Skip to main content

Negotiating Cultural Conflicts Over Sacred Values

Part of the Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation book series (AGDN,volume 6)

Abstract

Most current approaches to negotiation of resource and political conflicts assume that parties to these conflicts are rational actors that weigh the costs and benefits of their choices, treat values as though they are fungible, and then act in a way that maximizes their benefits. However, recent research suggests that this is not the case. In other words, people do not treat all values as amenable to tradeoffs, but rather they distinguish between material values having to do with resource pricing and markets and sacred values that reside in the moral realm. Moreover, people seem to apply different reasoning to sacred vs. material values. Even more crucially, what is considered sacred and what is considered material varies among cultures. In this chapter we discuss research by us and others into the nature of sacred values in real world conflicts and the implications of the findings for ongoing political conflicts.

Keywords

  • Sacred values
  • Material values
  • Negotiation
  • Political conflicts
  • Backfire effect

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-5574-1_6
  • Chapter length: 11 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-94-007-5574-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   149.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

References

  • Atran, S., Medin, D. L., & Ross, N. O. (2005). The cultural mind: Environmental decision-making and cultural modeling within and across populations. Psychological Review, 112(4), 744–776.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J., & Leshner, S. (2000). How serious are expressions of protected values? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 183–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J., & Spranca, M. (1997). Protected values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 1–16.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dehghani, M., Iliev, R., Sachdeva, S., Atran, S., Ginges, J., & Medin, D. L. (2009). Emerging sacred values: Iran’s nuclear program. Journal of Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 930–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger. New York: Routledge.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. (1995/1912). The elementary forms of religious life. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliade, M. (1957). The sacred and the profane. New York: Harcourt Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, M. J., Erez, M., & Aycan, Z. (2007). Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 479–514.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J. (1997). Deterring the terrorist: A psychological evaluation of different strategies for deterring terrorism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 9, 170–185.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., & Atran, S. (2008). Humiliation and the inertia effect: Implications for understanding violence and compromise in intractable intergroup conflicts. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8, 281–294.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., & Atran, S. (2009a). Noninstrumental reasoning over sacred values: An Indonesian case study. In D. M. Bartels, C. W. Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Moral judgment and decision making, Vol. 50). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., & Atran, S. (2009b). What motivates participation in violent political action: Selective incentives or parochial altruism? Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1167, 115–123.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., & Atran, S. (2011). War as a moral imperative (not just practical policy by other means). In Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences. Online first publication, February 16, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., Atran, S., Medin, D., & Shikaki, K. (2007). Sacred bounds on rational resolution of violent political conflict. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 7357–7360.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., Atran, S., Sachdeva, S., & Medin, D. (2011). Psychology out of the laboratory: The challenge of violent extremism. American Psychologist, 66(6), 507–519.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ginges, J., Hansen, I. G., & Norenzayan, A. (2009). Religion and popular support for suicide attacks. Psychological Science, 20, 224–230.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Iliev, R., Sachdeva, S., Bartels, D. M., Joseph, C., Suzuki, S., & Medin, D. L. (2009). Attending to moral values. In D. M. Bartels, C. W. Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Moral judgment and decision making, Vol. 50). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imai, L., & Gelfand, M. J. (2009). Culture and negotiation: Interdisciplinary perspectives. In R. S. Bhagat & R. M. Steers (Eds.), Handbook of culture, organizations, and work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, D., & Ginges, J. (2010). Preferring balanced vs. advantageous peace agreements: A study of Israeli attitudes towards a two state solution. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 420–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obeid, M. (2010). A lebanese confession: Why religious politics is bad for Lebanon. Harvard Kennedy School Review, 10, 104–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. (2003). Thinking the unthinkable: Sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 320–324.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E., Kristel, O., Elson, B., Green, M., & Lerner, J. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counter-factuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853–870.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Varshney, A. (2003). Nationalism, ethnic conflict and rationality. Perspectives on Politics, 1, 85–99.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy Ginges .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jassin, K., Sheikh, H., Obeid, N., Argo, N., Ginges, J. (2013). Negotiating Cultural Conflicts Over Sacred Values. In: Sycara, K., Gelfand, M., Abbe, A. (eds) Models for Intercultural Collaboration and Negotiation. Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5574-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5574-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5573-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5574-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)