Social stratification and the formation of subgroups are universal correlates of group behavior. Such processes take place in families, in various secondary groups, as well as in entire cultures and societies. One frequently observed form is a dichotomization of the social environment into Us vs. Them, through an exaggerated emphasis of the differences between these two subgroups. Various competing hypotheses have been offered to explain these phenomena; some of them are drawn from social, clinical or family psychology, others lean on anthropological and biological axioms. Whatever their source, these potentially destructive processes serve as a major ground for interpersonal conflict at both the micro and macro levels.

Within the framework of a master degree program in educational counselling, a year-long course (The Helping Interview graduate workshop) was shared by Arab and Jewish Israelis. Through the consistent application of principles drawn from Rogers humanistic approach, Seligman's positive psychology and Kohut's self psychology (such as empathy, self-knowledge, teamwork, tolerance, mutual respect), the interpersonal dynamics within this group drastically changed throughout the year; these changes have been evaluated by both pre-post attitude scales (also administered to a control group), and the continuous observation of both verbal and non-verbal behaviors. The two ethnic subgroups, distant and frequently hostile at the beginning of this course of study, merged into a cohesive unit by the end of the year.

Social stratification and the formation of subgroups are universal correlates of group behavior. Such processes take place in families, in various secondary groups, as well as in entire cultures and societies. One frequently observed form is a dichotomization of the social environment into Us vs. Them, through an exaggerated emphasis of the differences between these two subgroups. In his discussion of group behavior Erikson wrote that "sociogenetical evolution has split mankind into pseudo-species, into tribes, nations and religions, castes and classes which bind their members into a pattern of individual and collective identity, but, alas, reinforce that pattern by a mortal fear and a murderous hatred for other pseudo-species". Various competing hypotheses have been offered to explain these phenomena; some of them are drawn from social, clinical or family psychology, others lean on anthropological and biological axioms. Whatever their source, these potentially destructive processes serve as a major ground for interpersonal conflict at both the micro and macro levels.

Within the framework of a master degree program in educational counseling, a year-long course (The Helping Interview graduate workshop) was shared by Arab and Jewish Israelis. Principles drawn from Rogers' humanistic approach, Seligman's positive psychology and Kohut's self psychology (such as empathy, self-knowledge, teamwork, tolerance, mutual respect) were consistently applied. Interpersonal dynamics within the group have been evaluated by both pre-post attitude scales (also administered to a control group), and the continuous observation of both verbal and non-verbal behaviors. The aim of the research was to determine whether such theoretically advisable conditions were indeed conducive for the reduction of a severe intercultural conflict.

A 10-item Likert-type inventory (Cronbach's alpha=0.86), dealing with various aspects of inter-cultural encounters (such as I think I understand the way members of other ethnic groups are thinking; Members of other ethnic groups will never understand me; Contact between ethnic groups is likely to improve their relationship; Members of other ethnic groups have mistaken opinions about us; I want to know better members of other ethnic groups), was administered to both the experimental group (N=26) and to a control group (students in a graduate course on Advanced Developmental Psychology; N=28), at the beginning of the academic year and at its end. In the experimental group the mean response changed in the expected direction in 8 items; in the remaining two items there was no change. In the control group the mean response improved in 3 cases, declined in 4, and there was no change in the remaining 3 items (χ²= 6.47; d.f.=2; p<.05).

The Helping Interview graduate workshop was conducted in two sections. An observer was present at every other meeting of each section. Seating arrangements were recorded in order to obtain information about the mixing of the two subgroups. In each section the group sat in a half circle, with the facilitator sitting across, and the observer sitting outside the group. In section A there were 5 Arab students and 9 Jewish ones; the corresponding numbers in section B were 3 and 11. The following table presents the mean number of breaks between continuous strings of Jewish and Arab participants, as a function of time. Note that the maximum number of breaks would be 10 in section A, and 6 in section B (with each member of the minority subgroup sandwiched between two members of the other subgroup):