Search

Positive attitudes and trust towards former adversaries facilitate reconciliation and peace building. Both historical and current intergroup experiences such as intergroup contact and conflict predict intergroup attitudes and trust, but no previous research has investigated the joint effects of these experiences. Therefore, we study the interplay of positive intergroup contact preceding conflict, negative experiences of the conflict, and positive intergroup contact following conflict. Drawing on social representations theory and using a multilevel design, we highlight the importance of both individual and collective experiences. We examine the effects of such experiences on intergroup attitudes and trust among a large sample of Greek Cypriots (N = 802) and Turkish Cypriots (N = 718) from 54 formerly ethnically mixed villages in the context of a protracted and frozen conflict in Cyprus. Present‐day individual contact related to more positive attitudes and higher trust regardless of participants' past experiences of conflict or contact. Furthermore, past collective contact experiences predict more positive attitudes and higher trust, whereas past collective conflict experiences predicted more negative attitudes and lower trust. Finally, present‐day contact closes the gap in trust between respondents with low and high past contact. Overall, both current and historical and individual and collective experiences matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Armed drones are now a key component of military strategy; however, little empirical research has explored the phenomenon in terms of psychological processes. Previous research has emphasized the importance of basic human values for structuring understandings of and opinions towards foreign policy issues. Using a social representations approach, we used a multilevel modeling approach to explore the link between values and support for the use of armed drones in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Turkey. In line with our predictions, high priority of self‐transcendence values negatively predicted, and high priority of conservation values positively predicted, support for armed drones. Furthermore, given our theoretical framework, we specified that values should be conceptualized as prioritized or devalued within a particular context, and when values were specified as country‐level, as well as individual predictors, this led to an increase in model fit. These findings are discussed in light of a developing line of research on meta‐representations and their consequences for political opinion, and directions for future research are advanced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Opposition to immigration and the rejection of migrants have long been of concern to psychologists. While much is known about negative representations of migrants in politics and the media, far less is known about positive representations of migrants and immigration. In this article, we provide an examination of social representations promoting promigrant action in the context of a community campaign opposing the deportation of a woman and her young daughter. The woman, who had come to the United Kingdom from Malawi seven years prior had lost permission to remain following changes to personal circumstances and was facing deportation. Our analysis explores the ways in which the campaign's mobilization arguments respond to and engage with antimigrant representations. It identifies the importance of categorical representations concerning the nature, norms, and interests of the local community, of the two migrants under threat of deportation, and of those seeking to deport them. Contrary to antimigrant representations, the migrants at the center of the campaign were presented as ingroup members and their potential deportation as a violation of ingroup norms and ingroup interests. Finally, we also identify points of ambivalence in the campaign's mobilization strategy where arguments reject the ascription but not the nature of negative representations of migrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is crucial to gain better insights into how psychosocial processes can limit the power of the political/legislative sphere for promoting social change through new laws. One form of accomplishing this is by illuminating the arguments and the content and value of social representations at play in cases in which the public sphere succeeds in contesting new laws. In this article, we explore a case of successful resistance to new ecological laws in a Portuguese Natura site. The laws, restricting recreational fishing, were made less stringent after meeting with local opposition. Content analysis of 122 articles published from 2006 to 2014 in regional and national newspapers reveals that protestors (fishermen, local authorities) received higher visibility and support and had more direct voice than the political sphere in both presses. Dialogical analysis of direct quotations of protestors shows how they seek legitimacy by establishing common ground with valued representations, vividly invoking people‐place bonds and tradition, and also how they attempt to undermine the law's legitimacy by linking local and national concerns, avoiding (potentially devalued) “Nimby” (“not in my backyard”) arguments. The discussion highlights what can be learned from using the press to investigate policy struggles that successfully organized their argumentation to contest new laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study investigates the relationship between the foreign policy orientation of Irish neutrality and national identity using a social representations approach (Elcheroth, Doise, & Reicher, 2011; Moscovici, 1961/76). In four focus groups conducted in the Republic of Ireland, 22 participants discussed vignettes in which hypothetical conflicts were described. The findings pointed towards the dynamic relationship between neutrality and Irish national identity and more generally to the importance of macropolitical phenomena for identity construction. The process of categorization was key to participants' decision making regarding the hypothetical conflicts; the decision to support or oppose the Irish state's involvement in the conflicts frequently revolved around a reconsideration of the boundaries of the ingroup. Furthermore, social representations were laden with the possibility of social change; the construction of neutrality as morally ambivalent, motivated by pragmatism rather than principles, opened up a space for younger participants to resist dominant, pragmatic interpretations of the policy and offer alternatives. Theoretical and empirical implications of the findings are discussed. Taken together, the findings demonstrate the critical potential of extending a social representations approach to issues of political psychological significance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The idea of narrative has become increasingly appropriated in empirical research in both psychology and politics, yet there is a notable absence of integrative frameworks that specify a conceptual and methodological approach to narrative research in political psychology. An integrative conceptual framework is proposed and anchored in four principles of a narrative approach: (1) the mutual constitution of language and thought, (2) the need for personal coherence through narrative identity development, (3) the need for collective solidarity through shared meaning, and (4) the mediational property of narrative in social activity and practice. Theory and empirical research related to these principles are reviewed. We argue that a narrative framework has the potential to enhance the relevance and amplify the voice of political psychology within and beyond the academy and to offer new knowledge on the complex and dynamic relationship between context and mind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary outlines an approach to social representations which emphasizes the normative and dynamic nature of shared knowledge. Social representations both connect and divide people, for example through shared ingroup and outgroup stereotypes derived from antagonistic social representations. Through asymmetrical intergroup communication and influence, in turn, social representations are formed, maintained, and contested. In this dynamic process, powerful majorities attempt to define the meaning of new or otherwise important information as a function of their group norms, while subordinate minorities employ propaganda techniques of social influence to resist majority influence and propose alternative positions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fifty years ago, Serge Moscovici first outlined a theory of social representations. In this article, we attempt to discuss and to contextualize research that has been inspired by this original impetus from the particular angle of its relevance to political psychology. We argue that four defining components of social representations need to be taken into account, and that these elements need to be articulated with insights from the social identity tradition about the centrality of self and group constructions in order to develop original insights into political psychological phenomena. First, social representations are shared knowledge, and the way interpretations of the world are collectively elaborated is critical to the way people are able to act within the world. Second, social representations are meta-knowledge, which implies that what people assume relevant others know, think, or value is part of their own interpretative grid, and that collective behavior can often be influenced more powerfully at the level of meta-representations than of intimate beliefs. Third, social representations are enacted communication, which means that social influence is exerted by the factors that constrain social practices as much as by the discourse that interprets these practices. Fourth, social representations are world-making assumptions: collective understandings do not only reflect existing realities but often bring social reality into being. Put together, these four components provide a distinctive theoretical perspective on power, resistance and conflict. The added conceptual value of this perspective is illustrated by showing how it allows revisiting ethnic conflict in the former Yugoslavia. We conclude with implications for research practices and discuss how the proposed model of social representations invites us to define new priorities and challenges for the methods used to study political psychological phenomena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we first suggest that the approach presented by Elcheroth, Doise, and Reicher is particularly relevant in view of the 'neuroscientific turn' that faces political psychology. Thus, we note that the distinction between content and process and the predilection for general, intrapsychological, and content-free explanations of political cognition and behavior are encouraged by these developments. We contrast the contribution of the social representations approach to the understanding of social conflict and social change with the approach promoted by these new perspectives. Next, we consider the four themes highlighted by Elcheroth et al. as distinctive of the social representations approach. We notice convergences between these themes and several areas of 'mainstream' social and political psychology and show that several of these themes have surfaced in these fields without making reference to this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why and under what conditions do subjects from diverse political orientations tend to offer different explanations of a social problem? Past studies have found evidence of a connection between political orientations and explanations of delinquency, for example. However, observing such differences among subjects with diverse political orientations is not enough to prove the existence of an organic link between social differentiation and the representations of delinquency. The aim of this paper is to provide an experimental proof of such a link. The results show that: (a) right-wing and left-wing subjects tend to offer different types of explanations of delinquency, but they refer to several common organizing principles; (b) divergence increases when social comparison between groups is activated; (c) differences are bigger if this comparison induces a discrimination; (d) the bigger the differences the more likely are the groups to resort to their ideological principles. Results are discussed in terms of theoretical, methodological, deontological, and practical implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this response to the commentaries, we make one concession and try to clarify two critical points raised by the commentators. The concession is about the common stock of knowledge on which social representations approaches draw in general, and the model outlined in our article in particular. The two points we attempt to clarify concern the importance of both an intergroup perspective and of the structural components of power to our model of social representations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]