Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:53:45.582Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Segregation and belief polarization as boundary conditions for when fusion leads to self-sacrifice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Zachary J. Melton  and
Matt Motyl
Zachary J. Melton
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607. [email protected], [email protected]://www.mattmotyl.com
Matt Motyl
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607. [email protected], [email protected]://www.mattmotyl.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Physical enclavement, away from out-group members, may determine when identify fusion leads to self-sacrifice. When people surround themselves with ideologically similar others, their attitudes may polarize and become moralized, leading to more violence and hostility toward people who do not share those attitudes. We discuss how this segregation may increase the amount of political violence in typically nonviolent systems.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e211
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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

Brauer, M., Judd, C. M. & Gliner, M. D. (1995) The effects of repeated expressions on attitude polarization during group discussions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68(6):1014–29.Google Scholar
Kirk, R. & Martin, S. A. (2017) The dark power of words: Stratagems of hate in the 2016 presidential campaign. In: The 2016 US Presidential Campaign, pp. 205–29. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.Google Scholar
Mason, L. (2015) I disrespectfully agree: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science 59(1):128–45.Google Scholar
Motyl, M. (2016) Liberals and conservatives are geographically dividing. In: Social psychology of political polarization, ed. Valdesolo, P. & Graham, J., pp. 7–37. Routledge.Google Scholar
Motyl, M., Hart, J., Pyszczynski, T., Weise, D., Maxfield, M. & Siedel, A. (2011) Subtle priming of shared human experiences eliminates threat-induced negativity toward Arabs, immigrants, and peace-making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 47(6):1179–84.Google Scholar
Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Oishi, S., Trawalter, S. & Nosek, B. A. (2014) How ideological migration geographically segregates groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 51:1–14.Google Scholar
Motyl, M. & Pyszczynski, T. (2009) The existential underpinnings of the cycle of terrorist and counterterrorist violence and pathways to peaceful resolutions. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale 22(3):267–91.Google Scholar
Motyl, M., Rothschild, Z. & Pyszczynski, T. (2009) The cycle of violence and pathways to peace. Journal of Organisational Transformation & Social Change 6(2):153–70.Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W. & Sargis, E. G. (2005) Moral conviction: Another contributor to attitude strength or something more? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88(6):895–917. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.6.895.Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J. & Houston, D. A. (2001) When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Social Justice Research 14(3):305–26.Google Scholar
Zaal, M. P., Laar, C. V., Ståhl, T., Ellemers, N. & Derks, B. (2011) By any means necessary: The effects of regulatory focus and moral conviction on hostile and benevolent forms of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology 50(4):670–89.Google Scholar