From the lab to the field and back: the effects of need satisfaction on reconciliation among Germans and Israelis

Introduction: Previous lab experiments supported the needs-based model of reconciliation, which posits that discussing historical transgressions enhances the need for acceptance in groups perceived as perpetrators and empowerment in groups perceived as victims. Addressing these needs (e.g., through accepting or empowering messages from outgroup members) increases willingness to reconcile. This study tests this model in a real-world settings. Methods: Study 1 examined 143 German and Israeli Jewish participants from youth exchange programs, measuring their feelings of acceptance/empowerment, program satisfaction, outgroup attitudes, and keeping in touch with outgroup members. Study 2 examined 293 Israeli Jews, manipulating the salience of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians in a pre-registered laboratory experiment and measuring responses to accepting versus empowering messages from Germans. Results: As expected, Study 1 (N =143) found Germans’ feelings of acceptance were linked to program satisfaction, positive outgroup attitudes, and keeping in touch. For Israeli Jews, feelings of empowerment were linked to satisfaction and positive attitudes, but keeping in touch was unexpectedly linked to acceptance. This unexpected effect maybe because keeping in touch is done mainly through social networks that focus on the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, often with a focus on Israel’s transgressions against Palestinians. Consistent with this explanation, Study 2 (N=293, pre-registered) showed that Israeli Jews viewed accepting messages from Germans as more conciliatory when presented with transgressions against Palestinians, and empowering messages as more effective when presented with reminders of historical victimization by Nazis. Discussion: The findings from Study 1 partially support the needs-based model of reconciliation and additionally suggest that reconciliation needs vary with context. Implications for people-to-people peace-building interventions are discussed.