View
221
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Precursors of inter-group reconciliation among the youth in
Belfast and Vukovar (Croatia)
Ankica Kosic(please pronounce Ankiza or Anna)
University of Rome, Italy
• despite political solutions (e.g., Belfast Agreement of 1998; Andrew agreement, 2006), communities remained separated.
Culture of violence
“There are still many riots at interface areas – in summer 2006 it happened that 300 young people gathered and wanted to attack the other community.” (interview Intercomm)
Transcending the divide and the culture of violence among young
people
• Integrated education
• Inter-community work
Participants•320 students (139 boys and 181 girls) in high schools in Belfast. •M age = 17.77 years.
•Protestants (N = 128) •Catholics (N = 174).
Measures
Adolescents’ conflict management styles within family -8 items ( = 0.80)- adaptation of Kurdek’s CRSi (Kurdek, 1994)Examples: Trying to find solutions that are acceptable for both sides. Throwing insults and digs.
- Adolescents’ constructive conflict management styles
Parental communication styles with children – 7 items – Parental non constructive communication styles
Impact of the Troubles – 4 items ( = 0.82) whether they had any experience of sectarianism and the Troubles Example: Have you ever been intimidated because of your religion?
Have you ever been injured in a sectarian incident?
Feeling unsafe (e.g., walking outside the neighbourhood, wearing school uniform…) – 3 items ( = 0.82)
Index - Impact of the violence
•Cross-community contact: quantity– 5 items ( = 0.80)
•Integrated school
•Participation in cross-community projects
Feeling thermometer (1 = extremely unfavourable to 7 (extremely favourable)
Inter-group forgiveness – 7 items ( = 0.85)
Bogardus social distance scale - 5 items ( = 0.80) – higher scores indicate higher social acceptance
Instrumental co-operation
propensity towards collaboration and interest in improvement of inter-group relations Example: I am interested in the development of good relations and co-operation with the other community.
Index of reconciliation
Table 1. Summary of Moderated Multiple Regression Analyses
(R2 = .39; F= 14.50)Reconciliation
Beta p
Adolescents’ constructive communication styles .17 .001
Parental non-constructive communication styles -.39 .001
Impact of violence .05 n.s.
Cross-community contact .16 n.s.
Integrated school .07 n.s.
Participation in Cross-community projects .11 .03
Adolescents’ constructive communicative styles x Impact of the violence .21 .001
Adolescents constructive communicative styles x Cross-community contact
.13 .005
Parental non-constructive communicative styles x Impact of the violence -.17 .001
Figure 1: Reconciliation as a function of adolescents constructive strategies in
conflict management within family and impact of violence.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Low Impact of violence High Impact of violence
Dep
ende
nt v
aria
ble
Low Adolescents constructive strategies
High Adolescents constructive strategies
Figure 2: Reconciliation as a function adolescents constructive strategies in
conflict management within family and inter-group contact.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Low Inter-group contact High Inter-group contact
Rec
onci
liatio
n
Low Adolescents constructive strategies
High Adolescents constructive strategies
Figure 3: Reconciliation as a function of parental non-constructive
communicative styles and impact of violence.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Low Impact of violence High Impact of violence
Rec
onci
liatio
n
Low Parental nonconstructive styles
High Parental nonconstructive styles
Discussion
Constructive conflict resolution styles within family
more propensity toward reconciliation with the other community, even when
the youth do not feel safe in the context.
Croatia
In 1991 conflicts escalated in areas of Croatia populated by large numbers of Serbs.
•Vukovar was almost completely destroyed.
•about 2000 people were killed or wounded and over 500 ‘disappeared’ (Tanner, 1997).
• According to the 2001 census registered population was 31.670.
• Croats (57.5%) • Serbs (32.9%) • other minorities (6.28%).
• The process of social ‘polarisation’.
• separated shops and coffee bars…
• parallel institutions, such as local radio stations, sports clubs…
• children in schools and kindergartens have been separated into different buildings or classes.
Problems:
•people are still trying to find missing members of their families
•slow progress of justice
•poor economic situation
Study in Croatia
Participants 277 participants, students at the University in Vukovar and in secondary schools. • average age = 18.32 years
• 132 male and 145 female respondents
•Croats (N = 154) and Serbs (N = 106).
Measures •Adolescents conflict resolution styles within family - constructive
• Parental communication styles with children – non constructive
• Impact of the war
•Feeling unsafe
•Index – Impact of the violence
• Cross-community contact - quantity
• Participation in cross-community projects
Propensity toward reconciliation
Feeling thermometer
Inter-group forgiveness
Bogardus social distance scale
Instrumental co-operation
Index of reconciliation
Table 2. Summary of Moderated Multiple Regression Analyses (R2 = .49; F= 18.02)
Reconciliation
Beta p
Adolescents constructive communication styles within family .31 .001
Parental non-constructive communication styles -.08 n.s.
Impact of violence .12 .03.
Cross-community contact .36 .001
Cross-community projects .06 n.s.
Adolescents constructive communication styles x Impact of the violence .23 .001
Adolescents constructive communication styles x Cross-community contact
.19 .001
Parental non-constructive communication styles x Impact of the violence -.15 .003
Figure 4: Reconciliation as a function of adolescents constructive strategies
in conflict management within family and impact of violence.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Low Impact of violence High Impact of violence
Dep
ende
nt v
aria
ble
Low Adolescents constructive strategies
High Adolescents constructive strategies
Figure 5: Reconciliation as a function adolescents constructive strategies in
conflict management within family and inter-group contact.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Low Inter-group contact High Inter-group contact
Rec
onci
liatio
n
Low Adolescents constructive strategies
High Adolescents constructive strategies
Figure 5: Reconciliation as a function of parental non-constructive
communicative styles and impact of violence.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Low Impact of violence High Impact of violence
Rec
onci
liatio
n
Low Parental non-constructive styles
High Parental non-constructive styles
Conclusions
Constructive conflict resolution strategies within family
more propensity toward reconciliation with the other community, even when
the youth do not feel safe.