Emotions in attacker-defender conflicts

In tense situations, emotions emerge that influence conflicts, shaping decision making and behavior (Bar-Tal et al. 2007; Halperin 2016). We propose that the distinction between attackers and defenders in asymmetric conflicts, as addressed by De Dreu and Gross (D&G), may inspire a new line of research that will help broaden the understanding of emotional processes and their implications in intergroup conflicts. More specifically, this commentary focuses on the impact that the role of being an attacker or a defender has on emotional experiences, appraisals, action tendencies, emotional preferences, brain activities, and responses to emotion-based interventions.

Appraisal theory offers a useful framework to shed light on why the perception of being an attacker or defender could have a differential impact on emotional experiences and action tendencies: It proposes that distinct combinations of cognitive appraisals (i.e., evaluations of an event) influence the emotions that are experienced (Sander et al. 2018; Scherer & Moors 2019). According to D&G, superiority and overconfidence are more typical for attackers, which would suggest appraisals of high certainty and high control. These appraisals, in turn, are usually related to feelings of anger, pride, and contempt (Fontaine et al. 2007; Lerner & Keltner 2000). For instance, anger predicts lower risk perception (Lerner & Keltner 2000; 2001), a bias that may facilitate competition in attackers. Conversely, defenders are described in the target article as vigilant. This could be associated with appraisals of low certainty and low control, which are typical of the emotion...