Emotion in inter-group relations

By A. Iyer, C. Leach. 2008

274 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/57e66a1bf83f2933de9559fc5663d1d61a372f07

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Revisiting followership through a social identity perspective: the role of collective follower emotion and action (2013, background): “This effect has been found to be consistent across experimental studies by Lipponen, Koivisto, and Olkkonen (2005), De Cremer, van Dijke, and Mayer (2010), and Seppälä, Lipponen, and Pirttilä-Backman (2012).”
Group-Based Shame and Guilt: Emerging Directions in Research (2011, unknown): “In other instances, people feel these emotions about their group’s present or past history of behavior toward an outgroup (such as the policies seen as unfairly discriminating against a minority group; see Iyer & Leach, 2008 for a more nuanced taxonomy of these distinctions).”
Interpersonal instrumental emotion regulation (2015, background): “Previous studies have shown that group-based emotions (i.e., the emotions one feels as a result of group membership) can bring people to act in an emotion-consistent manner (e.g., Iyer & Leach, 2008; Niedenthal & Brauer, 2012).”
Politics, schadenfreude, and ingroup identification: The sometimes happy thing about a poor economy and death (2009, result): “Although previous research has not found support for IET with regard to intergroup schadenfreude (see Iyer & Leach, 2008, for a review), theoretically, one would expect individuals that identified strongly with an ingroup to experience greater pleasure when a misfortune event would serve to benefit…”
Experimental evidence for a dual pathway model analysis of coping with the climate crisis (2010, background): “…how framing the situation in terms of different appraisals (e.g., from negative future consequences to injustice and blame) might evoke anger and thereby perhaps increase individuals' environmental action intentions even more (for discussions, see Iyer & Leach, 2008; Leach, Snider, & Iyer, 2002).”
Collective Narcissism Predicts Hypersensitivity to In–group Insult and Direct and Indirect Retaliatory Intergroup Hostility (2016, unknown): “Despite several studies reporting a positive relationship (Combs, Combs, Powell, Schurtz, & Smith, 2009), a comprehensive review suggests that the overall relationship is null (Iyer & Leach, 2008).”
Social identity: The role of self in group processes and intergroup relations (2017, background): “…by intergroup beliefs and wider explanatory ideologies on the specific emotions elicited, such as guilt or shame, and on what groups do as a consequence, such as make apologies or pursue reconciliation (e.g., Doosje, Branscombe, Spears, & Manstead, 2006; Iyer & Leach, 2008; Nadler & Shnabel, 2015).”
The positive effect of negative emotions in protracted conflict: The case of anger (2011, background): “Over the last three decades, a growing body of literature has highlighted the importance of emotions in intergroup relations (Iyer & Leach, 2008; Mackie & Smith, 2002; Mackie, Smith, & Ray, 2008).”
Social identity, group processes, and helping in emergencies (2013, background): “Researchers have been exploring the place of emotion in intergroup contexts where there has been conflict, advantage or discrimination—and have examined the impact of different kinds of emotion on social and political action (Iyer & Leach, 2009; Leach, Iyer, & Pedersen, 2006).”
Social-Psychological Interventions for Intergroup Reconciliation: An Emotion Regulation Perspective (2016, methodology): “…processes—situation selection, situation modification, attentional deployment, cognitive change, and response modulation—distinguished by the point in the emotion1 The terms group-based emotions and intergroup emotions are often used interchangeably in the literature (Iyer & Leach, 2008).”
Guilt, anger, and pride about in-group environmental behaviour: Different emotions predict distinct intentions (2013, methodology): “Guilt about in-group environmental damage should be narrowly focused on repairing this damage (Iyer & Leach, 2008; Leach et al., 2002).”
GROUPS AND MORALITY (2014, background): “This is likely why anger appears to be the most consistent and most robust basis for efforts to reform wrongdoing in intergroup relations (for a review, see Iyer & Leach, 2008).”
The emotional link: Leadership and the role of implicit and explicit emotional contagion processes across multiple organizational levels (2015, background): “The sharing of such emotions within a group setting can also motivate collective action (Drury & Reicher, 2005, 2009; Ellemers, Spears, & Doosje, 2002; Iyer & Leach, 2008).”