Attitudinal and Behavioral Legacies of Wartime Violence: A Meta-Analysis

Understanding the legacies of wartime violence is essential for explaining postwar dynamics and informing policy. I present a meta-analysis of 172 quantitative studies across more than 50 countries, assessing the effects of wartime violence on 22 outcomes spanning four broad areas: (a) civic and political engagement, prosociality, and trust; (b) attitudinal hardening toward wartime enemies; (c) identification with one’s own wartime-aligned group; and (d) generalized attitudinal hardening. The analysis reveals mixed effects on engagement, prosociality, and trust: while violence increases some forms of participation, it does not promote voting, trust, or altruism. In contrast, wartime violence consistently heightens hostility toward former adversaries and strengthens in-group identification and favoritism. However, I find little evidence of broader hardening toward actors not directly involved in the conflict. These results challenge optimistic claims that war fosters cohesion and underscore the need for interventions that reduce intergroup hostility, rebuild cross group-trust, and support reconciliation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Political Science Review
Published
2025-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055425101299
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Attitudinal and Behavioral Legacies of Wartime Violence: A Meta-Analysis

Joan Barceló
American Political Science Review
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

Attitudinal and Behavioral Legacies of Wartime Violence: A Meta-Analysis

Joan Barceló
article en

Abstract

Understanding the legacies of wartime violence is essential for explaining postwar dynamics and informing policy. I present a meta-analysis of 172 quantitative studies across more than 50 countries, assessing the effects of wartime violence on 22 outcomes spanning four broad areas: (a) civic and political engagement, prosociality, and trust; (b) attitudinal hardening toward wartime enemies; (c) identification with one’s own wartime-aligned group; and (d) generalized attitudinal hardening. The analysis reveals mixed effects on engagement, prosociality, and trust: while violence increases some forms of participation, it does not promote voting, trust, or altruism. In contrast, wartime violence consistently heightens hostility toward former adversaries and strengthens in-group identification and favoritism. However, I find little evidence of broader hardening toward actors not directly involved in the conflict. These results challenge optimistic claims that war fosters cohesion and underscore the need for interventions that reduce intergroup hostility, rebuild cross group-trust, and support reconciliation.

American Political Science Review
New York University Abu Dhabi (AE), New York University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
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.

Attitudinal and Behavioral Legacies of Wartime Violence: A Meta-Analysis — Joan Barceló · American Political Science Review (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS