Publicado Nov 14, 2017



PLUMX
Almetrics
 
Dimensions
 

Google Scholar
 
Search GoogleScholar
Descargas


Mónica Alzate http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9566-535X

Marcos Dono

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Resumen

La reconciliación social ha sido propuesta como una de las estrategias que permite la transformación de los conflictos y el restablecimiento de las relaciones intergrupales pacíficas. El objetivo de este trabajo es hacer una revisión sistemática de la reconciliación, las variables con las que se asocia y los instrumentos para medirla. La búsqueda se hizo en Psycinfo y en la Web of Science, los resultados indican que el mayor porcentaje de artículos surge en los años 90, las publicaciones abordan conflictos que se desarrollan a lo largo de todo el planeta: América, Europa, Oriente medio y África. Las variables con las cuales se relaciona estadística y teóricamente a la reconciliación se agrupan en cinco categorias de variables: recuperación psicosocial, acercamiento de las partes confrontadas, resignificación endo y exogrupal, emociones y gestión del conflicto. Se registran 12 instrumentos con una fiabilidad adecuada para evaluar la reconciliación. Se concluye que con las cinco categorías de variables se podrían diseñar modelos explicativos y de diagnóstico que contribuyan a la promoción de los procesos de reconciliación social temprana, particularmente para aquellos paises que requieren transformar las dinámicas de confrontación violenta.

Keywords

Dinámicas grupales, Reconciliación, Resolución de conflictos.group dynamics, reconciliation, conflict resolution

References
Alzate, M., Sabucedo, J.M., Durán, M. (2013). Antecedents of the attitude towards inter-group reconciliation in a setting of armed conflict. Psicothema, 25(1), 61-66.

Archick, K. (2015). Congressional Research Service. (Report RS21333). Northern Ireland: The Peace Process.

Baron, R. (2008). Reconciliation, trust, and cooperation: Using bottom-up and top-down strategies to achieve peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (275-298) USA: Oxford University Press.

Bar-Tal, D. (2000). From intractable conflict through conflict resolution to reconciliation: Psychological analysis. Political Psychology, 21(2), 351-365.

Chapman, A. R. (2007). Truth commissions and intergroup forgiveness: The case of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 13(1), 51-69.

De la Rey, C. (2001). Reconciliation in divided societies. En D.J. Christie, R.V Wagner, & D.A Winter (Eds.), Peace, conflict, and violence: Peace psychology for the 21st century. (pp. 251-261) USA: Prentice Hall/Pearson Education.

Devos, T., Silver, L. A., Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (2002). Experiencing intergroup emotions. From prejudice to intergroup emotions (pp. 111–134). New York: Taylor & Francis.

Dovidio, J. F. (2008). Majority and minority perspectives in intergroup relations: The role of contact, group representations, threat, and trust in intergroup conflict and reconciliation. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (227-253). USA: Oxford University Press.

Freeman, C. M. L. (2012). The psychosocial need for intergroup contact: Practical suggestions reconciliation initiatives in Bosnia and Herzegovina and beyond. Intervention, 10(1), 17-29.

Gibson, J. L. (2004). Overcoming Apartheid: Can Truth Reconcile a Divided Nation? Politikon, 31(2), 129-155.

Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J.B., Cairns, E., Tauch, N., Hughes, J. et al. (2008) Stepping stones to reconciliation in Northern Ireland: Intergroup contact, forgiveness, and trust. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (227-253). USA: Oxford University Press.

Janoff-Bulman, R., & Werther, A. (2008). The social psychology of respect: Implications for delegitimization and reconciliation. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social psychology of intergroup reconciliation. (pp. 145-170) USA: Oxford University Press.

Kadiangandu, J. K. y Mullet, E. (2007). Intergroup forgiveness: A Congolese perspective. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 13(1), 37-49.

Kamau, C., Giner-Sorolla, R. & Zeven, S. (2013). Reconciliation responses, blame, and expressions of guilt or shame. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 287-292.

Kelman, H. C. (2008) Reconciliation from a social-psychological perspective. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (pp. 15-32). USA: Oxford University Press.

Kollock, P. (1994). The emergence of exchange structures: An experimental study of uncertainty, commitment, and trust. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 313–345.

Kosic, A., & Livi, S. (2012). Study of Perceived Parental Communication and Propensity towards Reconciliation among Youth in Vukovar (Croatia). Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europ, 11(4), 51-80.

Kosic, A., Noor, M. & Mannetti, L. (2012). The propensity toward reconciliation among young people in Northern Ireland and Croatia: The role of conflict management styles within the family. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15(1), 3-19.

Manzi, J. y González, R. (2007). Forgiveness and reparation in Chile: The role of cognitive and emotional intergroup antecedents. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 13(1), 71-91.

Miron, A. M., & Branscomben, N. R. (2008). Social categorization, standards of justice, and collective guilt. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (77-96). USA: Oxford University Press.

Mukashema, I. & Mullet, E. (2012). Unconditional forgiveness, reconciliation sentiment, and mental health among genocide victims in Rwanda. Social Indicators Research, 113, 121-132.

Nadler, A. & Liviatan, I. (2006). Intergroup Reconciliation: Effects of Adversary's Expressions of Empathy, Responsibility, and Recipients' Trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(4), 459-470.

Nadler, A. & Shnabel, N. (2008). Instrumental and socioemotional paths to intergroup reconciliation and the Needs-Based Model of Socioemotional Reconciliation. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (37-56). USA: Oxford University Press

Noor, M., Brown, R. J., González, R., Manzi, J. & Lewis, C. A. (2008). On positive psychological outcomes: What helps groups with a history of conflict to forgive and reconcile with each other? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(6), 819-832.

Noor, M., Brown, R. J. y Prentice, G. (2008a). Precursors and mediators of intergroup reconciliation in Northern Ireland: A new model. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 481-495.

Noor, M., Brown, R. J. y Prentice, G. (2008b). Prospects for Intergroup Reconciliation: Social-Psychological Predictors of Intergroup Forgiveness and Reparation in Northern Ireland and Chile. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (97-114). USA: Oxford University Press.

Perrault, F. (2013). African Development Bank Group, ORWB/SLFO/OSFU Department. Sierra Leone. Country Strategy Paper 2013-2017.

Riek, B. M., Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Brewer, M. B., Mania, E. W., & Lamoreaux, M. J. (2008). A social-psychological approach to postconflict reconciliation. En A. Nadler, T. Malloy & J.D. Fisher (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation (255-273). USA: Oxford University Press.

Rouhana, N. N. (2011). Key issues in reconciliation: Challenging traditional assumptions on conflict resolution and power dynamics. En D. Bar-Tal (Ed.), Intergroup Conflicts and Their Resolution. A Social Psychological Perspective (291-314). USA: Psychology Press.
Shnabel, N., Halabi, S., & Noor, M. (2013). Overcoming competitive victimhood and facilitating forgiveness through re-categorization into a common victim or perpetrator identity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 867-877.

Shnabel, N., Nadler, A. & Dovidio, J.F. (2014). Beyond need satisfaction: Empowering and accepting messages from third parties ineffectively restore trust and consequent reconciliation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 126-140.

Shnabel, N., Nadler, A., Ullrich, J., Dovidio, J. F., & Carmi, D. (2009). Promoting reconciliation through the satisfaction of the emotional needs of victimized and perpetrating group members: The needs-based model of reconciliation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(8), 1021-1030.

SimanTov-Nachlieli, I., & Shnabel, N. (2013). Feeling both victim and perpetrator: Investigating duality within the needs-based model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(3), 301-314.

Staub, E. (2005). Healing, Reconciliation, Forgiving and the Prevention of Violence After Genocide or Mass Killing: An Intervention And It's Experimental Evaluation in Rwanda. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24(3), 297-334.

Staub, E. (2012). Genocide, mass killing, and violent conflict: Prevention and reconciliation. En L. R., Tropp (Ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Intergroup Conflict. (273-290). New York: Oxford University Press.

Staub, E. (2013). Building a peaceful society: Origins, prevention, and reconciliation after genocide and other group violence. American Psychologist, 68(7), 576-589.

Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., Tausch, N., Maio, G., & Kenworthy, J. (2007). The impact of intergroup emotions on forgiveness in Northern Ireland.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(1), 119-136.

Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J. B., Cairns, E., Marinetti, C., Geddes, L., & Parkinson, B. (2008). Postconflict reconciliation: Intergroup forgiveness and implicit biases in Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Issues, 64(2), 303-320.

Wagner, U. & Hewstone, M. (2012). Intergroup Contact. En L. R., Tropp (Ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Intergroup Conflict. (193-209). New York: Oxford University.
Cómo citar
Alzate, M., & Dono, M. (2017). Reconciliación Social como estrategia para la transformación de los conflictos socio-políticos, variables asociadas e instrumentos de medición. Universitas Psychologica, 16(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy16-3.rset
Sección
Artículos