Is there contact at all? Intergroup interaction in planned contact interventions between Jews and Arabs in Israel
Introduction
In the past few decades, planned intergroup contact interventions play an important role in attempts at conflict management and peace building. These interventions are often based on theoretical premises of the contact theory according to which constructive or guided contact can improve intergroup relations (Allport, 1954). Critical discussions of this theory tend to claim that “contact is not enough” (Bargal, 1990; Brewer, 1996; Hewstone & Brown, 1986). While acknowledging the importance of the contact theory, these discussions raise and address several major questions such as what are the required conditions for constructive contact and what are the intervening variables through which contact is assumed to improve intergroup relations (Hewstone & Brown, 1986; Pettigrew, 1998).
The present research raises another fundamental question of “is there contact at all?” Based on previous research in desegregated settings that has recorded a preference for ingroup interaction over intergroup one, as well as on observations of planned encounters, we claim that the occurrence of intergroup interactions in planned contact interventions between groups in conflict, can be subject to marked variability, and therefore should not be treated as a given. Thus, this study's goal is to construct and apply a measure assessing the extent of intergroup interaction in such interventions. This is done in the context of planned encounters between Jews and Arabs that were conducted in Israel on 1999–2000.
Section snippets
Theoretical background
In the past few decades, planned intergroup contact interventions play an important role in attempts at conflict management, reconciliation and peace building (Kelman, 1999; Bar-Tal, 2000). Examples of different forms or practices of such interventions, organized to help cope with living in a conflict or living in the aftermath of conflict, can be found in Northern Ireland and between Greek and Turkish Cypriots (Saunders, 1999). In the Jewish–Arab or the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, encounters
Overview
The approach that was constructed and applied in this study focuses on evaluation of the extent of the intergroup interaction in planned encounter interventions. Previous approaches assessed the effectiveness of contact interventions primarily by measuring attitude change based on the assumption that when two groups are placed in the same room, interaction occurs which qualifies as intergroup contact. The approach presented here, on the other hand, is based on many observations of encounter
The research population
The research population consists of 46 encounter programs between Jews and Arabs that took place in Israel in the years 1999–20002. These encounter programs included a series of intergroup meetings that were usually held once in every 3 to 5 weeks. They generally extended from 3–4 months to a year, were facilitated by a Jewish and an Arab facilitator, and conducted in the
Research methods
For each encounter program, one intergroup meeting was observed and rated on the numerical scale described before, assessing the degree to which there was intergroup interaction between Jews and Arabs in the encounter. The rating was accompanied by verbal rationale and details. The observers also recorded factual background data about the encounter, such as where and when it took place, number of participants attending of each nationality and their age and provided a brief written description
Findings
The data analysis examined the distribution of the extent of intergroup interaction among the studied Jewish–Arab encounter programs. In addition, we examined if there are differences between programs targeted at various age groups in the extent of intergroup interaction in them. Table 1 below presents the ratings on the measure of the extent of intergroup interaction by the target age group of the program. In the intergroup interaction measure ratings, ‘1’ and ‘2’ were combined and ratings ‘4’
Conclusion
The results of this study show variability in the extent of intergroup interaction in the investigated encounter programs. The majority of the encounters (some 65% of them) were characterized by a high to very high extent of intergroup interaction. Results of previous research in concerning self-reported spontaneous contact with an out-group in ethnically mixed or desegregated settings, has indicated a linear correlation between the extent or frequency of such contact, the degree of its
Acknowledgements
This study is based on a larger research project invited and supported by the Abraham Fund. I thank the Abraham Fund for the generous support that enabled conducting the research. I also thank the members of the research team: Summer Jaber, Rona Refaeli and Keren Wasserman for their help.
References (34)
The role of inter-group contact in change of prejudice and ethic relations
When contact is not enoughSocial identity and intergroup cooperation
International Journal of Intercultural Relations
(1996)- et al.
Revisiting the contact hypothesisThe induction of a common ingroup identity
International Journal of Intercultural Relations
(1996) - et al.
The effects of intercultural acquaintance and structured intergroup interaction on ingroup, outgroup, and reflected ingroup stereotypes
International Journal of Intercultural Relations
(1997) Power relations in inter-group encountersA case study of Jewish–Arab encounters in Israel
International Journal of Intercultural Relations
(2000)- et al.
Predicting prejudice
International Journal of Intercultural Relations
(1996) - et al.
The effect of childhood interracial contact on adult antiblack prejudice
International Journal of Intercultural Relations
(1996) The nature of prejudice
(1954)- et al.
Living with the conflictEncounters between Jewish and Palestinian Israeli youth
(1995) Contact is not enough—The contribution of Lewinian theory to inter-group workshops involving Palestinian and Jewish youth in Israel
International Journal of Group Tensions
(1990)
A Lewinian approach to intergroup workshops for Arab–Palestinians and Jewish youth
Journal of Social Issues
The ‘others’ within us—A socio-psychological perspective on changes in Israeli identity
From intractable conflict through conflict resolution to reconciliationPsychological analysis
Political Psychology
Why does fear override hope in societies engulfed by intractable conflict, as it does in the Israeli society
Political Psychology
Cooperative interaction in multiethnic contexts
Contact is not enoughan intergroup perspective on the ‘contact hypothesis’
Transforming the relationship between former enemiesA social–psychological analysis
Cited by (37)
Conflict resolution and asymmetric conflict: The contradictions of planned contact interventions in Israel and Palestine
2018, International Journal of Intercultural RelationsCitation Excerpt :The final discussion and conclusions sections construct and examine a grounded proposal for conflict resolution inside asymmetric conflict that emerges from the interview narratives. Planned contact interventions such as citizen dialogue, reconciliation and healing sessions, micro-negotiations, joint schooling and training, social, sports and cultural events, and economic and development cooperation are widely used by conflict resolution organizations as strategic initiatives in response to protracted social conflict and intergroup violence in Palestine (Abu-Nimer, 2004, 2012; Dessel & Rogge, 2008; Maoz, 2000a, 2002, 2003; Ramsbotham, 2010; Ron et al., 2010; Steinberg & Bar-On, 2002). Widely utilized in other contexts of intercommunal violence including between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland and between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, planned contact interventions (often labelled ‘people-to-people’ activities) in Israel and Palestine were first initiated in the 1970s and 1980s, often as high-risk ventures for facilitators and participants, which evolved into a flood of internationally-funded contact-based conflict resolution activity after the Palestine Liberation Organization adopted a two-state platform in 1988 and the promotion of cross-communal contact after the 1993 Oslo Accords (Herzog & Hai, 2005).
Urban green areas and their potential for social interaction - A case study of a socio-economically mixed neighbourhood in Santiago de Chile
2014, Habitat InternationalCitation Excerpt :Scholars like Oliver and Wong (2003) have highlighted the positive effect of indirect spatial contact (presence of a distinct group and sporadic encounters in the residential district), that is the reduction of social distance. Nonetheless and because of methodological and theoretical obstacles some scholars warn to raise early conclusions on the situation of contact because the way and quality of contact in daily life is much more limited as supposed (Connolly, 2000; Dixon et al., 2005; Maoz, 2002). Therefore, the very common use of a space does not necessarily imply a considerable interaction (Maoz, 2002).
Narrating hyphenated selves: Intergroup contact and configurations of identity among young Palestinian citizens of Israel
2010, International Journal of Intercultural RelationsIntergroup contact in context: The mediating role of social norms and group-based perceptions on the contact-prejudice link
2009, International Journal of Intercultural RelationsThe social dimension of green infrastructure. A review of socio-environmental well-being in the metropolitan space
2021, Revista de Geografia Norte Grande