Talking to a (Segregation) Wall: Intergroup Contact and Attitudes Toward Normalization Among Palestinians From the Occupied Territories

This article examines how Palestinians' intergroup contact experiences relate to their attitudes towards interactions with Israelis (i.e., normalization). We draw on four recent advances in intergroup contact literature. First, recent research indicates that positive contact can impede disadvan...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Political psychology 2023-02, Vol.44 (1), p.43-59
Main Authors: Albzour, Mai, Bady, Zacharia, Elcheroth, Guy, Penic, Sandra, Reimer, Nils, Green, Eva G. T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Arab Israeli relations
Attitudes
Disadvantaged
Inequality
Institutionalization
Intergroup contact
Intergroup relations
Military occupations
Minority groups
Motivation
negative contact
Negative experiences
Normalization
Palestinian people
Palestinian–Israeli relations
Reminders
sedative effect of positive intergroup contact
Segregation
Social change
Social contact
Social motivation
Talking
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article examines how Palestinians' intergroup contact experiences relate to their attitudes towards interactions with Israelis (i.e., normalization). We draw on four recent advances in intergroup contact literature. First, recent research indicates that positive contact can impede disadvantaged groups' motivation to challenge inequalities. Second, increased endorsement of normalization mediates this sedative effect of positive contact on motivation to resist in the West Bank. Third, negative contact has been related to increased motivation for social change. Fourth, institutions and societal norms shape the meaning of intergroup contact and its effect on intergroup relations. We hypothesize that negative experiences at checkpoints can act as reminders of institutionalized inequalities and thus attenuate sedative effects. Furthermore, we explore the contextual boundary conditions of such reminder effects. Analyses of cross‐sectional survey conducted among a representative sample (N = 1,000) in the West Bank including Jerusalem showed that (1) positive intergroup contact related to normalization endorsement (sedative effect), (2) negative intergroup contact related to decreased normalization endorsement (mobilizing effect), and (3) negative contact experiences (at checkpoints) canceled out the effect of positive contact (reminder effect), but only in Jerusalem. Results suggest that the impacts of intergroup contact need to be interpreted in light of institutionalized forms of group inequality and segregation.
ISSN:0162-895X
1467-9221
DOI:10.1111/pops.12816