6533b82bfe1ef96bd128d582
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Explaining the Inexplicable: Differences in Attributions for the Holocaust in Germany, Israel, and Poland
Slieman HalabiTal-shani ShermanMichał BilewiczNaomi Henkel-guembelRoland ImhoffKatja HankeKatja HankeDennis T. KahnGilad Hirschbergersubject
Sociology and Political ScienceSocial PsychologySituationismmedia_common.quotation_subject05 social sciencesIsraeli jews050109 social psychologyExperimental and Cognitive PsychologyCoercion050105 experimental psychologyObediencePhilosophyClinical PsychologyThe HolocaustPolitical Science and International Relations0501 psychology and cognitive sciencesLay perceptionsClosure (psychology)PsychologyAttributionSocial psychologymedia_commondescription
Seventy years have passed since the Holocaust, but this cataclysmic event continues to reverberate in the present. In this research, we examine attributions about the causes of the Holocaust and the influence of such attributions on intergroup relations. Three representative surveys were conducted among Germans, Poles, and Israeli Jews to examine inter- and intragroup variations in attributions for the Holocaust and how these attributions influence intergroup attitudes. Results indicated that Germans made more external than internal attributions and were especially low in attributing an evil essence to their ancestors. Israelis and Poles mainly endorsed the obedient essence attribution and were lowest on attribution to coercion. These attributions, however, were related to attitudes towards contemporary Germany primarily among Israeli Jews. The more they endorsed situationist explanations, and the less they endorsed the evil essence explanation, the more positive their attitude to Germany. Among Germans, attributions were related to a higher motivation for historical closure, except for the obedience attribution that was related to low desire for closure. Israelis exhibited a low desire for historical closure especially when attribution for evil essence was high. These findings suggest that lay perceptions of history are essential to understanding contemporary intergroup processes.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2016-05-25 | Political Psychology |