Finding Identity Complexity Through Dialogue

Intractable conflicts like the longstanding one between Israel and Palestine have the social psychological effect of exacerbating and enshrining negative inter-group dynamics (Bar-Tal, 2007; 2013). In these conflicts the welfare, status, power, and resources of the in and out-groups can seem directly at odds with each other (Brewer, 2001) leading to dehumanization, violence, and difficulty seeing the other side as potential partners in ending war. Groups affiliated with these conflicts around the world often also find themselves polarized, disconnected, and even threatened by groups on the ‘other side.’ College campuses, cities, and workplaces can become mired in hostilities that interfere with collaboration, learning, and productivity. Many techniques in peace-building are designed to shift group dynamics from competitive to collaborative (Fisher and Ury, 1987). Inter group dialogue does so by building humanizing relationships through facilitated conversations. Based on inter-group contact theory, inter-group dialogue has been shown to have a variety of benefits, including reductions in inter-group hostility and prejudice (Pettigrew, 1998). There may be motivations to participate in contact and dialogue even for those who hold hostile attitudes toward the other (Dys-Steenbergen, Wright and Aron 2016). One theory to explain why these shifts occur is social identity complexity (Brewer 2010), which demonstrates that more complex and overlapping group affiliations similarly reduce hostility and prejudice. However, the way participants’ identities change in relation to social in and out-groups is under-explored and no direct link between dialogue and social identity complexity has successfully been outlined prior to this piece. While authors have discussed shifts toward overarching identities (Hammack, 2010), this article demonstrates that dialogue also strengthens identification with both the initial in and out-groups, one way to conceptualize social identity complexity, using two real work case studies.