Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Understanding Symbols of Division in Post-conflict Northern Ireland

2014; Springer International Publishing; Linguagem: Inglês

10.1007/978-3-319-05464-3_7

2197-5787

Maurice Stringer, Jackie Hunter,

Scottish History and National Identity

This chapter seeks to explore how division in Northern Ireland is perpetuated through contrasting narratives, which support differing views of key historical events. These group based explanations serve to boost the social identity of group members by making them feel better about their own group at the expense of the out-group. From the perspective of social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel and Turner, The social psychology of intergroup relations, Nelson-Hall, Chicago, 1979) intergroup attributional biases may be interpreted as a reflection of the attempt to achieve and maintain a positive social identity. We examine how group members in Northern Ireland attribute out-group behaviour to internal causes and in-group behaviour to external causes when describing key historical events (see Hunter et al., Journal of Social Psychology 30:261–266, 1991; 1992). Research carried out by (Hunter et al., Journal of Social Psychology 30:261–266, 1991) has revealed that Catholics and Protestants attribute in-group and out-group violence in a group serving manner. Out-group violence is judged to be caused by internal characteristics (i.e. madness, bloodlust), while in-group violence is judged to be caused by external factors (i.e. retaliation, fear of attack). Like other forms of intergroup behaviour (see Oakes et al., 1994), research has shown that these biases may be affected by a variety of contextual factors. As Northern Ireland moves into a post-conflict environment, these biases have to be addressed if progress towards an integrated society is to be meaningful. The chapter outlines the main barriers to progress and suggests ways in which biases can be challenged through increased intergroup contacts (Hewstone et al., The social psychology of inclusion and exclusion, Psychology Press, Philadelphia, PA, 2005; Stringer et al., British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(2):239–257, 2009).