| Literature DB >> 34519338 |
Jonathan Levy1,2, Abraham Goldstein3, Moran Influs1, Shafiq Masalha4, Ruth Feldman1,5.
Abstract
Intergroup bias is a ubiquitous socio-cognitive phenomenon that, while sustaining human dependence on group living, often leads to prejudice, inequity, and violence; yet, its neural underpinnings remain unclear. Framed within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and targeting youth, this study utilized magnetoencephalography to describe intrinsic neural oscillatory processes that represent the intergroup bias and may link with engagement in peacemaking in order to shed further light on the neural mechanisms underpinning intergroup conflict. Across the oscillatory spectrum, from very low to very high frequency bands, the only rhythm found to underlie the intergroup bias was the alpha rhythm. Alpha rhythm was continuously activated across the task and integrated a rapid perceptual component in the occipital cortex with a top-down cognitive-control component in the medial cingulate cortex. These components were distinctly associated with the real-life intergroup dialogue style and expressed attitudes that promote active engagement in peacemaking. Our findings suggest that the cortical alpha rhythm plays a crucial role in sustaining intergroup bias and addresses its impact on concrete intergroup experiences. The results highlight the need to provide opportunities for active peace-building dialogue to youth reared amidst intractable conflicts.Entities:
Keywords: alpha rhythm; conflict resolution; intergroup bias; intergroup conflict; intergroup dialogue; magnetoencephalography
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34519338 PMCID: PMC8972238 DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsab106
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci ISSN: 1749-5016 Impact factor: 3.436
Fig. 1.Experimental design and main findings. Upper panels: (A) Jewish-Israeli participants (left) and Arab-Palestinian participants (right) (N = 42) alternated to perform the intergroup IAT task in their mother tongue (Hebrew and Arabic, respectively) while MEG continuously monitored neural oscillatory activity. (B) Throughout the whole task, rhythmic reactivity and connectivity in the alpha-band between two key nodes reflect perception and control during intergroup bias. Lower panels: (C) Participants were then interviewed in their mother tongue to measure ‘active belief’, that is, the endorsement of being active for conflict resolution; and conducted (D) an intergroup conflictual to assess ‘active dialogue’, that is, active engagement during the dialogue.
The ‘active belief’ construct
| Jewish-Israelis | Arab-Palestinians | Both sides |
|---|---|---|
| Education, territorial concessions and learning more about the conflict | Education, making compromises and leading towards peace | Avoiding passivity |
| Stopping violence and racism | Stopping violence |
The five items that were used to compute the ‘active belief’ score delineate the specific active steps that need to be made (by each one of the two camps, or by both) in order to achieve conflict mitigation.
Fig. 2.Neural representations of intergroup bias. (A) On the left, an overlaid cortical axial (MNI template) representation of the intergroup bias perceptual contrast illustrates a significant cluster (Pcluster-cor < 0.05; colour bar illustrates masked significant clusters) in the RL gyrus; on the right, TFR maps of induced oscillatory activity (1–150 Hz; −0.4–1.5 s) filtered from the RL peak coordinates (i.e. virtual channel) illustrate that across the 1–150 Hz, significant rhythmic activity (Pcluster-cor < 0.05 in contoured patterns) emerges only in the alpha range. Time axis and insets below illustrate that stimuli appeared at zero and were replaced by fixation cross once response decision was made (M ± s.d., 935.62 ± 176.55 ms). (B) On the left, an overlaid cortical axial (MNI template) representation of phase-lag-value (i.e. PLV) connectivity from RL as seed region (Pcluster-cor < 0.05; colour bar illustrates masked significant clusters) revealed the MCC, thereby characterizing information trafficking between RL and MCC as reflecting another representation of intergroup bias (right).
Fig. 3.Mediation analyses. Upper triangle: the first mediation analysis revealed that perception (RL activity) leads to ‘active belief’ (PFDR-cor = 0.0077; model summary = 0.0077), which leads to active dialogue (PFDR-cor = 0.02; model summary = 0.01), while perception does not significantly lead to active dialogue (PFDR-cor = 0.46; model summary = 0.01). Lower triangle: the second mediation analysis revealed that control (MCC activity) leads to perception-control (RL–MCC connectivity) (PFDR-cor = 0.0002; model summary = 0.0002), which leads to active dialogue (PFDR-cor = 0.02; model summary = 0.06), while control does not significantly lead to active dialogue (PFDR-cor = 0.30; model summary = 0.06).