Abstract
The Informative Process Model (IPM) proposes an intervention to facilitate change in conflict-supporting narratives in protracted conflicts. These narratives develop to help societies cope with conflict; but over time, they turn into barriers for its resolution. The IPM suggests raising awareness of the psychological processes responsible for the development of these narratives and their possibility for change, which may unfreeze conflict attitudes. Previous studies in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict found that the IPM (versus control) increased participants' support for negotiations. In three preregistered studies (combined N = 2,509), we illuminate the importance of feeling that one's conflict-related attitudes are accepted-that is, acknowledged without judgement-in explaining the effectiveness of the modeland expand the IPM's validity and generalizability: By showing the effectiveness of the IPM compared to an intervention similarly based on exposure to conflict-related information (Study 1); by showing its effectiveness in unfreezing attitudes when communicating different thematic conflict-supporting narratives-victimhood and security (Study 2); and by showing its effectiveness when using messages referring to ongoing, not only resolved conflicts, and text-based, not only visually stimulating, message styles (Study 3). These results contribute to theory and practice on psychological interventions addressing the barrier of conflict-supporting narratives.