Hameiri Boaz, Porat Roni, Bar-Tal Daniel, Halperin Eran
School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel; School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya 46150, Israel;
School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya 46150, Israel; Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem 91904, Israel.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Oct 25;113(43):12105-12110. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1606182113. Epub 2016 Oct 10.
In the current paper, we report a large-scale randomized field experiment, conducted among Jewish Israelis during widespread violence. The study examines the effectiveness of a "real world," multichanneled paradoxical thinking intervention, with messages disseminated through various means of communication (i.e., online, billboards, flyers). Over the course of 6 wk, we targeted a small city in the center of Israel whose population is largely rightwing and religious. Based on the paradoxical thinking principles, the intervention involved transmission of messages that are extreme but congruent with the shared Israeli ethos of conflict. To examine the intervention's effectiveness, we conducted a large-scale field experiment (prepost design) in which we sampled participants from the city population (n = 215) and compared them to a control condition (from different places of residence) with similar demographic and political characteristics (n = 320). Importantly, participants were not aware that the intervention was related to the questionnaires they answered. Results showed that even in the midst of a cycle of ongoing violence within the context of one of the most intractable conflicts in the world, the intervention led hawkish participants to decrease their adherence to conflict-supporting attitudes across time. Furthermore, compared with the control condition, hawkish participants that were exposed to the paradoxical thinking intervention expressed less support for aggressive policies that the government should consider as a result of the escalation in violence and more support for conciliatory policies to end the violence and promote a long-lasting agreement.
在本论文中，我们报告了一项在广泛暴力期间对以色列犹太人进行的大规模随机现场实验。该研究考察了一种“现实世界”的、多渠道的矛盾思维干预措施的有效性，相关信息通过各种传播方式（即网络、广告牌、传单）进行传播。在为期6周的时间里，我们将目标对准了以色列中部的一个小城市，其人口大多是右翼和宗教人士。基于矛盾思维原则，该干预措施涉及传递极端但与以色列冲突的共同民族精神相一致的信息。为了检验该干预措施的有效性，我们进行了一项大规模现场实验（前后测设计），从城市人口中抽取参与者（n = 215），并将他们与具有相似人口统计学和政治特征的对照条件组（来自不同居住地点）（n = 320）进行比较。重要的是，参与者并不知道该干预与他们所回答的问卷有关。结果表明，即使是在世界上最棘手的冲突之一的持续暴力循环之中，该干预措施也使得鹰派参与者随着时间的推移减少了对支持冲突态度的坚持。此外，与对照条件组相比，接受矛盾思维干预的鹰派参与者对政府因暴力升级而应考虑的激进政策的支持较少，而对结束暴力并促进达成持久协议的和解政策的支持较多。
