue, interviews with group members, and a field diary kept by Michael Sternberg. Findings indicate that, without the immediate need to close ranks in the presence of the outgroup, the intragroup setting supplied opportunities to explore diverse identities, narratives, power structures, and related collective assumptions and to examine alternatives to existing types of conflict engagement. Furthermore, findings indicate the contribution of such processes to the readiness to challenge hegemonic perceptions of conflict reality and cope with the challenges of becoming an active bystander toward the abuse of power relations.
This chapter theorizes, and provides field-based illustrations, about new ways to foster intergroup collaboration beginning first with intragroup conflict engagement. While the author has been experimenting with these ideas and practices for many years, this chapter represents still early efforts to lay out an agenda for systematic research and experimentation.
I hypothesize that by successfully engaging internal conflicts about outgroups within ingroups, sides may separately become more willing and able to successfully and interactively solve shared problems and achieve superordinate goals between them. History is filled with attempts at cooperation between antagonistic groups – whether through negotiated agreement, functional cooperation, promoting positive contact and attitudes, and so forth – that have led instead to worsening attitudes and renewed confrontation. Even when polarized groups decide to cooperate to achieve superordinate goals (Sherif, 1966) they are often unable to make this leap from conflict to collaboration. I posit that this may be in part because inadequate attention is paid first to intragroup conflict dynamics vis-à-vis outgroups.
The present study examined how Israelis and Palestinians present their narratives related to their conflict in school textbooks used by the state educational system and the ultraorthodox community in Israel and by all Palestinian schools in Palestinian National Territories. The focus was on how each side portrays the Other and their own group. The content analysis was based on a developed conceptual framework and standardized and manualized rating criteria with quantitative and qualitative aspects. The results showed in general that (1) dehumanizing and demonizing characterizations of the Other are rare in both Israeli and Palestinian books; (2) both Israeli and Palestinian books present unilateral national narratives that portray the Other as enemy, chronicle negative actions by the Other directed at the self-community, and portray the self-community in positive terms with actions aimed at self-protection and goals of peace; (3), there is lack of information about the religions, culture, economic and daily activities of the Other, or even of the existence of the Other on maps; (4) the negative bias in portrayal of the Other, the positive bias in portrayal of the self, and the absence of images and information about the Other are all statistically significantly more pronounced in Israeli Ultra-Orthodox and Palestinian books than in Israeli state books.
This book provides a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, and holistic analysis of the socio-psychological dynamics of intractable conflicts. Daniel Bar-Tal’s original conceptual framework is supported by evidence drawn from different disciplines, including empirical data and illustrative case studies. His analysis rests on the premise that intractable conflicts share certain socio-psychological foundations, despite differences in context and other characteristics. He describes a full cycle of intractable conflicts – their outbreak, escalation, and reconciliation through peace building. Bar-Tal’s framework provides a broad theoretical view of the of the socio-psychological repertoire that develops in the course of long-term and violent conflicts, outlines the factors affecting its formation, demonstrates how it is maintained, points out its functions, and describes its consequences. The book also elaborates on the contents, processes, and other factors involved in the peace building process.
Participatory action research has an extensive history in many fields of social practice. Our aim in this chapter is to develop the view of participatory action research that has shaped our own theory and practice during recent years. We begin with a short overview of the evolution of our own thinking and the influence of several generations of action research. In our chapter on "Participatory Action Research" for the second edition of this Handbook, we identified several key approaches to action research, the sites and settings where they are most frequently used, several criticisms that have been advanced for each, and key sources to explore them (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2000). The approaches identified were a somewhat eclectic mix--participatory research, classroom action research, action learning, action science, soft systems approaches, and industrial action research. We summarize those approaches again here but do not reiterate our views of them in this chapter. We acknowledge the influence of each approach on the field and as stimulus to reflection on our own ideas and practices. For our current purposes, we proceed to develop a comprehensive view of social practice and reflect on aspects of our own work that we term "myths, misinterpretations, and mistakes" to move toward reconceptualizing research itself as a social practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Socially shared representations of history have been important in creating, maintaining and changing a people's identity. Their management and negotiation are central to interethnic and international relations. We present a narrative framework to represent how collectively significant events become (selectively) incorporated in social representations that enable positioning of ethnic, national and supranational identities. This perspective creates diachronic (temporal) links between the functional (e.g. realistic conflict theory), social identity, and cognitive perspectives on intergroup relations. The charters embedded in these representations condition nations with similar interests to adopt different political stances in dealing with current events, and can influence the perceived stability and legitimacy of social orders. They are also instrumental in determining social identity strategies for reacting to negative social comparisons, and can influence the relationships between national and ethnic identities.
The concept of prejudice has profoundly influenced how we have investigated, explained and tried to change intergroup relations of discrimination and inequality. But what has this concept contributed to our knowledge of relations between groups and what has it obscured or misrepresented? How has it expanded or narrowed the horizons of psychological inquiry? How effective or ineffective has it been in guiding our attempts to transform social relations and institutions? In this book, a team of internationally renowned psychologists re-evaluate the concept of prejudice, in an attempt to move beyond conventional approaches to the subject and to help the reader gain a clearer understanding of relations within and between groups. This fresh look at prejudice will appeal to scholars and students of social psychology, sociology, political science and peace studies.
Conflict, from Latin confligere, can be understood as shock, clash, collision; but between what and what?—a basic question in conflict theory with politically significant implications. Take another collision as metaphor: between two or more cars. Is this a shock between two lumps of metal, or between two drivers at the same point in space at the same point in time?
This chapter begins with a discussion of the socio-political and social-psychological background of intergroup reconciliation. It then discusses the various methodological approaches used by the chapters in this volume. An overview of the succeeding chapters is presented.
This book investigates intractable conflicts and their main verbal manifestation - radical disagreement - and explores what can be done when conflict resolution fails. The book identifies agonistic dialogue - dialogue between enemies - as the key to linguistic intractability. It suggests how agonistic dialogue can best be studied, explored, understood and managed even in the most severe political conflicts when negotiation, mediation, problem solving, dialogue for mutual understanding, and discourse ethics are unsuccessful. This approach of viewing radical disagreement as the central topic of analysis and conflict management is a new innovation in this field, and also supplements and enhances existing communicative transformational techniques. It also has wider implications for cognate fields, such as applied ethics, democratic theory, cultural studies and the philosophy of difference. This book will be of great interest to students of conflict resolution, peace and conflict studies, ethnic conflict and International Relations in general.
This article argues that intercultural communication scholars should play a central role in advancing the study and practice of peacebuilding. A reflexive, multi-dimensional and contextualized framework for viewing peacebuilding is proposed, with a focus on personal, relational, and structural dimensions. Three topical areas—community engagement, intercultural dialogue, and alliance building—are used to illustrate the framework and point to possibilities for additional research and development. Seven strategies for applying this framework in the complex arena of intractable conflicts are proposed and described.
This article reviews influences leading to extreme violence between groups. It then describes principles and practices of prevention, especially early prevention, and reconciliation: addressing difficult life conditions in ways that include everyone in society; diplomacy that addresses crises and prevents conflicts from becoming intractable; developing constructive visions and groups which make destructive ideological movements less likely; generating positive orientation to previously devalued others; moderating respect for authority in part by encouraging individual judgment; fostering healing by groups from past victimization and psychological woundedness. The socialization of children for inclusive caring and moral courage, developing societal values of cooperation and community, and active bystandership by citizens, leaders, and the media to resist influences leading to violence and create positive institutions that help fulfill basic psychological needs are all important for a world without genocide. The article also describes interventions promoting reconciliation in Rwanda and neighboring countries and research evaluating their effects.
This paper aims to identify what is distinctive about conflict transformation theory and practice, as well as to identify its key dimensions. We need such a theory of conflict transformation if we are to have an adequate basis for the analysis of conflicts, as well as for devising appropriate responses to them and evaluating the effects of these responses. The paper argues that such theories need to be continually adjusted in response to the changing nature of conflicts, and that current theories must be adapted in order to take proper account of the globalisation of conflicts and conflict interventions. The first section of the article distinguishes conflict transformation theory from theories of conflict management and conflict resolution. It explores some of the principal conflict transformation approaches in more detail, and then asks whether they add up to a coherent body of theory. Following this, it suggests a shift from theories of conflict to theories of conflict-in-context, arguing that in the context of globalisation our analyses of conflict must give proper consideration to the social, regional and international context. We need to consider both the factors that promote peacebuilding and those that exacerbate conflict at these different levels over an extended time period from before the outbreak of violent conflict to well after its resolution. Within this broader setting, this section thus attempts to extend Galtung's and Azar's theories of conflict formation to theories of conflict transformation. It also proposes a framework of five types of conflict transformation, which should be useful as a basis for planning and assessing interventions in conflicts. The second section of the article discusses current developments in conflict transformation practice as they have occurred in the four principal kinds of practice - that of governmental and intergovernmental representatives, of development agencies, of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and of local parties and groups within the conflict setting. The issues involved in coordinating initiatives between these different groups are also discussed. The final section of the paper discusses conflict transformation as a potential seed for change, requiring change both in the peacebuilder as well as in the society in conflict.
One of the major challenges for the process of peace building is to overcome the rigid structure of the socio‐psychological repertoire that accompanies it. Our longitudinal study examined one element of this repertoire among Jewish and Arab adolescents in Israel: the cognitive legitimacy and the emotional reactions toward the historical narrative of the opponent. We focused our question on the impact of the socio‐political context and the role of the violent reality in the development of these perceptions among youth. Data were collected in four stages (1999–2000, 2002, 2004, and 2007) among various samples of Arab and Jewish high school students (10th and 12th graders). The results showed that among the Jewish adolescents, the readiness to legitimate Palestinian narratives significantly decreased during violent periods. Among the Arab students, the impact of their difficult status as a Palestinian minority in the State of Israel is reflected in their relatively high level of readiness to accept both narratives. The results are discussed from social, cultural, and developmental perspectives with a focus on the role of the conflictual reality itself in the development of the socio‐psychological repertoire among youth.
The storytelling method can be used to work through intractable conflicts. Working-through enables people who have suffered traumatic social experiences to learn to live with these painful events while developing an ability to listen to the pain of the “other.” The storytelling approach focuses on the way personal storytelling facilitates the working-through processes in intractable conflicts. The storytelling approach was used in To Reflect and Trust (TRT), a dialogue group that began in 1992 and involved descendants of Nazi perpetrators and Jewish descendants of Holocaust survivors. The storytelling method was applied to a year-long Jewish-Palestinian student workshop held at Ben Gurion University in 2000–2001.
Inter-Group Contact Theory
- T F Pettigrew
Social Construction and Research as Action
- K J Gergen
- M M Gergen
The Foundations of Qualitative Research
- D Snape
- L Spencer