Values, not just politics, shape Israeli opinions on hostage deals, study finds

A comprehensive new study led by Prof. Ariel Knafo-Noam of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem reveals that personal values are primary drivers behind how Israelis form and maintain opinions on hostage negotiations. The research, published in the journal American Psychologist, suggests that these deeply held principles provide a cognitive foundation for navigating high-stakes dilemmas even as circumstances on the ground shift.

The investigation followed more than 7,000 Israeli participants across five different samples during the Hamas–Israel war. Researchers presented respondents with the main details of the hostage deals and assessed their opinion. Opinions were tracked from the first successful deal in late 2023 through the intense and often stalled negotiations of 2024 and early 2025.

The core values at play

The study utilized the Schwartz theory of basic human values to categorize the motivations of participants. The researchers found that specific values consistently predicted whether an individual would support or oppose a hostage deal:

• Universalism: This value, which emphasizes the welfare of all people and peaceful resolutions, was the strongest predictor of support for a deal in every sample.
• Tradition: High importance placed on tradition values, which focus on maintaining the customs of one's culture or religion, was a robust predictor of opposition to the deals.
• Power: Values centered on achieving dominance and social status were also linked to opposition, though this association was typically weaker than that of tradition.

Notably, the study found that these values predicted opinions independently of an individual's gender, age, or level of education. While political ideology and voting history were also strong factors, universalism values remained a significant predictor of support even when accounting for a person's political camp.

Certainty and stability

Prof. Knafo-Noam and his colleagues discovered that when a person's opinion aligns with their core values, they hold that opinion with greater certainty. For instance, a proponent of the deal who also scores high in universalism is more likely to be certain of their stance than a proponent who does not prioritize those values.

This sense of certainty impacts how likely a person is to change their mind over time. The longitudinal portion of the study showed that individuals with a high "fit" between their values and their opinions were the least likely to shift their position as the war progressed.

Prof. Knafo-Noam suggests that during times of unprecedented crisis where clear social norms have not yet been established, people naturally look inward to their most stable attributes to find a way forward.

"Our findings indicate that when Israelis are faced with forming opinions about these agonizing life and death issues, they rely on their internal compasses in addition to the headlines or political cues," Prof. Knafo-Noam said. "People are very different in what they see as important in their lives, and they use their own personal sets of values to form different opinions even when they encounter the same set of facts about moral dilemmas. Understanding public opinion divisions should be based on recognizing that diversity in values."

The researchers suggest that these insights could be used to design more effective public campaigns by framing negotiations in ways that resonate with different value systems. For example, emphasizing themes of mutual responsibility and national resilience might bridge the gap for those who currently view the deals through the lens of traditionalist or group-focused concerns.

The study concluded that while the specific context of the Hamas-Israel war is unique, the role of values in shaping public opinion is likely a universal human process during any high-stakes, evolving crisis.

More information:
Ariel Knafo-Noam et al, The role of personal values in opinion formation regarding a high-stakes continually evolving topic: The Hamas–Israel hostage deal negotiations., American Psychologist (2026). DOI: 10.1037/amp0001656

Provided by Hebrew University of Jerusalem