In regions with frozen conflicts, where group divisions span not only geographical but also linguistic lines, how does the high cost of accessing the outgroup affect interethnic relations, and how can it be reduced? While online platforms offer a unique opportunity for unmediated cross-group interaction, this potential remains unrealized in linguistically divided contexts. To assess the impact of barriers to outgroup access online, I assigned Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking Cypriots to seek out outgroup content of personal interest over two weeks, aided by translation tools. The experiment showed, on average, significantly improved attitudes and behavioral intentions toward ethnic outgroups. By complementing the experimental data with interviews and analysis of online interactions, I theorize about the mechanisms driving the benefits of online outgroup immersion for individuals with limited offline outgroup exposure and examine how language barriers further constrain potential for online intergroup contact in deeply divided societies.
AdamidesC. (2020). Cyprus: A textbook case of an intractable conflict. In Securitization and desecuritization processes in protracted conflicts (pp. 25–55). Springer.
2.
AgadullinaE. R.LovakovA. V. (2018). Are people more prejudiced towards groups that are perceived as coherent? A meta-analysis of the relationship between out-group entitativity and prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(4), 703–731. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12256
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
5.
AnastasiouH. (2009). The broken olive branch: Nationalism, ethnic conflict, and the quest for peace in cyprus: Volume two: Nationalism versus europeanization. Syracuse University Press.
6.
AsimovicN. (2026). Replication data for “unlocking outgroup access online: Evidence from cyprus”. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/XWXOC1
7.
BailC. A.ArgyleL. P.BrownT. W.BumpusJ. P.ChenH.HunzakerM. F.LeeJ.MannM.MerhoutF.VolfovskyA. (2018). Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(37), 9216–9221. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804840115
8.
BaileyM.JohnstonD.KuchlerT.RusselD.StateB.StroebelJ. (2020). The Determinants of Social Connectedness in Europe. Social Informatics. SocInfo 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science., 123467. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60975-7_1
9.
BakshyE.RosennI.MarlowC.AdamicL. (2012). The role of social networks in information diffusion. In Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web (pp. 519–528). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2187836.2187907
10.
Bar-TalD. (2013). Intractable conflicts: Socio-psychological foundations and dynamics. Cambridge University Press.
11.
Bar-TalD.HalperinE. (2011). Socio-psychological barriers to conflict resolution. In Intergroup conflicts and their resolution: Social psychological perspective (217, p. 240). Psychology Press.
12.
Bar-TalD.HameiriB. (2020). Interventions to change well-anchored attitudes in the context of intergroup conflict. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 14(7), Article e12534. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12534
13.
BekermanZ.ZembylasM. (2011). Teaching contested narratives: Identity, memory and reconciliation in peace education and beyond. Cambridge University Press.
14.
BergE. (2023). Engagement without recognition. In The routledge handbook of self-determination and secession. Routledge.
15.
BondB. J. (2021). The development and influence of parasocial relationships with television characters: A longitudinal experimental test of prejudice reduction through parasocial contact. Communication Research, 48(4), 573–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219900632
16.
BourisD.KyrisG. (2017). Europeanisation, sovereignty and contested states: The eu in Northern Cyprus and Palestine. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(4), 755–771. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117727530
17.
BruneauE. G.SaxeR. (2012). The power of being heard: The benefits of 9´1perspective-giving’in the context of intergroup conflict. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(4), 855–866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.02.017
18.
BryantR. (2011). The past in pieces: Belonging in the new Cyprus. University of Pennsylvania Press.
CampbellD. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 3(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830030103
21.
CharalambousC.RamptonB. (2012). Other language learning, identity and intercultural communication in contexts of conflict. In The routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 209–224). Routledge.
22.
ColemanP. T. (2006). Intractable conflict. In The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (2, pp. 533–559). Wiley Publishing.
DaviesL. (2003). Education and conflict: Complexity and chaos.
26.
De QuidtJ.VesterlundL.WilsonA. J. (2019). Experimenter demand effects. In Handbook of research methods and applications in experimental economics (pp. 384–400). Edward Elgar.
27.
DeutschM.ColemanP. T.MarcusE. C. (2011). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons.
DonnoD.PsaltisC.ZarpliO. (2021). Extended intergroup contact in frozen conflicts: Experimental evidence from Cyprus. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 07388942211012623.
30.
DruckmanJ.LevenduskyM. (2018). What do we measure when we measure affective partisanship. Public Opinion Quarterly.
31.
EfthymiouS. A. (2019). Nationalism, militarism and masculinity in post-conflict Cyprus. Springer.
32.
EnosR. D. (2017). The space between us: Social geography and politics. Cambridge University Press.
33.
EnosR. D.GidronN. (2016). Intergroup behavioral strategies as contextually determined: Experimental evidence from Israel. The Journal of Politics, 78(3), 851–867. https://doi.org/10.1086/685545
34.
EnosR. D.GidronN. (2018). Exclusion and cooperation in diverse societies: Experimental evidence from Israel. American Political Science Review, 112(4), 742–757. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055418000266
35.
EpleyN.KardasM.ZhaoX.AtirS.SchroederJ. (2022). Undersociality: Miscalibrated social cognition can inhibit social connection. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(5), 406–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2022.02.004
36.
EyalT.SteffelM.EpleyN. (2018). Perspective mistaking: Accurately understanding the mind of another requires getting perspective, not taking perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(4), 547–571. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000115
FigueiredoA.MartinovicB.ReesJ.LicataL. (2017). Collective memories and present-day intergroup relations: Introduction to the special thematic section. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(2), 694–706. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v5i2.895
39.
FisherA. N.SakalukJ. K. (2020). Are single people a stigmatized 9´1group’? Evidence from examinations of social identity, entitativity, and perceived responsibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 86, Article 103844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103844
40.
FlaxmanS.GoelS.RaoJ. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006
41.
ForbesH. D. (2004). Ethnic conflict and the contact hypothesis. In The psychology of ethnic and cultural conflict (pp. 69–88). Praeger Pub Text.
42.
GelmanA.CarlinJ. (2014). Beyond power calculations: Assessing type s (sign) and type m (magnitude) errors. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 641–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614551642
43.
GilovichT.GriffinD.KahnemanD. (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press.
44.
HadjipavlouM. (2007). The Cyprus conflict: Root causes and implications for peacebuilding. Journal of Peace Research, 44(3), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343307076640
45.
HallJ.KovrasI.StefanovicD.LoizidesN. (2018). Exposure to violence and attitudes towards transitional justice. Political Psychology, 39(2), 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12412
46.
HarelT. O.JamesonJ. K.MaozI. (2020). The normalization of hatred: Identity, affective polarization, and dehumanization on Facebook in the context of intractable political conflict. Social Media+ Society, 6(2), Article 2056305120913983. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120913983
47.
HindmanM. (2008). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton University Press.
48.
HodsonG. (2011). Do ideologically intolerant people benefit from intergroup contact?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(3), 154–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411409025
49.
HootsuiteW. A. S. (2021). Digital 2021: Global overview report. DataReportal–Global Digital Insights.
50.
HootsuiteW. A. S. (2022). Digital 2021: Global overview report. DataReportal–Global Digital Insights.
51.
ImbensG. W.RubinD. B. (2015). Causal inference in statistics, social, and biomedical sciences. Cambridge University Press.
52.
IyengarS.LelkesY.LevenduskyM.MalhotraN.WestwoodS. J. (2019). The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 22(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034
53.
KallaJ. L.BroockmanD. E. (2021). Which narrative strategies durably reduce prejudice? Evidence from field and survey experiments supporting the efficacy of perspective-getting. American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/MMYAOY
54.
KardasM.KumarA.EpleyN. (2022). Overly shallow? Miscalibrated expectations create a barrier to deeper conversation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(3), 367–391. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000282
55.
KelmanM. (2011). The heuristics debate. Oxford University Press.
LaitinD. D. (2000). What is a language community?American Journal of Political Science, 44(1), 142–155. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669300
58.
LaurenceJ.SchmidK.RaeJ. R.HewstoneM. (2019). Prejudice, contact, and threat at the diversity-segregation nexus: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of how ethnic out-group size and segregation interrelate for inter-group relations. Social Forces, 97(3), 1029–1066. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy079
59.
LeesJ.CikaraM. (2020). Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(3), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0780-6
60.
LevyR. (2021). Social media, news consumption, and polarization: Evidence from a field experiment. American Economic Review, 111(3), 831–870. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20191777
61.
LewisA. C.ShermanS. J. (2010). Perceived entitativity and the black-sheep effect: When will we denigrate negative ingroup members?The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(2), 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903366388
62.
LinW. (2013). Agnostic notes on regression adjustments to experimental data: Reexamining freedman’s critique. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 7(1), 295–318. https://doi.org/10.1214/12-aoas583
63.
LoizidesN.PsaltisC.Morgan-JonesE.SudulichL.PoppR.BaykizT. (2022). Citizens and peace mediations in divided societies: Identifying zones of agreement through a conjoint survey experiment. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 66(9), 1619–1649. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027221108221
LucyJ. A. (1996). Grammatical categories and cognition: A case study of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge University Press.
66.
MakriyianniC. (2007). History, museums and national identity in a divided country: Children’s experience of museum education in Cyprus. Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge.
67.
MallettR. K.WilsonT. D.GilbertD. T. (2008). Expect the unexpected: Failure to anticipate similarities leads to an intergroup forecasting error. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.265
68.
MedeirosM. (2017). The language of conflict: The relationship between linguistic vitality and conflict intensity. Ethnicities, 17(5), 627–645. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796815608878
69.
MephamK. D.MartinovicB. (2018). Multilingualism and out-group acceptance: The mediating roles of cognitive flexibility and deprovincialization. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 37(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X17706944
70.
MitchellD.MillerM. (2019). Reconciliation through language learning? A case study of the turas Irish language project in east Belfast. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 42(2), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1414278
71.
MooreH. L.SandersT. (2014). Anthropology in theory: Issues in epistemology. John Wiley & Sons.
72.
MummoloJ.PetersonE. (2019). Demand effects in survey experiments: An empirical assessment. American Political Science Review, 113(2), 517–529. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055418000837
73.
PaluckE. L. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 574–587. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0011989
74.
PaluckE. L.GreenS.GreenD. (2019). The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioural Public Policy, 3(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2018.25
PaoliniS.HarwoodJ.HewstoneM.NeumannD. L. (2018). Seeking and avoiding intergroup contact: Future frontiers of research on building social integration. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12(12), Article e12422. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12422
78.
PapadakisY. (2003). Nation, narrative and commemoration: Political ritual in divided Cyprus. History and Anthropology, 14(3), 253–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/0275720032000136642
79.
PapadakisY. (2005). Locating the Cyprus problem: Ethnic conflict and the politics of space. Macalester International, 15(1), 11–34.
80.
ParadisM. (2019). The handbook of the neuroscience of multilingualism. John Wiley & Sons.
81.
ParkS.-Y. (2012). Mediated intergroup contact: Concept explication, synthesis, and application. Mass Communication & Society, 15(1), 136–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2011.558804
82.
PeristianisN.MavrisJ. C. (2012). The green line of Cyprus: A contested boundary in flux. Ashgate Publishing.
83.
PerryV. (2009). At cross purposes? Democratization and peace implementation strategies in bosnia and herzegovina’s frozen conflict. Human Rights Review, 10(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-008-0090-2
84.
PettigrewT. F. (2021). Advancing intergroup contact theory: Comments on the issue’s articles. Journal of Social Issues, 77(1), 258–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12434
85.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2013). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. psychology press.
86.
PsaltisC. (2016). Collective memory, social representations of intercommunal relations, and conflict transformation in divided Cyprus. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 22(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000145
87.
PsaltisC.CarreteroM.Čehajić-ClancyS. (2017). Conflict transformation and history teaching: Social psychological theory and its contributions. In History education and conflict transformation (pp. 1–34): Palgrave Macmillan.
88.
PsaltisC.FrancR.SmeekesA.IoannouM.ŽeželjI. (2017). Social representations of the past in post-conflict societies: Adherence to official historical narratives and distrust through heightened threats. In PsaltisC.CarreteroM.Čehajić-ClancyS. (Eds.), History education and conflict transformation (pp. 97–121). Palgrave Macmillan.
89.
RathjeS.Van BavelJ. J.van der LindenS. (2021). Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(26), Article e2024292118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2024292118
90.
ReidA. (2021). Heritage, reconciliation and cross-border cooperation in Cyprus. Anthropological Journal on European Cultures, 30(1), 144–152. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2021.300113
RohmannA.PiontkowskiU.Van RandenborghA. (2008). When attitudes do not fit: Discordance of acculturation attitudes as an antecedent of intergroup threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 337–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311282
93.
RonY.SolomonJ.HalperinE.SaguyT. (2017). Willingness to engage in intergroup contact: A multilevel approach. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 23(3), 210–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000206
SchemerC.MeltzerC. E. (2020). The impact of negative parasocial and vicarious contact with refugees in the media on attitudes toward refugees. Mass Communication & Society, 23(2), 230–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2019.1692037
SheltonJ. N.RichesonJ. A. (2005). Intergroup contact and pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(1), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.91
SmeekesA.McKeownS.PsaltisC. (2017). Endorsing narratives under threat: Maintaining perceived collective continuity through the protective power of ingroup narratives in northern Ireland and Cyprus. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(2), 282–300. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v5i2.682
103.
SmetanaM.LudvikJ. (2019). Between war and peace: A dynamic reconceptualization of 9´3frozen conflicts. Asia Europe Journal, 17(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-018-0521-x
104.
SmirnovaA.IlievR. (2017). Political and linguistic identities in an ethnic conflict. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 36(2), 211–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x16643559
105.
StephanW. G.YbarraO.MorrisonK. R. (2009). Intergroup threat theory. In Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 43–61). Psychology Press.
106.
SudweeksS.GudykunstW. B.Ting-ToomeyS.NishidaT. (1990). Developmental themes in japanese-north American interpersonal relationships. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14(2), 207–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(90)90006-i
107.
SunsteinC. (2018). # republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton university press.
108.
TellidisI.KapplerS. (2016). Information and communication technologies in peacebuilding: Implications, opportunities and challenges. Cooperation and Conflict, 51(1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836715597942
109.
TileagăC.AugoustinosM.DurrheimK. (2021). The routledge international handbook of discrimination, prejudice and stereotyping. Routledge.
110.
TroppL. R.PettigrewT. F. (2005). Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups. Psychological Science, 16(12), 951–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01643.x
111.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031322
112.
UslanerE. M. (2012). Segregation and mistrust: Diversity, isolation, and social cohesion. Cambridge University Press.
113.
VezzaliL.LolliotS.TrifilettiE.CoccoV. M.RaeJ. R.CapozzaD.HewstoneM. (2023). Effects of intergroup contact on explicit and implicit outgroup attitudes: A longitudinal field study with majority and minority group members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 62(1), 215–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12583
114.
VorauerJ. D.MainK. J.O’ConnellG. B. (1998). How do individuals expect to be viewed by members of lower status groups? Content and implications of meta-stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 917–937. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.917
115.
WagnerU.ChristO.PettigrewT. F.StellmacherJ.WolfC. (2006). Prejudice and minority proportion: Contact instead of threat effects. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(4), 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250606900406
116.
WagnerU.LampenL.SyllwasschyJ. (1986). In-group inferiority, social identity and out-group devaluation in a modified minimal group study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1986.tb00697.x
117.
WagonerB.BrescóI. (2016). Conflict and memory: The past in the present. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 22(1), 3–4. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000147
118.
YucelD.PsaltisC. (2020). The effects of direct and indirect contact on prejudice: 2007 and 2017 results among Greek cypriots and Turkish cypriots. European Societies, 22(5), 610–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1793211
