The following is an excerpt of the intervention methodology. For more information, please see the full text of the article on the publisher's website or through your institution's library.

Study 1: Reappraisal and Political Reactions to Conflict-Related Events in the Laboratory

In our first study, we tested whether participants trained in cognitive reappraisal, compared with those who were not trained, would (a) experience less anger in response to conflict-related, anger-provoking information and (b), as a result, show greater support for conciliatory policies [...].

Participants. Our 39 Jewish Israeli participants (13 female, 26 male; mean age = 24.51 years, SD = 1.98) mirrored the distribution of political attitudes in the Israeli population at the time [...]. [...]

Procedure. Participants [...] were randomly assigned to a reappraisal condition or a control condition. Participants in the reappraisal condition were handed anger-inducing pictures and were asked to respond to them like scientists, objectively and analytically—to try to think about them in a cold and detached manner. [...] Participants in the control condition saw the same four pictures, but were asked to respond to them naturally. After the manipulation, all participants watched a 4-min anger-inducing PowerPoint presentation, including pictures, text, and music, describing Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip and the Palestinians’ response to it [...]. Before watching the presentation, participants were asked to apply the technique they had learned earlier. [...] After the presentation, participants used a Likert-type scale ranging from 1, not at all, to 6, very much so, to indicate the extent to which they felt anger and rage [...] toward Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, as well as the extent to which they had experienced any other emotions (e.g., fear, hatred). We also assessed participants’ general political ideology, religious conviction, and gender. Next, in what was presented as a separate study on attitudes regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, participants indicated their support of four items reflecting conciliatory political policies [...] and three items reflecting aggressive policies [...]. The rating scale ranged from 1, highly oppose, to 6, very much in favor. Participants also completed the 13-item Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale.

Study 2: Reappraisal and Political Reactions to Real-World, Conflict-Related Events

[...] Because the Palestinians declared their intention well in advance, we decided to randomly assign participants to receive a reappraisal manipulation (or not) before the Palestinian bid, and we then examined the emotional and political effects of the manipulation a week after the bid. To test whether the effects reflected meaningful changes in our participants [...], we also tested whether the effects persisted 5 months after the manipulation. [...]

Participants. Sixty Jewish Israelis (36 female, 24 male; mean age = 17.94 years, SD = 0.28) participated [...]. The sample was balanced in terms of political affiliations and included 29.8% rightists, 36.8% centrists, and 33.4% leftists.

Procedure. Five days before the Palestinian bid, participants rated their current state positive affect [...] and state negative affect [...], using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. They also rated their general support of conciliatory policies toward Palestinians [...] and their support of aggressive policies [...]. The rating scale for these items ranged from 1, highly oppose, to 6, very much in favor. As in the first study, we also measured social desirability, gender, and political stance. Participants were randomly assigned to either a reappraisal or a control condition. The manipulation [...] was similar to the one used in Study 1, except that participants practiced on six rather than four pictures. After the training, participants were asked to use the technique they had learned (i.e., reappraisal or natural responding) during the following week. [...] A week after the training (2 days after the Palestinian bid), we assessed participants’ emotional and political reactions. Participants responded to four items assessing their negative intergroup emotions toward Palestinians (scale from 1, not at all, to 6, very much), indicating their feelings of anger, rage, empathy (reverse-scored), and hope (reverse-scored) [...]. Participants also rated their level of support for five possible conciliatory Israeli responses [...] and their support for four possible aggressive Israeli responses [...]. The rating scale for these items ranged from 1, highly oppose, to 6, very much in favor. Five months after the manipulation, participants took part in a daily seminar on an unrelated topic in a classroom located far from where the training and second assessment had taken place. They were approached by an unfamiliar experimenter and asked to complete a brief questionnaire for a class project. Participants were unaware of the link between this questionnaire and the study they had completed 5 months earlier. Of the original 60 participants, 51 (85%) completed the questionnaire. Given time limitations, participants were asked only about their anger and rage toward Palestinians (α = .75) and their support for four policies toward Palestinians that were relevant to current events; two of these policies were conciliatory [...] and two were aggressive [...].