Collective psychological ownership and reconciliation in territorial conflicts

Abstract

Collective psychological ownership refers to people’s perception that an object, place, or idea belongs to their own group. We considered this concept in the context of territorial conflicts and proposed that (1) collective psychological ownership is distinct from place attachment, (2) higher ingroup identifiers are more likely to claim collective ownership and feel attached to the territory, yet (3) only ownership claims are related to lower support for reconciliation. These hypotheses were tested in two studies using structural equation modelling. Study 1 addressed the Kosovo conflict, based on Serbian participants living in Serbia (N = 264). We found that collective psychological ownership and place attachment were distinct. Moreover, higher Serbian identifiers had a stronger sense of collective ownership of Kosovo and were more attached to it. Those with stronger feelings of collective ownership supported reconciliation with Albanians less, while place attachment did not hinder reconciliation. Study 2 replicated these findings among a new sample of Serbs in Serbia (N = 173), among Serbs in Kosovo (N = 129), and in two other conflict settings: among Greek Cypriots in Cyprus (N = 135) and Jews in Israel (N = 109). Altogether, we provide evidence that collective psychological ownership can represent an obstacle to reconciliation in conflict regions.

Can ‘we’ share the contested territory with ‘them’? Shared territorial ownership perceptions and reconciliation intentions in Kosovo

“…The answer options ranged from (1) = 'Not at all' to (7) = 'Very much'. These items were previously used by Storz et al (2020) to measure ingroup ownership but here we use them to capture outgroup ownership as well.…”

‘This country is OURS’: The exclusionary potential of collective psychological ownership

“…The exclusive determination right affords a sense of control, which is the primary need fulfilled by ownership (Beggan, 1991; Furby, 1978). However, ownership can additionally furnish a sense of identity and belongingness (Pierce et al ., 2001; Porteous, 1976), and indeed, CPO is related but relatively independent from national identification and place attachment (Brylka et al ., 2015; Storz et al ., 2020). Furthermore, national identification is a constituent aspect of right‐wing populism (Brubaker, 2019; Lubbers, 2019) that is linked to negative attitudes towards immigrants (Pehrson, Vignoles, & Brown, 2009), the EU (Carey, 2002), and the pro‐Brexit vote (Hobolt, 2016).…”

Support for Conciliatory Policies in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: The Role of Different Modes of Identification and Territorial Ownership Perceptions

“…Further, territorial ownership feelings (“this is our land”) have largely been ignored in the research on intergroup relations in general but also on conflict resolution in particular, yet the question of whom the territory belongs to is central in many interethnic disputes (see ethos of conflict; e.g., Bar-Tal et al, 2012 ). A handful of recent studies conducted both in peaceful and conflict settings draws attention to the relevance of ownership feelings over one’s country ( Brylka et al, 2015 ; Storz et al, 2020 ; Nijs et al, 2021 ) or neighborhood ( Torunczyk-Ruiz and Martinović, 2020 ) for intergroup relations. Additionally, since one needs to feel part of “us” in order to perceive collective ownership, ingroup identification is an important prerequisite for the feeling that something is “ours” ( Verkuyten and Martinović, 2017 ; Storz et al, 2020 ).…”

“…A handful of recent studies conducted both in peaceful and conflict settings draws attention to the relevance of ownership feelings over one’s country ( Brylka et al, 2015 ; Storz et al, 2020 ; Nijs et al, 2021 ) or neighborhood ( Torunczyk-Ruiz and Martinović, 2020 ) for intergroup relations. Additionally, since one needs to feel part of “us” in order to perceive collective ownership, ingroup identification is an important prerequisite for the feeling that something is “ours” ( Verkuyten and Martinović, 2017 ; Storz et al, 2020 ). However, the role of different dimensions of identification in shaping ownership perceptions has not been considered yet.…”

“…In territorial interethnic conflicts such as the one in Israel/Palestine, perceptions that the territory rightfully belongs to one’s own group tend to be rather prominent ( Storz et al, 2020 ). Yet, we argue that perceiving the ingroup to own a territory does not have to be exclusive.…”