Satisfying identity needs of victims and perpetrators facilitates reconciliation across groups.

Evidence

The main proposition of the needs-based model, in addition to identifying the identity needs of members of historical victim and perpetrator groups, is that satisfying these needs should facilitate reconciliation. That is, when members of the historical victim group feel empowered (e.g., when they feel their voices are heard; Bruneau & Saxe 2012), and when members of the historical perpetrator group feel both morally validated and socially accepted (e.g., when their emotional distress due to the burden of guilt is sympathized with), the threats to their identities are alleviated. The restoration of their positive social identities should, according to the model, translate into greater generosity and a positive orientation toward the outgroup (Shnabel et al. 2023). — Nurit Shnabel and Johannes Ullrich, Identity Needs in Intergroup Relations, 94

Categorization

• XREF: Directly reinforces and enriches the reader’s existing synthesis on asymmetric identity restoration: victims need empowerment/agentic restoration, perpetrators need moral validation/social acceptance. — connects to: Leaving extremism requires bridging relationships that scaffold a new identity — Amy Fisher-Smith, Charles R. Sullivan, John D. Macready, and Geoffrey Manzi, Identity Reconfiguration and the Core…, 618; Reconciliation work must target perpetrator and high-power group members’ affect, not only victims’. — Johanna Ray Vollhardt and Michelle Sinayobye Twali, Emotion-Based Reconciliation Requires…, 29; Victims need empowerment while perpetrators need moral acceptance for reconciliation — Johanna Ray Vollhardt and Michelle Sinayobye Twali, Emotion-Based Reconciliation Requires…, 37 (+17 more)

Broader Connections

• Competitive victimhood serves opposite identity needs for victims versus perpetrator groups. #expands (0.83) — Nurit Shnabel and Johannes Ullrich, Identity Needs in Intergroup Relations, 122
• Victim and perpetrator groups pursue agentic versus moral identity restoration respectively. #expands (0.82) — Nurit Shnabel and Johannes Ullrich, Identity Needs in Intergroup Relations, 140
• Collective victimhood drives revenge more than reconciliation in both groups #contradicts (0.80) — R. C. Tripathi, R. Kumar, and V. N. Tripathi, When the Advantaged Feel Victimised, 128
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt #qualifies (0.79) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 16
• Negative emotions bind narratives of victimhood and consolidate ingroup identity. #complicates (0.79) — R. C. Tripathi, R. Kumar, and V. N. Tripathi, When the Advantaged Feel Victimised, 127
• Group violence requires erasing the victim’s concrete individual identity #qualifies (0.78)
• Perpetrator and victim groups favor accepting versus assigning guilt #expands (0.78) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 152
• Acknowledging in-group responsibility for past atrocities increases infrahumanization of the victim group #complicates (0.76) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2108
• Accepting relationships with out-group members model new identity structures for exiting extremists. #exemplifies (0.75) — Amy Fisher-Smith, Charles R. Sullivan, John D. Macready, and Geoffrey Manzi, Identity Reconfiguration and the Core…, 475
• Shared identity with the perpetrator is the critical precondition for moral disengagement #complicates (0.72) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2112
• General in-group identification does not predict moral disengagement toward victims #qualifies (0.72) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2113