Shared Beliefs in a Society: Social Psychological Analysis

By D. Bar-Tal. 2000

432 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d7258e00b275483fed0a8858c79bf1200dcd665a

How researchers see this paper

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

In Philosophy

Citations in the corpus

GROUPS AND MORALITY (2014, background): “For instance, in intergroup conflicts, in-groups maintain their moral superiority over their adversary by endorsing narratives that legitimize in-group violence, delegitimize the opponent, and emphasize the in-group’s victimization (Bar-Tal, 2000).”
Ethos of conflict: The concept and its measurement. (2012, background): “In this conceptual framework, societal beliefs are defined as shared cognitions by society members that address themes and issues with which society members are particularly occupied, and which contribute to their sense of uniqueness (Bar-Tal, 2000).”
Emotions and Emotion Regulation in Intractable Conflict: Studying Emotional Processes Within a Unique Context (2015, background): “Ethos of Conflict is defined as “the configuration of central societal beliefs that provide dominant characterization to the society and gives it a particular orientation” (Bar-Tal, 2000, p. xiv).”
Exploring the roots of dehumanization: The role of animal—human similarity in promoting immigrant humanization (2010, background): “1 Such representations presumably justify the exclusion of outgroups from moral consideration, facilitating inhumane acts of discrimination such as genocide and/or slavery (Bandura, 2002; Bar-Tal, 2000; Opotow, 1990; Schwartz & Sturch, 1989).”
Objectifying Sarah Palin: Evidence that objectification causes women to be perceived as less competent and less fully human (2009, background): “Research documenting that stripping people of their humanity plays a role in legitimizing aggression (e.g., Bandura, 2002; Bar-Tal, 2000) further suggests that objectification may have consequences for women beyond those we have discussed.”
Identity, Conflict, and Coexistence (2006, background): “In the context of conflict, group-induced attitude polarization (Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969; for review, see Isenberg, 1986), a phenomenon well-documented by social psychologists, might proliferate at the larger cultural level, creating diametrically opposed societal beliefs (Bar-Tal, 2000).”
The Influence of the Ethos of Conflict on Israeli Jews' Interpretation of Jewish—Palestinian Encounters (2009, background): “The assumption of this research is that in the Israeli case, the ethos of conflict functions as an ideology and constitutes a prism for interpretation and evaluation of the reality in the context of intractable conflict (D. Bar-Tal 1998, 2000, 2007a).”
Narrative as a Root Metaphor for Political Psychology (2012, background): “A fundamental premise of our approach is that narratives operate not only at the level of individual psychology but also at the collective (Bar-Tal, 2000; Hammack, 2008).”
Dehumanization: An Integrative Review (2006, background): “Delegitimization (Bar-Tal, 2000), moral exclusion (Opotow, 1990), and moral disengagement (Bandura, 2002) theories, for example, are quite nonspecific: Others could be delegitimized, excluded, or disengagedby the denial ofeither sense ofhumanness.”
Nature, Rationale, and Effectiveness of Education for Coexistence (2004, background): “It is thus important to realize that the process of establishing coexistence begins at the lowest point of the negative intergroup relations (Bar-Tal, 2000b).”
Sociopsychological Foundations of Intractable Conflicts (2007, background): “…prolonged intractable conflict, societies develop a particular ethos—ethos of conflict, which gives a general orientation and direction and provides a clear picture of the conflict, its goals, its conditions, requirements, and images of the in-group’s society and of the rival (Bar-Tal, 2000a).”
Collective narcissism and anti-Semitism in Poland (2012, background): “The siege mentality prompts generally distrustful and negative attitudes towards other groups as it is “[a] belief held by group members stating that the rest of the world has highly negative behavioral intentions toward them” (Bar-Tal & Antebi, 1992a, p. 49; see also Bar-Tal, 2000).”
The detrimental dynamics of delegitimization in intractable conflicts: The Israeli–Palestinian case (2007, background): “In general, delegitimization refers to stereotypes2 with extremely negative connotations (Bar-Tal, 1989, 1990, 2000) that is used to describe a specific case of group categorization.”