Suchergebnisse

AbstractWe tested how Muslim participants identify speeches as hate speech or not, and whether they thought an apology from the speakers is needed. In Studies 1a (N = 209) and 1b (N = 183), participants were asked about a speech delivered by a prominent ingroup figure showed that hate, meta‐hate, and collective narcissism tended to identify a prejudiced speech about outgroup members as not related to hate speech, and thus no apology is needed. Nonetheless, the resulting path was in contrast to participants who believe the outgroup nature as good. With similar predictors of Study 1, Study 2 (N = 191) showed that when participants were asked to identify a (non‐harmful) speech about ingroup delivered by a minority outgroup member, there was an opposite path compared to Study 1. Across all findings, we argue that in the real‐world setting, how a speech, with or without harmful contents, is identified depends on positive or negative views about ingroup and outgroup members by which it can dictate people's understanding and denial.

This paper presents an analysis of interviews of participants in a political manifestation in Indonesia about the reasons for the rally and the resulting riot. The rally was held in the middle of the Jakarta gubernatorial election, against a non-Muslim incumbent who was accused of having insulted the Quran. We argue that there is a deep relationship between social identities and religion, which has implications for societal togetherness and political freedom. Using a snowball technique, we interviewed 16 Muslims who had participated in this rally. The findings suggest that 1) even though the rally was held in the middle of an election, the demonstrators denied that the rally was politically motivated; 2) Those demonstrators who thought that intruders had infiltrated the rally, maintained that the intruders are to be held responsible for any violence, but not the 'actual' participants. 3) Interviewees claimed that their actions were not motivated by anti-Chinese prejudice, although traces of racist thinking can be found in their statements. The findings are discussed before the background of social representations, social identity, theories of collective action, and the black sheep effect. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

This paper presents an analysis of interviews of participants in a political manifestation in Indonesia about the reasons for the rally and the resulting riot. The rally was held in the middle of the Jakarta gubernatorial election, against a non-Muslim incumbent who was accused of having insulted the Quran. We argue that there is a deep relationship between social identities and religion, which has implications for societal togetherness and political freedom. Using a snowball technique, we interviewed 16 Muslims who had participated in this rally. The findings suggest that 1) even though the rally was held in the middle of an election, the demonstrators denied that the rally was politically motivated; 2) Those demonstrators who thought that intruders had infiltrated the rally, maintained that the intruders are to be held responsible for any violence, but not the 'actual' participants. 3) Interviewees claimed that their actions were not motivated by anti-Chinese prejudice, although traces of racist thinking can be found in their statements. The findings are discussed before the background of social representations, social identity, theories of collective action, and the black sheep effect.

In December 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accused the Myanmar government of genocide against Rohingya Muslims. Represented by Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar authorities denied such accusations. To understand how a political leader can deny ingroup wrongdoings, we unpacked Suu Kyi's ICJ speech and analyzed her defensive rhetorical style through critical narrative analysis. We aimed to identify and describe the denial strategies Suu Kyi used as well as how she maintained a positive ingroup image to support her position. Our findings showed that Suu Kyi engaged in interpretative denial of genocide by arguing that genocide cannot occur when there is armed conflict, that there were victims and perpetrators on both sides, and that misconducts by law enforcement had been addressed. To maintain the ingroup's positive image, she portrayed Myanmar as moral by emphasizing the government's knowledge of ethical standards and laws, as well as their support for peace and justice. By examining political discourse used by a national leader internationally renowned for supporting human rights, our findings shed light on the dynamic, constructive nature of denial. Theoretical and applied contributions to understanding denial of ingroup wrongdoing are discussed. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

In December 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accused the Myanmar government of genocide against Rohingya Muslims. Represented by Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar authorities denied such accusations. To understand how a political leader can deny ingroup wrongdoings, we unpacked Suu Kyi's ICJ speech and analyzed her defensive rhetorical style through critical narrative analysis. We aimed to identify and describe the denial strategies Suu Kyi used as well as how she maintained a positive ingroup image to support her position. Our findings showed that Suu Kyi engaged in interpretative denial of genocide by arguing that genocide cannot occur when there is armed conflict, that there were victims and perpetrators on both sides, and that misconducts by law enforcement had been addressed. To maintain the ingroup's positive image, she portrayed Myanmar as moral by emphasizing the government's knowledge of ethical standards and laws, as well as their support for peace and justice. By examining political discourse used by a national leader internationally renowned for supporting human rights, our findings shed light on the dynamic, constructive nature of denial. Theoretical and applied contributions to understanding denial of ingroup wrongdoing are discussed.

This study aims to demonstrate and change negative perceptions of descendants of members of the Indonesian Communist Party (Partai Komunis Indonesia/PKI), a stigmatized social group in Indonesia. In Studies 1 and 2, participants were given positive descriptions of an adult (Study 1) and a child (Study 2), and were asked to evaluate them twice, before and after reading information about the target's family background. In Study 1, targets were described either as descendants of PKI members, members of another Indonesian party or criminals. In Study 2, the target was presented as a descendant of PKI members, of members of another Indonesian party or without information on family background (control condition). The studies showed that whenever people were 'revealed' to be descendants of PKI members, the respondents' judgments became more negative, and their assumptions about commonly shared views of these people became more negative as well. In Studies 3 and 4, participants were again given descriptions of an adult (Study 3) and a child (Study 4), which were both described as descendants of PKI members. Half of the participants were reminded afterwards with a written statement that every human is by nature good and unique (the experimental condition), while the other half did not get any additional information (control group). By making salient a shared and positively valued human 'essence', it was possible to alleviate the stigma that still is attached to PKI-affiliations in Indonesian society. We end the study with a discussion of our findings' political and societal implications.

This study aims to demonstrate and change negative perceptions of descendants of members of the Indonesian Communist Party (Partai Komunis Indonesia/PKI), a stigmatized social group in Indonesia. In Studies 1 and 2, participants were given positive descriptions of an adult (Study 1) and a child (Study 2), and were asked to evaluate them twice, before and after reading information about the target's family background. In Study 1, targets were described either as descendants of PKI members, members of another Indonesian party or criminals. In Study 2, the target was presented as a descendant of PKI members, of members of another Indonesian party or without information on family background (control condition). The studies showed that whenever people were 'revealed' to be descendants of PKI members, the respondents' judgments became more negative, and their assumptions about commonly shared views of these people became more negative as well. In Studies 3 and 4, participants were again given descriptions of an adult (Study 3) and a child (Study 4), which were both described as descendants of PKI members. Half of the participants were reminded afterwards with a written statement that every human is by nature good and unique (the experimental condition), while the other half did not get any additional information (control group). By making salient a shared and positively valued human 'essence', it was possible to alleviate the stigma that still is attached to PKI-affiliations in Indonesian society. We end the study with a discussion of our findings' political and societal implications. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

This study aims to demonstrate and change negative perceptions of descendants of members of the Indonesian Communist Party (Partai Komunis Indonesia/PKI), a stigmatized social group in Indonesia. In Studies 1 and 2, participants were given positive descriptions of an adult (Study 1) and a child (Study 2), and were asked to evaluate them twice, before and after reading information about the target's family background. In Study 1, targets were described either as descendants of PKI members, members of another Indonesian party or criminals. In Study 2, the target was presented as a descendant of PKI members, of members of another Indonesian party or without information on family background (control condition). The studies showed that whenever people were 'revealed' to be descendants of PKI members, the respondents' judgments became more negative, and their assumptions about commonly shared views of these people became more negative as well. In Studies 3 and 4, participants were again given descriptions of an adult (Study 3) and a child (Study 4), which were both described as descendants of PKI members. Half of the participants were reminded afterwards with a written statement that every human is by nature good and unique (the experimental condition), while the other half did not get any additional information (control group). By making salient a shared and positively valued human 'essence', it was possible to alleviate the stigma that still is attached to PKI-affiliations in Indonesian society. We end the study with a discussion of our findings' political and societal implications. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion