Deeds, not words: Understanding intergroup apology and forgiveness from different sides of conflict.

Abstract

Repairing broken intergroup relations after conflict is a challenging process that becomes particularly complex when perpetrators and victims continue to live in the same community. In the present study, we have asked participants from different sides of the 1991-1995 conflict in Croatia to disentangle their understanding of apology and forgiveness 20 years after the war. We conducted focus groups with people who suffered war-related personal losses, those with no such losses, and young adults born after the conflict. The major research question was as follows: How do different community actors understand intergroup apology and forgiveness and its relevance for the peaceful future in the postconflict ethnically mixed communities? A total of 65 persons participated in 11 focus groups (36 Serbs and 29 Croats; 35 women and 30 men; aged 20-78 years) who had lived in two ethnically mixed towns (Knin and Vukovar) before and during the war. Our results showed no substantial differences in how people with different experiences or from different sides of conflict understood intergroup apology and forgiveness. However, the meaningfulness of apologyforgiveness cycles was impaired by mistrust in the sincerity of apologies and by strong differences in opinions about preconditions for intergroup apology and forgiveness between two ethnic groups. Our results show that an outright apology and forgiveness may not be necessary for the communities that suffered mutual massive violence. Rather, exchange of mutual social gestures showing readiness for contact and moving on with everyday living could be more constructive ways for community social reconstruction. Public Significance StatementIn this study, we elaborate on how people from different sides of conflict, with different experiences and from different generations understand the concepts of intergroup apology and forgiveness after the conflict and their relevance for future community intergroup relations. The results confirmed the complexity of phenomena and emotional, cognitive, and motivational challenges operating in considering common future and social recovery among community members.

Putting science to work for peace: A special issue in honor of Emile Bruneau.

“…Specifically, Noor and Quek (2022) examined perpetrators’ expectations for forgiveness and whether their social dominance orientation and the victim’s social status influences these expectations. Štambuk et al (2022) explored how intergroup apologies are interpreted and forgiveness is expressed in the aftermath of violent conflict. Finally, Soral et al (2022) investigated how empathy-inducing contact interventions change the way that majority group members respond to hate speech about marginalized group members.…”

The Association between ideology and resistance to governmental apology depends on political knowledge

“…Thus, there tend to be some members who oppose the group apologies in the apologizing groups. They may emphasize the fact that they were not directly involved in the transgression, and thus deny their responsibility (Štambuk et al , 2022). In the absence of sufficient agreement by its apologetic group members, the victim may judge the apology to be insincere (Wenzel et al , 2017).…”