This cross-sectional study examined predictors of attitudes and relatedness toward génocidaires among survivors of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. A survey of 448 eligible adults in selected households from 5 districts in Rwanda was conducted in 2013-2014. Structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques were used to test the theorized relationships among age, gender, exposure to genocide events, stressors attributed to the genocide, traumatic stress, and a hypothesized latent factor of attitudes toward génocidaires (positive outgroup stereotypes, beliefs/perceived social norms, revenge toward génocidaires, and social distance). On the basis of a final sample of 304 respondents, more exposure to genocide events was directly associated with increased traumatic stress symptoms, higher attribution of societal stressors to the genocide, and lower positive attitudes toward génocidaires. Attribution of societal stressors to the genocide mediated the relationship between exposure to genocide events and positive attitudes toward génocidaires, accounting for 34% of the total effect. Traumatic stress was also negatively correlated with positive attitudes toward génocidaires. Regardless of the level of exposure to genocide events, a survivor will likely attribute current stressors to the genocide to the extent that they are experiencing traumatic stress symptoms. The complete SEM model fit extremely well. Attributions of social stressors to the genocide and negative attitudes toward génocidaires are embedded within a cultural context of "chosen amnesia" about the genocide events (Buckley-Zistel, 2006), which necessitate remembrance of progress and honest acknowledgment of the complex task of reconciliation among Rwandans in a postconflict society.

This longitudinal study examined outcomes of a local peace‐building intervention that applied principles of intergroup contact to promote reconciliation between génocidaires and survivors whom they have directly harmed during the 1994 Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda. Individual interviews were conducted with 46 génocidaires and 45 survivors whom they have directly harmed during the genocide at 7‐time points over the course of their 22‐month participation in three programmatic activities (workshops, cell groups, and cooperative cow raising). One thousand bootstrapped samples generated to measure changes in outcomes indicated that survivors and génocidaires regarded themselves and those who directly impacted them during the genocide more positively after 22 months. Although both survivors and génocidaires experienced significant decline in trauma symptomatology after 22 months, they responded to programmatic activities differently. Cell group interactions sustained some positive outcomes (génocidaires perceived forgiveness by others) after the workshops and further improved others (génocidaires self‐forgiveness). Survivors who participated in cell groups and raised cows with génocidaires demonstrated further willingness to reconcile compared to survivors who participated in cell groups alone. Our findings empirically support the benefits of promoting different forms of intergroup interactions long after a period of intense violence and highlight the importance of considering how the trajectories of outcomes can inform program and theory development. Highlights Survivors and génocidaires in Rwanda benefited from a local intergroup contact intervention (CI). However, génocidaires and survivors they directly harmed benefited differently over 22‐months. Preparing survivors and génocidaires with skills to participate in communal life is critical for CI. Highlighting both CI outcomes and trajectories are essential for program and theory development.

Family members who witnessed the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi arguably shape their children's narratives of the events and subsequent formation of outgroup prejudice. An understanding of whether vestiges of the genocide are transmitted to future generations informs ongoing peacebuilding efforts. We, therefore, examined the relationship between child and guardian attitudes toward one's outgroup among households of survivors or génocidaires and investigated whether this relationship was potentially affected by social interactions with members of outgroups (survivors or génocidaires) outside the family. We interviewed 588 members of survivor (153 guardian-child dyads) and génocidaire (141 guardian-child dyads) households in the Muhanga district of Rwanda to investigate whether children, 12-18 years old, conveyed their parents' outgroup prejudice after parents participated in a local peace intervention compared to when children participated in similar programming for youth. Structural equation modeling (SEM) results indicated that survivors' and génocidaires' outgroup prejudice did not influence their children's formation of these beliefs. Nor did children affect their guardians in this regard. However, other factors influenced children's beliefs in both households. In survivor households, children who endorsed more positive attitudes toward génocidaires reported stronger family relationships and more frequent interaction with génocidaires after adjusting for child age and gender, and guardian's gender. In génocidaire households, children's positive beliefs about survivors were influenced by more interactions with survivors and living with a guardian who participated in peace interventions. Rather than being passively shaped by their guardians' experiences, our results suggested that a new generation of viewpoints was being formed by relationships within and outside the family. Public Significance StatementThe children of survivors and génocidaires who directly experienced the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda do not share their parents' perceptions of people from outgroups-that is those who perpetrated harm or those victimized by it during the genocide. However, children's regard of outgroups in both households was influenced more by the quality of family relationships and the frequency of their interactions with members of their outgroup.

Seventeen Hutu men who were convicted of murder and other crimes committed during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda participated in in-depth semistructured interviews regarding the psychological motivation for their participation in the genocide. The interviews were analyzed using grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) and the emergent theory identified 3 core themes: (a) early discriminatory messages; (b) fear; (c) desensitization to violence. Participants described living in a highly discriminatory environment and although it did not affect their interpersonal relationships with Tutsis, it created an "other" and set-the-stage for the genocide to occur. Participants also talked about how fear of both Tutsis and Hutus influenced their participation. Participants described that as they became involved in the genocide, they became desensitized to killing and overtime participants described something akin to losing sight of their own sense of humanity. A core theme of transformation emerged whereby, through a process of punishment and reeducation, they rehumanized themselves and their victims and restored the sense of humanity they had lost.

Integrating an understanding of HIV transmission with structural-behavioral prevention approaches remains a priority in low prevalence rural regions in Africa. Many national indicators use categorical survey responses which do not capture the cultural nuances of HIV transmission knowledge that potentially reify stigmatizing treatment of persons living with HIV (PL-HIV). We examined the relationship between quantitative and qualitative measures of HIV knowledge and four forms of stigma (individual attitudes, felt normative, social distance, and stigma perceived by PLHIV) among 200 rural residents in Rwanda. Forty-two percent qualitatively reported concurrent accurate and partial knowledge of HIV transmission. Being more knowledgeable about HIV transmission was associated with less desire for social distancing from PLHIV. Our findings highlight the continued importance of reinforcing an accurate understanding of HIV transmission and correcting misinformation by drawing on quantitative and qualitative assessments of HIV knowledge as critical arms of HIV stigma reduction programs in low prevalence rural regions.