A Devil in Disguise: How Contempt Fuels Intergroup Conflicts

By Dr. Julia Elad-Strenger & Prof. Eran Halperin

“No more fiendish punishment could be devised [...] than that one should be turned loose in society and remain absolutely unnoticed by all the members thereof.” - William James, 1890

Harvard Professor Arthur Brooks’ keynote address at the February 2020 National Prayer Breakfast, hosted by members of the United States Congress, was titled “American’s crisis of contempt.” In it, Brooks noted, “People often say that our problem in America today is incivility or intolerance. This is incorrect. Motive attribution asymmetry leads to something far worse: contempt…and not just contempt for other people’s ideas, but also for other people. In politics today, we treat each other as worthless, which is why our fights are so bitter and cooperation feels nearly impossible.”

Source: Ehimetalor Akhere Unuabona/Unsplash

Brooks’ speech touches upon a largely understudied, yet highly destructive, phenomenon in interpersonal and intergroup relations: the expression of contempt towards others. Contempt is an emotion that arises based on the belief that the other is inherently unworthy and inferior, and that this inherent inferiority cannot be changed (Fischer, & Giner-Sorolla, 2016). This belief that underlies contempt makes it unique compared to other negative emotions, such as anger and hate.

As opposed to contempt, anger is elicited from the belief that the other has committed unfair acts towards us, accompanied by the belief that the relationship is still viable, and that the target's behavior can be changed. As a result, anger often leads to confrontations with others, either by attacking them or by changing their behaviors or beliefs. Like contempt, but unlike anger, hate stems from the belief that the target is inherently negative.

However, while contempt implies the perception of the other as inherently worthless and inferior, the target of hate is appraised as “bad” or “evil” by nature, and thus as “worthy” of considerable harm. The highly “active” and overt nature of such behaviors makes emotions such as anger and hate the primary focus of intergroup conflict research. What do we know about the unique implications of contempt in general, and on conflicts in particular?

In a recently published series of studies (Elad-Strenger, Reifen-Tagar, Kessler, Hasson, Shulman, Brahms, & Halperin, 2022), we offer the first empirical research demonstrating that contempt towards out-groups triggers a unique form of intergroup harm, which we call “harmful inaction.” This form of intergroup harm includes refusing to cooperate or communicate with a person or a group, disregarding their needs and perspectives, withholding behaviors that may benefit them, and even denial of their very existence. Across seven studies conducted in diverse intergroup contexts, including religious, ideological, and ethnic intergroup conflicts, and using different methods, we find that group-based contempt predicts harmful inaction towards outgroup members.

More specifically, we found that contempt towards other groups predicts support for harmful inaction towards them. We found this pattern among Jewish-Israelis toward Palestinians and Israeli Arabs, among white Americans towards Black Americans, and among rival ideological groups in Israel and Germany.

Interestingly, we also found that Jewish-Israeli Orthodox feel contempt toward Jewish-Israeli seculars and that this experience of contempt triggers the Ultra-Orthodox’s support for harmful inaction against secular Israelis. This last finding may be surprising: Insofar as contempt is based on perceived superiority over others, one may assume that it is primarily felt by groups who have higher status in society (like Jewish-Israelis and white Americans) towards groups that have lower societal status (like Palestinians and Black Americans).

One may also assume that when the lower-status group is also low-powered (namely, has lower access to resources compared to the higher-status group), it is less likely (and less able) than higher-powered groups to ignore and neglect the higher-status out-group. The finding that Jewish-Israeli Ultra-Orthodox indeed feel contempt towards the higher-status and higher-powered seculars, and that this contempt is associated with increased support for harmful inaction towards seculars, despite the Ultra-Orthodox's relatively low power, suggests that contempt (and the resulting harmful inaction) can function as a creative strategy on part of the lower-status group to increase their subjective sense of status relative to the higher-status group.

This contempt-driven “harmful inaction” may look relatively tolerable at first glance, compared to the more blatant harmdoing elicited by anger and hate. Nevertheless, harmful inaction may adversely affect intergroup relations, particularly when relations are already tense—making it a “devil in disguise.” Our findings suggest that working to reduce hate or anger towards other groups may not be enough to foster positive intergroup relations.

Anger Essential Reads

The Buddha, Twain, and You: Wisdom for Taming Your Temper

The Best Ways to Manage Anger

Contempt may trigger intergroup behaviors that are no less harmful but easily overlooked. We tend to undermine harmful inaction in intergroup conflict, thinking that ignoring or neglecting another group is better than physically attacking them. Our findings suggest that even such seemingly “moderate” behaviors are triggered by powerful negative emotions. A better understanding of the emotional experiences that elicit harmful inaction is an essential step toward mitigating their potentially destructive consequences on intergroup relations.

Julia Elad-Strenger is a political psychologist, and an assistant professor at the Department of Political Studies, Bar Ilan University, Israel. Her research focuses on the psychology of political ideology and on the role of group processes, group norms, and social identity concerns in shaping political attitudes and policy preferences, particularly in the context of intergroup conflict.