Reactive devaluation of an "Israeli" vs. "Palestinian" peace proposal

Ifat Maoz*, Andrew Ward, Michael Katz, Lee Ross

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

122 Scopus citations

Abstract

Three studies used the Palestinian-Israeli context to investigate the tendency for political antagonists to derogate each other's compromise proposals. In study 1, Israeli Jews evaluated an actual Israeli-authoredpeace plan less favorably when it was attributed to the Palestinians than when it was attributed to their own government. In study 2, both Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs similarly devalued a Palestinian plan when it was ascribed to the "other side." Furthermore, both Arabs and Jewish "hawks" (but not Jewish "doves") perceived a proposal attributed to the dovish Israeli government as relatively bad for their own people and good for their adversaries. Study 3 explored the role that differences in construal of proposal terms play in mediating "reactive devaluation." These studies expand theoretical understanding of this devaluation phenomenon and the barrier it creates to the resolution of real-world conflicts.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)515-546
Number of pages32
JournalJournal of Conflict Resolution
Volume46
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2002

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reactive devaluation of an "Israeli" vs. "Palestinian" peace proposal'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this