Agreeing to disagree: When do superordinate identities facilitate competing opinion-based groups to work through intergroup conflict?

With increasing division and conflict amongst groups with different opinions on social and political issues, there is a growing need to effectively manage intergroup conflict. The current paper examined the role of superordinate identities in facilitating-versus hindering-competing opinion-based groups to work through value-based intergroup conflict and reach value consensus. We examined interactions on Wikipedia as a novel, 'real-world' context where people with different opinions and perspectives work through disagreement guided by the rules and norms of a Wikipedian superordinate identity. We thematically analysed 22 discussion topics (comprising 9837 words) involving 21 editors on the Wikipedia talk page corresponding to the Indigenous Voice to Parliament article. Analyses revealed that supporters and opponents of the Voice often shared the same values but disagreed about how those values should be expressed (i.e., the implications of those values). Moreover, we found evidence that working through intergroup conflict involved perceiving value consensus-a process which was facilitated by a Wikipedian superordinate identity. The results highlight the conditions under which superordinate groups can productively structure disagreement and attenuate conflict between opinion-based groups.