Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T04:03:54.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward the need to discriminate types of attackers and defenders in intergroup conflicts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2019

Dashalini Katna  and
Bobby K. Cheon
Dashalini Katna
Affiliation:
School of Social Sciences (Psychology), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637332. [email protected] [email protected]
Bobby K. Cheon
Affiliation:
School of Social Sciences (Psychology), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637332. [email protected] [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Here, we argue that attackers in intergroup conflicts are also likely to hold strong identity fusion, anticipate threat from the out-groups, and retaliate by signaling preemptive aggressiveness, which may not be asymmetrically exclusive to defenders. We propose that the study of the intergroup and intragroup dynamics could highlight more specific, robust markers to differentiate types of defenders from attackers.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 42 , 2019 , e127
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altman, N. (2008) On suicide bombing. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies 5(1):51–67.Google Scholar
Baray, G., Postmes, T. & Jetten, J. (2009) When I equals we: Exploring the relation between social and personal identity of extreme right-wing political party members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(4):625–47.Google Scholar
Barclay, P. & Van Vugt, M. (2015) The evolutionary psychology of human prosociality: Adaptations, byproducts, and mistakes. In Schroeder, D. A. & Graziano, W. G (Eds), The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior, pp. 37–60. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Becker, D. V., Mortensen, C. R., Ackerman, J. M., Shapiro, J. R., Anderson, U. S., Sasaki, T., Maner, J. K., Neuberg, S. L. & Kenrick, D. T. (2011) Signal detection on the battlefield: Priming self-protection vs. revenge-mindedness differentially modulates the detection of enemies and allies. PLoS One 6(9):e23929. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023929.Google Scholar
Bélanger, J. J., Caouette, J., Sharvit, K. & Dugas, M. (2014) The psychology of martyrdom: Making the ultimate sacrifice in the name of a cause. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 107(3):494–515.Google Scholar
Böhm, R. (2016) Intuitive participation in aggressive intergroup conflict: Evidence of weak versus strong parochial altruism. Frontiers in Psychology 7:1535–38.Google Scholar
Bondü, R. & Richter, P. (2016) Interrelations of justice, rejection, provocation, and moral disgust sensitivity and their links with the hostile attribution bias, trait anger, and aggression. Frontiers in Psychology 7:795–810.Google Scholar
Clements, K. & Schumacher, J. A. (2010) Perceptual biases in social cognition as potential moderators of the relationship between alcohol and intimate partner violence: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior 15(5):357–68.Google Scholar
Cottrell, C. A. & Neuberg, S. L. (2005) Different emotional reactions to different groups: A sociofunctional threat-based approach to “prejudice.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88(5):770–89.Google Scholar
De Dreu, C. K. W., Gross, J., Meder, Z., Griffin, M. R., Prochazkova, E., Krikeb, J. & Columbus, S. (2016a) In-group defense, out-group aggression, and coordination failure in intergroup conflict. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 113:10524–29.Google Scholar
Epps, J. & Kendall, P. C. (1995. Hostile attributional bias in adults. Cognitive Therapy and Research 19(2):159–78.Google Scholar
Gerber, M. M. & Jackson, J. (2013) Retribution as revenge and retribution as just deserts. Social Justice Research 26(1):61–80.Google Scholar
Hasan-Aslih, S., Netzer, L., van Zomeren, M., Saguy, T., Tamir, M. & Halperin, E. (2018) When we want them to fear us: The motivation to influence outgroup emotions in collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218769744.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. C., Choi, V. K. & Gelfand, M. J. (2019) Revenge: A multilevel review and synthesis. Annual Review of Psychology 70:319–45.Google Scholar
Lopes, B. & Jaspal, R. (2015) Paranoia predicts out-group prejudice: Preliminary experimental data. Mental Health, Religion & Culture 18(5):380–95.Google Scholar
McGregor, I., Hayes, J. & Prentice, M. (2015) Motivation for aggressive religious radicalization: Goal regulation theory and a personality × threat × affordance hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology 6:1325.Google Scholar
Meadowcroft, J. & Morrow, E. A. (2017) Violence, self-worth, solidarity and stigma: How a dissident, far-right group solves the collective action problem. Political Studies 65(2):373–90.Google Scholar
Mroszczyk, J. (2016) To die or to kill? An analysis of suicide attack lethality. Terrorism and Political Violence 31(2):346–366.Google Scholar
Neuberg, S. L. & Schaller, M. (2016) An evolutionary threat-management approach to prejudices. Current Opinion in Psychology 7:1–5.Google Scholar
Osgood, J. M. (2017) Is revenge about retributive justice, deterring harm, or both? Social and Personality Psychology Compass 11(1):1–15.Google Scholar
Raihani, N. J. & Bell, V. (2018) An evolutionary perspective on paranoia. Nature Human Behaviour 3:114–121.Google Scholar
Sharkin, B. S. (2004) Road rage: Risk factors, assessment, and intervention strategies. Journal of Counseling & Development 82(2):191–98.Google Scholar
Shaver, P. R., Segev, M. & Mikulincer, M. (2011) A behavioral systems perspective on power and aggression. In: Herzilya series on personality and social psychology. Human aggression and violence: Causes, manifestations, and consequences, ed. Shaver, P. R. & Mikulincer, M., pp. 71–87. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Swann, W. B. Jr., Jetten, J., Gomez, A., Whitehouse, H. & Bastian, B. (2012) When group membership gets personal: A theory of identity fusion. Psychological Review 119(3):441–56.Google Scholar
Topalli, V. & O'Neal, E. C. (2003) Retaliatory motivation enhances attributions of hostility when people process ambiguous social stimuli. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression 29(2):155–72.Google Scholar
Waytz, A., Young, L. L. & Ginges, J. (2014) Motive attribution asymmetry for love vs. hate drives intractable conflict. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 111(44):15687–92.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, H., McQuinn, B., Buhrmester, M. & Swann, W. B. (2014) Brothers in arms: Libyan revolutionaries bond like family. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 111(50):17783–85.Google Scholar