CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 419Social and Intergroup PsychologyForgiveness and Related BehaviorsPolitical Conflict and Governance

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 192 of the 195 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When Suffering Begets Suffering: The Psychology of Competitive Victimhood Between Adversarial Groups in Violent Conflicts

Open access
Noor, Masi, Shnabel, Nurit, Halabi, Samer, Nadler, Arie·2012·Personality and Social Psychology Review
DOI 10.1177/1088868312440048
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Inter-group competitive victimhood (CV) describes the efforts of members of groups involved in violent conflicts to establish that their group has suffered more than their adversarial group. Such efforts contribute to conflicts' escalation and impede their peaceful resolution. CV stems from groups' general tendency to compete with each other, along with the deep sense of victimization resulting from conflicts. The authors point to biases that contribute to groups' engagement in CV, describe five dimensions of victimhood over which groups may compete, and contend that such competition serves various functions that contribute to the maintenance of conflicts. Drawing on the Needs-Based Model, they suggest that CV may reflect groups' motivations to restore power or moral acceptance. They then review evidence of the negative consequences of CV for inter-group forgiveness and suggest potential strategies to reduce CV. Finally, the authors discuss potential moderators and directions for future research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1088868312440048

Cites

192 of 192 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. 10.1017/S181638310999022 · DOI
  2. Bar-Tal D., 2009, Prosocial motives, emotions and behaviour, 431
  3. Gaertner S., 2000, Reducing inter-group bias: The Common In-Group Identity Model
  4. Keane F., 1996, Letters to Daniel: Despatches from the heart (BBC)
  5. Kempf W., 2002, Journalism and the new world order (Vol. II): Studying war and the media, 59
  6. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1090 · DOI
  7. Litvak M., 2009, From empathy to denial: Arabic responses to the Holocaust
  8. 10.1037/0003-066X.48.5.518 · DOI
  9. Lynch J., 2005, Peace journalism
  10. 10.10371/0022-3514.79.4.602 · DOI
  11. 10.1080/10781910709336769 · DOI
  12. Melendy B. (2005). Expellees on strike: Competing victimization discourses and the Dachau refugee camp protest movement, 1948-1949. German Studies Review, 28, 107-127.Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/30038071
  13. Morrow D., 2001, Future policies for the past, 15
  14. Moses R., 1990, The psychodynamics of international relationships, 1, 145
  15. 10.1037/1093-4510.4.2.159 · DOI
  16. Nadler A., 2002, Peace education worldwide: The concept, underlying principles, the research, 127
  17. Nadler A., 2003, The psychology of diplomacy, 29
  18. Schori N., 2009, Paper presented at the 32nd ISPP Annual Scientific Meeting
  19. Sherif M., 1953, Groups in harmony and tension
  20. Shnabel N., 2009, Paper presented at the YIISA (Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Anti-Semitism): Psychological notion of the threat of contemporary genocidal Anti-Semitism conference
  21. Sonnenschein N., 2008, An identity challenging dialogue
  22. Tesser A., 1988, Advances in experimental social psychology, 21, 181
  23. Turner J. C., 1999, The psychology of the social self: Applied social research, 11
  24. Volkan V., 2006, Killing in the name of identity: A study of bloody conflicts
  25. 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.942 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 419

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Noor, M., Shnabel, N., Halabi, S., & Nadler, A.
Affiliations
  • Canterbury Christ Church University (GB)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Academic College of Tel Aviv-Yafo (IL)
ORCID
Venue
Personality and Social Psychology Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2012-03-29
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
351-374
ISSN
  • 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7957
DOI
10.1177/1088868312440048
OpenAlex
W2143901602
Cited by
419
References
195
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 2
FWCI
61.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Personality and Social Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Keele Research Repository (Keele University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
Keywords
competitive victimhood, intergroup conflict, victimhood, conflict escalation, intergroup forgiveness, power system restoration, intergroup competition, violent conflict
MeSH terms
Culture, Group Processes, Humans, Social Behavior, Social Identification, Stress, Psychological, Violence, Crime Victims

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