Hurting or healing? How conflict exposure and trauma (do not) shape support for truth commissions

Truth commissions (TCs) are a much-discussed and sometimes controversial means of establishing sustainable peace. Despite their prevalence and potential, the determinants of public support for TCs, particularly the role of conflict exposure, remain poorly understood. We suggest trauma as a key mechanism through which conflict exposure affects support for TCs. Trauma may lead victims to see TCs as hurting or healing, respectively, which may decrease or increase support. We test these competing hypotheses across Nepal, Guatemala, and Northern Ireland; three post-conflict cases with differing truth-seeking experiences. While conflict exposure predicts trauma in all three cases, trauma only determines support for TCs with tangible implications, and only in Nepal and Northern Ireland. By qualitatively examining context-specific scope conditions, we propose that the prospective closure utility of a specific TC could bolster its support. Future research is needed to probe the validity of this novel theoretical construct.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conflict Management and Peace Science
Published
2024-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/07388942241285609
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Migration, Health and Trauma
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.64

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Hurting or healing? How conflict exposure and trauma (do not) shape support for truth commissions

Karin Dyrstad, Amélie Godefroidt
1 citations
Conflict Management and Peace Science
Migration, Health and Trauma
0.64
article

Hurting or healing? How conflict exposure and trauma (do not) shape support for truth commissions

Karin Dyrstad, Amélie Godefroidt
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Truth commissions (TCs) are a much-discussed and sometimes controversial means of establishing sustainable peace. Despite their prevalence and potential, the determinants of public support for TCs, particularly the role of conflict exposure, remain poorly understood. We suggest trauma as a key mechanism through which conflict exposure affects support for TCs. Trauma may lead victims to see TCs as hurting or healing, respectively, which may decrease or increase support. We test these competing hypotheses across Nepal, Guatemala, and Northern Ireland; three post-conflict cases with differing truth-seeking experiences. While conflict exposure predicts trauma in all three cases, trauma only determines support for TCs with tangible implications, and only in Nepal and Northern Ireland. By qualitatively examining context-specific scope conditions, we propose that the prospective closure utility of a specific TC could bolster its support. Future research is needed to probe the validity of this novel theoretical construct.

Conflict Management and Peace ScienceVol. 42(5)
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO), KU Leuven (BE)
Norges Forskningsråd
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Migration, Health and Trauma
0.64
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Hurting or healing? How conflict exposure and trauma (do not) shape support for truth commissions — Karin Dyrstad, Amélie Godefroidt · Conflict Management and Peace Science (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS