Overcoming the Barrier of Narrative Adherence in Conflicts Through Awareness of the Psychological Bias of Naïve Realism
Abstract
One significant socio-psychological barrier for peaceful resolution of conflicts is each party's adherence to its own collective narrative. We hypothesized that raising awareness to the psychological bias of naïve realism and its identification in oneself would provide a path to overcoming this barrier, thus increasing openness to the adversary's narrative. We conducted three experimental studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Studies 1 and 2, conducted among Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Israelis, respectively, revealed that participants with hawkish political ideology reported greater openness to the adversary's narrative when they were made aware of naïve realism bias. Study 3 revealed that hawkish participants at the baseline adhered to the ingroup narrative and resisted the adversary's narrative more than dovish participants. They were also more able to identify the bias in themselves upon learning about it. This identification may explain why the manipulation led to bias correction only among hawkish participants.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Educating students about naïve realism helps them keep a more open mind.
“In addition to employing a refutational approach, there is some evidence that educating students about naïve realism, specifically, helps them to keep a more open mind (Nasie et al., 2014) and helps them take others' perspectives and deal with conflict (Smith, 2020).”
From Lessons from the field: Isn't it just common sense? Naïve realism as a barrier to learning (2024) · cites this paper as Nasie et al., 2014
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 62 · Cited by 56
- Authors
- Nasie, M., Bar-Tal, D., Pliskin, R., Nahhas, E., & Halperin, E.
- Affiliations
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- Tel Aviv University, Israel
- The Arab Academic College for Education in Israel (IL)
- Reichman University (IL)
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-09-22
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1543-1556
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2161726198
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 16.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Israel Science Foundation
- Azrieli Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Conflict Management and Negotiation
- Keywords
- naive realism, collective narratives, conflict resolution, bias awareness, bias correction, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, political ideology, in-group favoritism, intergroup conflict
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attitude, Awareness, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Social Identification, Social Perception, Negotiating, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review