Three studies examined the roles of traditional and novel social psychological variables involved in intergroup forgiveness. Study 1 (N = 480) revealed that among the pro-Pinochet and the anti-Pinochet groups in Chile, forgiveness was predicted by ingroup identity (negatively), common ingroup identity (positively), empathy and trust (positively), and competitive victimhood (the subjective sense of having suffered more than the outgroup, negatively). Political ideology (Right vs. Left) moderated the relationship between empathy and forgiveness, trust and forgiveness, and between the latter and competitive victimhood. Study 2 (N = 309), set in the Northern Irish conflict between Protestants and Catholics, provided a replication and extension of Study 1. Finally, Study 3 (N = 155/108) examined the longitudinal relationship between forgiveness and reconciliation in Northern Ireland, revealing that forgiveness predicted reconciliation intentions. The reverse direction of this relationship was also marginally significant. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and practical implications.
Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge , UK: Perseus Books.
2.
Banker, B.S., & Gaertner, S.L. (1998). Achieving stepfamily harmony: An intergroup relations approach. Journal of Family Psychology , 12, 310-325.
3.
Bijleveld, C.J.H., & van der Kamp, L.J.T. (1998). Longitudinal data analysis: Designs, models and methods. London: SAGE Publications.
4.
Brewer, M.B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429-444.
5.
Brewer, M., & Alexander, M.G. (2002). Intergroup emotions and images. In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups (pp. 209-226). New York: Psychology Press.
6.
Brewer, M., & Brown, R.J. (1998). Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 554-594). New York: McGraw-Hill.
7.
Brown, R.J., Condor, S., Matthews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J.A. (1986). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology , 59, 273-286.
8.
Brown, R.J., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 255-343.
9.
Brown, R.J., & Turner, J.C. (1981). Interpersonal and intergroup behaviour. In J. C. Turner & H. Giles (Eds.), Intergroup behaviour (pp. 33-65). Oxford , UK: Blackwell.
10.
Connolly, P., & Healy, J. (2003). The development of children's attitudes towards "the troubles" in Northern Ireland. In O. Hargie & D. Dickson (Eds.), Researching the troubles: Social science perspectives on the Northern Ireland conflict (pp. 37-57). Edinburgh, UK: Mainstream.
11.
Constable, P., & Valenzuela, A. (1991). A nation of enemies: Chile under Pinochet. London: Norton.
12.
Darby, J., & MacGinty, R. (2000). The management of peace processes. London: Macmillan.
13.
Dixon, P. (2001). Northern Ireland: The politics of war and peace . New York: Palgrave.
14.
Exline, J.J., Worthington, E.L., Hill, P., & McCullough, M.E. (2003). Forgiveness and justice: A research agenda for social and personality psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 337-348.
15.
Fay, M.T., Morrissey, M., & Smyth, M. (1999). Northern Ireland's troubles: The human costs. London: Pluto.
Gaertner, S., & Dovidio, J.F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Hove, UK: Psychology Press .
18.
Gaertner, S.L., Dovidio, J., Anastasio, P.A., Bachman, B.A., & Rust, M.C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 1-26.
19.
Gaertner, S.L., Rust, M.C., Dovidio, J.F., & Bachman, B.A. (1994). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias. Small Group Research , 25, 224-249.
20.
González, R., Manzi, J., Saiz, J., Brewer, M., De Tezanos, P., Torres, D., et al. (in press). Inter-party attitudes in Chile: Coalitions as superordinate social identities. Political Psychology.
21.
Green, D. (2006). In the forgiveness project. Retrieved August 10, 2006, from http://www.theforgivenessproject.com .
22.
Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., Voci, A., McLernon, F., Niens, U., & Noor, M. (2004). Intergroup forgiveness and guilt in Northern Ireland: Social psychological dimensions of "the troubles." In N. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 193-215). New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575-604.
24.
Huo, Y.J., Smith, H.J., Tyler, T.R., & Lind, A.E. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem? Is assimilation the answer?Psychological Science, 7, 40-45.
25.
Kramer, M.R. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology , 50, 569-598.
26.
Lewicki, R.J., & Wiethoff, C. (2000). Trust, trust development, and trust repair. In M. Deutsch & P. Coleman (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 86-107). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27.
Lundy, P., & McGovern, M. (2002). Ardoyne: The untold truth. Belfast, UK: Beyond the Pale Publications.
28.
Marques, J.M., Abrams, D., & Serodio, R. (2001). Being better by being right: Subjective group dynamics and derogation of ingroup deviants when generic norms are undermined . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 436-447.
29.
McCullough, M.E., Rachal, K.C., Sandage, S.J., Worthington, E.L.J., Brown, S.W., & Hight, T. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1586-1603.
30.
McCullough, M.E., Worthington, E.L., & Rachal, K.C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321-336.
31.
Mitchell, C. (2000). Gestures of conciliation factors contributing to successful olive branches. London: Macmillan.
32.
Mottola, G.R., Bachman, B.A., Gaertner, S.L., & Dovidio, J.F. (1997). How groups merge: The effects of merger integration patterns on anticipated commitment to the merged organization. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1335-1358.
33.
Nadler, A., & Liviatan, I. (2004). Intergroup reconciliation processes in Israel: Theoretical analysis and empirical findings. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt international perspectives (pp. 261-235). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
Nadler, A., & Saguy, T. (2003). Reconciliation between nations: Overcoming emotional deterrents to ending conflicts between groups. In H. Langholtz & C. E. Stout (Eds.), The psychology of diplomacy (pp. 29-46). Westport, CT : Praeger.
35.
Noor, M., & Brown, R. (2007). Generosity versus grudge: The role of identity in fostering intergroup forgiveness attitudes between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland. Manuscript submitted for publication.
36.
Noor, M., Brown, R., & Prentice, G. (in press-a). Precursors and mediators of intergroup reconciliation in Northern Ireland: A new model. British Journal of Social Psychology.
37.
Noor, M., Brown, R., & Prentice, G. (in press-b). Prospects for intergroup reconciliation: Social psychological predictors of intergroup forgiveness and reparation in Northern Ireland and Chile. In A. Nadler, T. Malloy, & J. D. Fisher (Eds.), Social psychology of inter-group reconciliation: From violent conflict to peaceful coexistence- going beyond victimization, guilt and distrust. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
38.
Roniger, L., & Sznajder, M. (1999). The legacy of human-rights violation in the Southern Cone. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
39.
Rosenberg, M. (1957). Occupations and value. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
40.
Schubotz, D. (2005). Beyond the orange and the green: The diversification of the qualitative social research landscape in Northern Ireland. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6.
41.
Scobie, E.D., & Scobie, G.E.W. (1998). Damaging events: The perceived need for forgiveness. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour , 28, 373-401.
42.
Staub, E. (1999). The root of evil: Social conditions, culture, personality and basic human needs. Personality and Social Psychological Reviews, 3, 179-192.
43.
Staub, E. (2006). Reconciliation after genocide, mass killing, or intractable conflict: Understanding the roots of violence, psychological recovery, and the steps toward a general theory. Political Psychology , 27, 867-894.
44.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior . In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.
45.
Takaku, S., Weiner, B., & Ohbuchi, K. (2001). A cross-cultural examination of the effects of apology and perspective taking on forgiveness. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20, 144-166.
46.
Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D., & Wetherell, M.S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
47.
Voci, A., & Hewstone, M. (2003). Contact and prejudice reduction in the Italian context: The impact of empathy, perspective-taking and group salience. Paper presented October 2003 at the meeting of the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, Boston.
48.
Waldzus, S., & Mummendey, A. (2003). Inclusion in a superordinate category, in-group prototypicality, and attitudes towards out-groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 466-477.
49.
Wohl, M.J.A., & Branscombe, N. (2005). Forgiveness and collective guilt assignment to historical perpetrator groups depend on level of social category inclusiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 288-303.
