1. Precursors of inter-group reconciliation among the youth in Belfast and Vukovar (Croatia) Ankica Kosic (please pronounce Ankiza or Anna) University of Rome, Italy

2. despite political solutions (e.g., Belfast Agreement of 1998; Andrew agreement, 2006), communities remained separated.

3. Culture of violence “There are still many riots at interface areas – in summer 2006 it happened that 300 young people gathered and wanted to attack the other community.” (interview Intercomm)

4. Transcending the divide and the culture of violence among young people Integrated education Inter-community work

5. Study in Belfast

6. Participants 320 students (139 boys and 181 girls) in high schools in Belfast. M age = 17.77 years. Protestants (N = 128) Catholics (N = 174).

7. Measures Adolescents’ conflict management styles within family - 8 items (  = 0.80) - adaptation of Kurdek’s CRSi (Kurdek, 1994) Examples: Trying to find solutions that are acceptable for both sides. Throwing insults and digs. - Adolescents’ constructive conflict management styles Parental communication styles with children – 7 items – Parental non constructive communication styles

8. Impact of the Troubles – 4 items (  = 0.82) whether they had any experience of sectarianism and the Troubles Example: Have you ever been intimidated because of your religion? Have you ever been injured in a sectarian incident? Feeling unsafe (e.g., walking outside the neighbourhood, wearing school uniform…) – 3 items (  = 0.82) Index - Impact of the violence

9. Cross-community contact: quantity – 5 items (  = 0.80) Integrated school Participation in cross-community projects

10. Feeling thermometer (1 = extremely unfavourable to 7 (extremely favourable) Inter-group forgiveness – 7 items (  = 0.85) Bogardus social distance scale - 5 items (  = 0.80) – higher scores indicate higher social acceptance Instrumental co-operation propensity towards collaboration and interest in improvement of inter-group relations Example: I am interested in the development of good relations and co- operation with the other community. Index of reconciliation

11. Results

12. Table 1. Summary of Moderated Multiple Regression Analyses (R2 =.39; F= 14.50) Reconciliation Betap Adolescents ’ constructive communication styles.17.001 Parental non-constructive communication styles -.39.001 Impact of violence.05n.s. Cross-community contact.16n.s. Integrated school.07n.s. Participation in Cross-community projects.11.03 Adolescents ’ constructive communicative styles x Impact of the violence.21.001 Adolescents constructive communicative styles x Cross-community contact.13.005 Parental non-constructive communicative styles x Impact of the violence -.17.001

13. Figure 1: Reconciliation as a function of adolescents constructive strategies in conflict management within family and impact of violence.

14. Figure 2: Reconciliation as a function adolescents constructive strategies in conflict management within family and inter-group contact.

15. Figure 3: Reconciliation as a function of parental non-constructive communicative styles and impact of violence.

16. Discussion Constructive conflict resolution styles within family more propensity toward reconciliation with the other community, even when the youth do not feel safe in the context.

17. Croatia In 1991 conflicts escalated in areas of Croatia populated by large numbers of Serbs. Vukovar was almost completely destroyed. about 2000 people were killed or wounded and over 500 ‘disappeared’ (Tanner, 1997).

19. Vukovar

20. According to the 2001 census registered population was 31.670. Croats (57.5%) Serbs (32.9%) other minorities (6.28%).

21. The process of social ‘polarisation’. separated shops and coffee bars… parallel institutions, such as local radio stations, sports clubs… children in schools and kindergartens have been separated into different buildings or classes.

22. Problems: people are still trying to find missing members of their families slow progress of justice poor economic situation

23. Study in Croatia Participants 277 participants, students at the University in Vukovar and in secondary schools. average age = 18.32 years 132 male and 145 female respondents Croats (N = 154) and Serbs (N = 106).

24. Measures Adolescents conflict resolution styles within family - constructive Parental communication styles with children – non constructive

25. Impact of the war Feeling unsafe Index – Impact of the violence Cross-community contact - quantity Participation in cross-community projects

26. Propensity toward reconciliation Feeling thermometer Inter-group forgiveness Bogardus social distance scale Instrumental co-operation Index of reconciliation

27. Results

28. Table 2. Summary of Moderated Multiple Regression Analyses (R2 =.49; F= 18.02) Reconciliation Betap Adolescents constructive communication styles within family.31.001 Parental non-constructive communication styles -.08n.s. Impact of violence.12.03. Cross-community contact.36.001 Cross-community projects.06n.s. Adolescents constructive communication styles x Impact of the violence.23.001 Adolescents constructive communication styles x Cross-community contact.19.001 Parental non-constructive communication styles x Impact of the violence -.15.003

29. Figure 4: Reconciliation as a function of adolescents constructive strategies in conflict management within family and impact of violence.

30. Figure 5: Reconciliation as a function adolescents constructive strategies in conflict management within family and inter-group contact.

31. Figure 5: Reconciliation as a function of parental non-constructive communicative styles and impact of violence.

32. Conclusions Constructive conflict resolution strategies within family more propensity toward reconciliation with the other community, even when the youth do not feel safe.

33. Thank you!