The increasingly xenophobic U.S. climate warrants a close investigation of Arab American responses to discrimination. We conducted secondary analyses of two large data sets to examine social identity processes and their relationship to well-being. In a representative sample of Muslim Arab Americans (Study 1, n = 228), discrimination was related to decreased American identification, which in turn predicted lower well-being. Another large sample of Arab Americans (Study 2, n = 1,001) revealed how social identity processes differ by religious group. For Christian Arab Americans, discrimination predicted an indirect negative effect on well-being through decreased American identification. Muslim Arab Americans showed the same pattern, but also stronger religious and ethnic identification the more they experienced discrimination, which partially buffered the harmful effects on well-being. These data present a social cohesion challenge where the maintenance of national identity necessitates less discrimination and injustice against minorities.

This review examines the coloniality infused within the conduct and third reporting of experimental research in what is commonly referred to as the ‘Israeli‐Palestinian conflict’. Informed by a settler colonial framework and decolonial theory, our review measured the appearance of sociopolitical terms and critically analysed the reconciliation measures. We found that papers were three times more likely to describe the context through the framework of intractable conflict compared to occupation. Power asymmetry was often acknowledged and then flattened via, for instance, adjacent mentions of Israeli and Palestinian physical violence. Two‐thirds of the dependent variables were not related to material claims (e.g. land, settlements, or Palestinian refugees) but rather to the feelings and attitudes of Jewish Israelis and Palestinians. Of the dependent measures that did consider material issues, they nearly universally privileged conditions of the two‐state solution and compromises on refugees' right of return that would violate international law. The majority of the studies sampled Jewish–Israeli participants exclusively, and the majority of authors were affiliated with Israeli institutions. We argue that for social psychology to offer insights that coincide with the decolonization of historic Palestine, the discipline will have to begin by contextualizing its research within the material conditions and history that socially stratify the groups.

In the aftermath of intergroup harm, victim groups often claim rights for restitution. Research has assessed how members of perpetrator groups respond to such claims, revealing that group-based guilt, shame, and anger can predict support for reparations. Though they have distinct foci, these group-based emotions are based on appraisals of ingroup harmdoing and victim group disadvantage as illegitimate. This meta-analysis investigates the relationship between these three group-based emotions and support for reparations, defined as symbolic or material policies that address historical injustices or the legacies thereof. An overall estimate based on 101 effect sizes from 58 samples, N = 10,305, showed a strong effect, r = .44, and revealed no significant difference between the three types of emotions. Moderator analyses revealed that the relationship between groupbased guilt and reparations was weaker when the reparations required effort and stronger when the victims were Indigenous people; for shame, the relationship was weaker when the reparations required effort and stronger when the reparations contained symbolic elements; and for anger, the relationship was stronger when the victims were Indigenous people. Future research can further disentangle the conceptual overlap between these group-based emotions by explicitly testing heretofore under-examined yet important facets of intergroup contexts such as the timeframe of harm and the nature and meaning of the proposed reparations.Keywords Group-based emotions . Guilt . Shame . Anger . Reparations History is rife with examples of intergroup harm (Barkan, 2001). Intergroup harm has occurred around the globe and such harm includes genocide, colonization, slavery, and present-day discrimination. After harming another group, the perpetrator group will sometimes attempt reconciliation with the victim group through reparative actions (Brooks, 1999;De Greiff, 2006). Reparative actions can take many forms, such as formal apologies, social programs to benefit victims, and financial payments, and can have positive consequences for both victims and perpetrators (Allan et al., 2006;Maitner et al., 2006; Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 1998). A rich literature has shown that one important antecedent that motivates perpetrator groups to engage in reparative actions is the kind and degree of emotion that group members feel about their harmdoing. Group-Based Guilt, Shame, and AngerResearch drawing on the social identity perspective (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) proposes that, since group memberships contribute to the self-concept, individuals can feel group-based emotions that stem from appraising events related to the group's goals (Branscombe, 2004;Seger et al., 2009;Smith, 1993;Smith & Mackie, 2016). Individuals typically prefer to identify with groups perceived as moral; appraisals of one's group having illegitimately harmed another group, then, can pose a grave threat to the group, resulting in aversive groupbased emotions like guilt, shame, and anger. Group-Based Guilt and Sha...

No abstract

We apply a cultural psychology approach to collective memory of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In particular, we considered whether practices associated with commemoration of the 9/11 terrorist attacks would promote vigilance (prospective affordance hypothesis) and misattribution of responsibility for the original 9/11 attacks (reconstructive memory hypothesis) in an ostensibly unrelated context of intergroup conflict during September 2015. In Study 1, vigilance toward Iran and misattribution of responsibility for the 9/11 attacks to Iranian sources was greater among participants whom we asked about engagement with 9/11 commemoration than among participants whom we asked about engagement with Labor Day observations. Results of Study 2 suggested that patterns of greater vigilance and misattribution as a function of instructions to recall engagement with 9/11 commemoration were more specifically true only of participants who reported actual engagement with hegemonic commemoration practices. From a cultural psychological perspective, 9/11 commemoration is a case of collective memory not merely because it implicates collective-level (versus personal) identities, but instead because it emphasizes mediation of motivation and action via engagement with commemoration practices and other cultural tools.