Search

The effects of political violence are felt across generations; for example, extent of parental competitive victimhood (feeling that one's ingroup was relatively more victimised during the conflict) predicts adolescent's intergroup discrimination. We extend that research to children, born a generation after the height of violence. Participants were 223 family dyads with children aged 7–11 (M = 9.05, SD = 1.30; 52.4% female): Croatia (n = 82) and Republic of North Macedonia (RNM: n = 141), equally split by group status (i.e., Croatia: Croats/Serbs; RNM: Macedonian/Albanian). Parents reported on competitive victimhood while children reported on intergroup contact intentions (e.g., shared education initiatives). Moderation analysis across sites found a significant status by competitive victimhood interaction; increased parental competitive victimhood was associated with decreased contact intentions among minority, but not majority, children. We review site‐specific findings in relation to their historical context, concluding with the implications for shared education, reconciliation and peacebuilding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An overarching, supraordinate identity (e.g., European identity) can enhance intergroup relations if individuals recategorize ingroup and outgroup members into one, unified group. Yet, in conflict‐affected societies, ethno‐national identities may promote negative intergroup attitudes and behaviours. The effects of European and ethno‐national identities in combination have yet to be explored in childhood. If they can be integrated, the inclusivity of a supraordinate European identity may be felt despite the divisiveness of ethno‐national identities in post‐accord societies. This research assesses supraordinate identity integration in relation to quality intergroup contact and cross‐group friendships among the post‐accord generation in Croatia, Kosovo and Republic of North Macedonia (RNM). These sites have relatively recent conflicts, but varying relationships to the EU. Data were collected from 382 children aged 7–11, split evenly by minority and majority status (Croatia n = 90; Kosovo n = 107; RNM n = 185). Children across all three sites had integrated ethno‐national/European identities. Levels of identity integration varied by site, but not group status. Identity integration was positively and significantly associated with quality of outgroup contact and number of cross‐group friends, and this relationship varied by site. Integrated supraordinate identities have promising implications for intergroup relations and the future of peacebuilding in Europe. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relations between prosocial risk taking (taking a risk to benefit another person; PSRT) and interpersonal regret (regret that one's choices have caused a poor outcome for another person) were examined in 192 children aged 7–9. PSRT was measured by children's choices within a gambling task in which one choice guaranteed participants a good prize whereas the other involved risking this prize to help a peer also win a good prize. Interpersonal regret was assessed within the same task by examining children's change in emotion when they learned they would have won a better prize for a peer had they chosen differently. Performance on this task was also examined in relation to sympathy and resource sharing. Findings indicated that the operationalizations of PSRT and interpersonal regret were meaningful. Children who took a prosocial risk were more generous in a resource sharing task. In some circumstances, children who took a prosocial risk were also more likely to experience interpersonal regret than those who did not take a prosocial risk, indicating that experiencing interpersonal regret may be related to individual differences in prosociality. However, experiencing interpersonal regret did not have a direct effect on subsequent prosocial behavior, when measured by resource sharing. We consider findings in relation to a possible distinction between outcome and process regret and the generalizability of the behavioral consequences of regret. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]