The present research examined the differential relationship between distinct construals of collective victimhood-specifically, inclusive and exclusive victim consciousness-and intergroup attitudes in the context and aftermath of mass violence. Three surveys in Rwanda (N = 842), Burundi (N = 1,074), and Eastern DRC (N = 1,609) provided empirical support for the hypothesis that while exclusive victim consciousness predicts negative intergroup attitudes, inclusive victim consciousness is associated with positive, prosocial intergroup attitudes. These findings were significant when controlling for age, gender, urban/rural residence, education, personal victimization, and ingroup superiority. Additionally, exclusive victim consciousness mediated the effects of ingroup superiority on negative intergroup attitudes. These findings have important theoretical implications for research on collective victimhood as well as practical implications for intergroup relations in regions emerging from violent conflict.

No abstract

No abstract

This article sheds light on the nature of the Turkish denial of Armenian mass killings. A survey study investigates Turkish students' construals (i.e., attributions of responsibility and perceived severity of harm) of Turkish massacres of Armenians at the beginning of the 20th century. The results demonstrated a high correspondence between participants' individual construals and the Turkish official narrative of the events. Structural equation modeling indicated that in-group glorification, perceived in-group threat, and positive attitudes toward war predicted less acknowledgment of in-group responsibility, which in turn predicted less support for reparations of the harm inflicted on Armenians. The study highlights the influence of government-sponsored national self-images in the production and endorsement of legitimizing narratives of the in-group's violence. The findings call for research that examines the combined influence of psychological and societal mechanisms on people's beliefs about in-group actions.Genocide is the most serious crime against humanity. Accordingly, allegations of genocide have significant legal and moral consequences for perpetrator groups,

Groups in conflict develop strikingly different construals of the same violent events. These clashing perceptions of past violence can have detrimental consequences for intergroup relations and might provoke new hostilities.In this article, we integrate and juxtapose what we know about construals of collective violence by delineating the different dimensions along which these construals differ between victim and perpetrator groups: regarding the question of who is the victim, who is responsible for the harm doing, what the perpetrator's intent was, how severe the violence was, and when it took place. Then, we discuss the individual-and group-level factors (e.g., collective narratives, social identities) that shape these construals, as well as their implications for attitudes regarding the conflict and support for relevant policies. We distinguish two different core motives that drive construals and their outcomes among victim and perpetrator groups: Perpetrator groups try to cope with moral identity threats and preserve a positive image of the ingroup, while victim groups try to protect their ingroup from future harm doing and desire acknowledgment of their group's experiences. Lastly, we discuss implications for strategies and interventions to address victim and perpetrator groups' divergent perspectives of collective violence.