Research shows that inclusive identities are effective for improving intergroup relations. Little work, however, asked what happens once a sense of common identity is formed, but then lost. Given increasing diversity and integration attempts that might fail, this question is realistic and timely. We studied a religious minority in Israel, Arab-Druze (N = 178), constituting 1.6% of the population. Druze have always had strong common ties with the Jewish majority, particularly younger Druze who serve in the Israeli army. We surveyed Druze in the aftermath of the nationality bill, which was considered by many to be highly exclusionary toward non-Jews. Drawing on research on minority exclusion, we expected that for younger Druze, a sense of common identity loss will predict radical forms of action. This was supported by our cross-sectional data and remained stable after controlling for more classic predictors of violent and nonviolent action.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.
2.
BeatonA. M.DovidioJ. F.LégerN. (2008). All in this together? Group representations and policy support. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 808–817.
3.
DanaN. (2003). The Druze in the Middle East: Their faith, leadership, identity and status. Brighton and Portland: Sussex Academic Press.
4.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.SaguyT.HalabiS. (2008). From when to why: Understanding how contact reduces bias. In WagnerU.TroppL. R.FinchilescuG.TredouxC. (Eds.), Improving intergroup relations: Building on the legacy of Thomas F. Pettigrew (pp. 75–90). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
5.
DovidioJ. F.JohnsonJ. D.GaertnerS. L.PearsonA. R.SaguyT.Ashburn-NardoL. (2010). Empathy and intergroup relations. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
6.
FischerA.RosemanI. J. (2007). Beat them or ban them: The characteristics and social functions of anger and contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 103–115.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
9.
GlasfordD. E.DovidioJ. F. (2011). E pluribus unum: Dual identity and minority group members’ motivation to engage in contact, as well as social change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1021–1024.
10.
HajjarL. (2000). Speaking the conflict, or how the Druze became bilingual: A study of Druze translators in the Israeli military courts in the West Bank and Gaza. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 23, 299–328.
11.
HalabiR. (2006). Equal citizens: Druze identity in the Jewish state. Tel-Aviv, Israel: The United Kibuts (Hebrew).
12.
HouletteM. A.GaertnerS. L.JohnsonK. M.BankerB. S.RiekB. M.DovidioJ. F. (2004). Developing a more inclusive social identity: An elementary school intervention. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 35–55.
13.
KrausM. W.TanJ. J. (2015). Americans overestimate social class mobility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 58, 101–111.
14.
KruglanskiA. W.GelfandM. J.BélangerJ. J.ShevelandA.HetiarachchiM.GunaratnaR. (2014). The psychology of radicalization and deradicalization: How significance quest impacts violent extremism. Political Psychology, 35, 69–93.
15.
KunstJ. R.ThomsenL.SamD. L.BerryJ. W. (2015). “We are in this together”: Common group identity predicts majority members’ active acculturation efforts to integrate immigrants. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 1438–1453.
16.
KurtD.AbassR.WaltersY. (2012). Patterns of identity and educational aspirations in Druze adults and adolescents: A cross generational study of attitudes and perceptions. Retrieved from Ministry of Education, Israel: https://ecat.education.gov.il/Attachment/DownloadFile?downloadId=7721
PaluckE. L.GreenD. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment of research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 339–367.
19.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
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.
22.
SaguyT.TauschN.DovidioJ. F.PrattoF. (2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20, 114–121.
23.
Schori-EyalN.HalperinE.SaguyT. (2019). Intergroup commonality, political ideology, and tolerance of enemy collateral casualties in intergroup conflicts. Journal of Peace Research. doi:10.1177/0022343318818658
24.
ShumanE.Cohen-ChenS.Hirsch-HoeflerS.HalperinE. (2016). Explaining normative versus non-normative action: The role of implicit theories. Political Psychology, 27, 835–852.
25.
SimonB.KlandermansB. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319–331.
26.
SimonB.ReichertF.GrabowO. (2013). When dual identity becomes a liability: Identity and political radicalism among migrants. Psychological Science, 24, 251–257.
27.
SorekT. (2011). The quest for victory: Collective memory and national identification among the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel. Sociology, 45, 464–479.
28.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
29.
TauschN.BeckerJ. C.SpearsR.ChristO.SaabR.SinghP.SiddiquiR. N. (2011). Explaining radical group behaviour: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and non-normative collective action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 129–148.
30.
TroïanJ.BonettoE.AraujoM.BaïdadaO.ÇelebiE.Dono MartinM.…YurtbakanT. (2019). Positive associations between anomia and intentions to engage in political violence: Cross cultural evidence from four countries. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology. doi:10.1037/pac0000385
31.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
32.
UfkesE. G.CalcagnoJ.GlasfordD. E.DovidioJ. F. (2016). Understanding how common ingroup identity undermines collective action among disadvantaged-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 26–35.
33.
UfkesE. G.DovidioJ. F.TelG. (2015). Identity and collective action among European Kurds. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 176–186.
34.
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.
35.
WohlM. J. A.BranscombeN. (2005). Forgiveness and collective guilt assignment to historical perpetrator groups depend on level of social category inclusiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 288–303.
WrightS.LubenskyM. (2008). 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
38.
YzerbytV. Y.MullerD.JuddC. M. (2004). Adjusting researchersapproach to adjustment: On the use of covariates when testing interac-tions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 424–431.
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.
