Abstract:
Although hundreds of dialogue programs geared towards conflict resolution are offered every year, there have been few scientific studies of their effectiveness.
Across 2 studies we examined the effect of controlled, dyadic interactions on attitudes towards the ‘other’ in members of groups involved in ideological conflict. Study 1 involved Mexican immigrants and White Americans in Arizona, and Study 2 involved Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East. Cross-group dyads interacted via video and text in a brief, structured, face-to-face exchange: one person was assigned to write about the difficulties of life in their society (‘perspective-giving’), and the second person was assigned to accurately summarize the statement of the first person (‘perspective-taking’).
Positive changes in attitudes towards the outgroup were greater for Mexican immigrants and Palestinians after perspective-giving and for White Americans and Israelis after perspective-taking. For Palestinians, perspective-giving to an Israeli effectively changed attitudes towards Israelis, while a control condition in which they wrote an essay on the same topic without interacting had no effect on attitudes, illustrating the critical role of being heard.
Thus, the effects of dialogue for conflict resolution depend on an interaction between dialogue condition and participants’ group membership, which may reflect power asymmetries.
[Edit: I say the following with some caution cause I read most of this study, but not all of it]
Of course dialogue can be a great tool for conflict resolution between two people with very different worldviews.
This study seems to me me to have a twisted approach tho. For example the problems between Mexican immigrants and white Americans, are not a result of lack of dialogue between themselves.
Their problems are the result of policies that have been present for such a long time and are made by other people higher up in government positions, implemented by law, police, armies etc. For me, failing to take these dynamics into consideration in a study like this can only provide misleading conclusions that exempt authorities from their responsibilities in creating and/or maintaining these dynamics.
Yeah I agree. There is a difference between understanding someone and actually caring enough to do something about it. For me what this study is useful for is helping us understand what helps change people’s attitude towards each other on an individual level, I don’t think that this can or should be applied in an institutional way at all because like you and the study mentions the power dynamics aren’t level so wouldn’t actually be that useful.
