Hope is viewed as a positive emotion associated with the motivation to change existing conditions. As such, it is highly relevant for social change, particularly when considering disadvantaged groups. We propose that, in the context of unequal intergroup relations, hope may actually undermine motivation for change among disadvantaged group members. Specifically, we distinguish between hope targeted at harmony with the outgroup and hope targeted at social equality between groups. Drawing on insights regarding the consequences of positive intergroup interactions, we predict that hope for harmony with the outgroup can undermine the constructive tension that motivates the disadvantaged toward equality. Across four studies, involving different intergroup contexts, hope for harmony was negatively associated with disadvantaged group members’ motivation for collective action. We further found that high identifiers from the disadvantaged group were immune to this effect. We discuss theoretical and practical implications for the role of hope in social change.
AminzadeR.McAdamD. (2001). Emotions and contentious politics. In AminzadeR.GoldstoneJ. A.McAdamD.PerryE. J.SewellW. H.TarrowS.TillyC. (Eds.), Silence and voice in the study of contentious politics (pp. 14-50). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Cohen-ChenS.Van-ZomerenM.HalperinE. (2015). Hope(lessness) and collective (in)action in intractable intergroup conflict. In HalperinE.SharvitK. (Eds.), The social psychology of intractable conflicts: Celebrating the legacy of Daniel Bar-Tal (Vol. 1., pp. 89-101). New York, NY: Springer.
3.
DixonJ.DurrheimK.TredouxC. (2005). Beyond the optimal contact strategy: A reality check for the contact hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 697-711.
4.
DixonJ. A.DurrheimK.TredouxC. (2007). Intergroup contact and attitudes toward the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological Science, 18, 867-872. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01993.x
5.
DixonJ.LevineM.ReicherS.DurrheimK. (2012). Beyond prejudice: Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting us to like one another more the solution?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 411-425. doi:10.1017/S0140525X11002214
6.
DoosjeB.EllemersN.SpearsR. (1995). Perceived variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 410-436. doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1018
7.
GohJ. X.HallJ. A.RosenthalR. (2016). Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 535-549. doi:10.1111/spc3.12267
8.
GreenawayK. H.CichockaA.Van VeelenR.LikkiT.BranscombeN. R. (2016). Feeling hopeful inspires support for social change. Political Psychology, 37, 89-107. doi:10.1111/pops.12225
9.
GuimondS.Dube-SimardL. (1983). Relative deprivation theory and the Quebec nationalist movement: The cognition-emotion distinction and the personal-group deprivation issue. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 44, 526-535. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.3.526
10.
HalperinE. (2016). Emotions in conflict: Inhibitors and facilitators of peace making. New York, NY: Routledge.
11.
HalperinE.RusselA. G.DweckC. S.GrossJ. J. (2011). Anger, hatred, and the quest for peace: Anger can be constructive in the absence of hatred. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55, 274-291.
12.
HalperinE.SharvitK.GrossJ. J. (2011). Emotion and emotion regulation in conflicts. In Bar-TalD. (Ed.), Intergroup conflicts and their resolution: Social psychological perspective (pp. 83-103). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
13.
HayesA. F. (2013). Methodology in the social sciences. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
14.
HayesA. F.PreacherK. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67, 451-470.
15.
HornseyM. J.FieldingK. S. (2016). A cautionary note about messages of hope: Focusing on progress in reducing carbon emissions weakens mitigation motivation. Global Environmental Change, 39, 26-34. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.003
16.
JackmanM. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.
17.
KlandermansB. (1984). Mobilization and participation: Social psychological expansions of resource mobilization theory. American Sociological Review, 49, 583-600.
18.
KlandermansB. (2002). How group identification helps to overcome the Dilemma of collective action. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 887-900.
19.
LalaG.McGartyC.ThomasE. F.EbertA.BroderickM.MhandoM.KamuronsiY. (2014). Messages of hope: Using positive stories of survival to assist recovery in Rwanda. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2, 450-468. doi:10.5964/jspp.v2i1.290
20.
LazarusR. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York, NY: Springer.
21.
LernerJ. S.KeltnerD. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 146-159.
22.
NietzscheF.W. (2006). Human, all too human: Parts one and two. Mineola, NY: Dover. (Original work published 1878)
23.
PearlmanW. (2013). Emotions and the micro foundations of the Arab uprisings. Perspectives on Politics, 11, 387-409. doi:10.1017/S1537592713001072
24.
RoccasS.SagivL.SchwartzS. H.HalevyN.EidelsonR. (2008). Towards a unifying model of identification with groups: Integrating theoretical perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 280-306. doi:10.1177/1088868308319225
25.
SaguyT. (2018). Downside of intergroup harmony? When reconciliation Might Backfire and what to do. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 75-81. doi:10.1177/2372732217747085
26.
SaguyT.Schori-EyalN.Hasan-AslihS.SobolD.DovidioJ. F. (2016). The irony of harmony: Past and new development. In VezzaliL.StathiS. (Eds.), Intergroup contact theory: Recent developments and future directions (pp. 53-71). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
27.
SaguyT.TauschN.DovidioJ. F.PrattoF. (2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20, 114-121. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02261.x
28.
SaguyT.TauschN.DovidioJ. F.PrattoF.SinghP. (2010). Tension and harmony in intergroup relations. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Human aggression and violence: Causes, manifestations, and consequences (pp. 333-348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
29.
SenguptaN. K.SibleyC. G. (2013). Perpetuating one’s own disadvantage: Intergroup contact enables the ideological legitimation of inequality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1391-1403. doi:10.1177/0146167213497593
30.
SmithC. A.LazarusR. S. (1990). Emotion and adaptation. In PervinL. A. (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 609-637). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31.
SpanovicM.LickelB.DensonT. F.PetrovicN. (2010). Fear and anger as predictors of motivation for intergroup aggression: Evidence from Serbia and Republika Srpska. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 725-733.
32.
StroebeK.WangK.WrightS. C. (2015). Broadening perspectives on achieving social change. Journal of Social Issues, 71, 633-645. doi:10.1111/josi.12132
33.
StürmerS.SimonB. (2004b). The role of collective identification in social movement participation: A panel study in the context of the German gay movement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 263-277. doi:10.1177/0146167203256690
34.
TauschN.BeckerJ. C.SpearsR.ChristO.SaabR.SinghP.SiddiquiR. N. (2011). Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and nonnormative collective action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 129-148. doi:10.1037/a0022728
35.
Van ZomerenM. (2013). Four core social-psychological motivations to undertake collective action. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 378-388. doi:10.1111/spc3.12031
36.
Van ZomerenM.PostmesT.SpearsR. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504-535. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
37.
Van ZomerenM.SaguyT.SchellhaasF. M. H. (2013). Believing in “making a difference” to collective efforts: Participative efficacy beliefs as a unique predictor of collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16, 618-634. doi:10.1177/1368430212467476
38.
Van ZomerenM.SpearsR.FischerA. H.LeachC. W. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies though group-focused anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 649-664. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.649
39.
Van ZomerenM.SpearsR.LeachC. W. (2008). Exploring psychological mechanisms of collective action: Does relevance of group identity influence how people cope with collective disadvantage?British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 353-372. doi:10.1348/014466607X231091
40.
WlodarczykA.BasabeN.PáezD.ZumetaL. (2017). Hope and anger as mediators between collective action frames and participation in collective mobilization: The case of 15-M. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5, 200-223. doi:10.5964/jspp.v5i1.471
41.
WrightS.LubenskyM. (2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action vs. prejudice reduction. In DemoulinS.LeyensJ. P.DovidioJ. F. (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291-310). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
42.
WrightS. C.TaylorD. M.MoghaddamF. M. (1990). The relationship of perceptions and emotions to behavior in the face of collective inequality. Social Justice Research, 4, 229-248. doi:10.1007/BF01048399
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
