Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-8wtlm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T18:27:33.936Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Communal sharing/identity fusion does not require reflection on episodic memory of shared experience or trauma – and usually generates kindness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Lotte Thomsen  and
Alan P. Fiske
Lotte Thomsen
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway. lotte.thomsen@psykologi.uio.nohttp://www.sv.uio.no/psi/personer/vit/lottetho/ Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Denmark
Alan P. Fiske
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095. afiske@ucla.eduhttps://www.anthro.ucla.edu/faculty/alan-page-fiske
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Identity fusion is remarkably similar to the extensively validated construct of communal sharing, proposed in 1991. Both posit that notions of oneness/unity/equivalence with others underpin altruism. However, we argue that oneness/equivalence instantiates an evolved, innate relational form, marked and constituted by cultural practices making participants’ bodies substantially the same. It is intuitive from earliest development, often encompasses persons whom one has never met, and results mostly in caring.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e219
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bian, L., Sloane, S. & Baillargeon, R. (2018) Infants expect ingroup support to override fairness when resources are limited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 115(11):2705–10. Available at: www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1719445115.Google Scholar
Fiske, A. P. (1991) Structures of social life: The four elementary forms of social relations. Free Press.Google Scholar
Fiske, A. P. (1992) The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review 99:689–723.Google Scholar
Fiske, A. P. (2004) Four modes of constituting relationships: Consubstantial assimilation; space, magnitude, time, and force; concrete procedures, & abstract symbolism. In: Relational models theory: A contemporary overview, ed. Haslam, N., pp. 52–142. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Fiske, A. P. & Rai, T. S (2014) Virtuous violence: Hurting and killing to create, sustain, and end honor social relationships. Cambridge University Press.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 USA 104(18):7357–60.Google Scholar
Hamlin, J. K., Mahajan, N., Liberman, Z. & Wynn, K. (2013) Not like me=bad: Infants prefer those who harm dissimilar others. Psychological Science 24(4):589–94.Google Scholar
Hamlin, J. K. & Wynn, K. (2012) Infants fail to match the food preferences of antisocial others. Cognitive Development 27:227–39.Google Scholar
James, W. (1906) On some mental effects of the earthquake. The Library of America Story of the Week. Reprinted from William James: Writings 1902–1910 (The Library of America, 1987), pp. 1215–22. First published in the June 7, 1906, edition of Youth's Companion. Accessed August 9, 2018. Available at: http://storyoftheweek.loa.org/2010/08/on-some-mental-effects-of-earthquake.html.Google Scholar
Jin, K. & Baillargeon, R. (2017) Infants possess an abstract notion of ingroup support. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 114:8199–204.Google Scholar
Kunst, J. R., Boos, B., Kimel, S., Obaidi, M., Shani, M. & Thomsen, L. (2018) Engaging in extreme activism in support of others' political struggles: The role of politically motivated fusion with out-groups. PLoS ONE 13(1):e0190639. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190639.Google Scholar
Lessa, W. A. (1964) The social effects of typhoon Ophelia (1960) on Ulithi. Micronesica 1(1/2):1–47.Google Scholar
Liberman, Z., Kinzler, K. & Woodward, A. (2018) The early social significance of shared ritual actions. Cognition 17:42–51.Google Scholar
Oliver-Smith, A. (1986) The martyred city: Death and rebirth in the Andes. University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Over, H. & Carpenter, M. (2009) Eighteen-month-old children show increased helping following priming with affiliation. Psychological Science 20(10):1189–93.Google Scholar
Powell, L. J. & Spelke, E. S. (2013) Preverbal infants expect members of social groups to act alike. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 110:E3965–72.Google Scholar
Powell, L. J. & Spelke, E. S. (2018) Human infants' understanding of social imitation: Inferences of affiliation from third-party observations. Cognition 170:31–48.Google Scholar
Rai, T. S. & Fiske, A. P. (2011) Moral psychology is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological Review 118(1):57–75.Google Scholar
Solnit, R. (2009) A paradise built in hell: The extraordinary communities that arise in disaster. Penguin.Google Scholar
Thomsen, L. & Carey, S. (2013) Core cognition of relational models. In: Navigating the social world: What infants, children and other species can teach us, ed. Banaji, M. & Gelman, S.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar