Search

In the aftermath of intractable armed conflict, adolescents can play a critical role in the process of reconciliation and the construction of a culture of peace. The meanings they construct about these processes are a core aspect of their engagement (or lack thereof) in peace‐building initiatives. This study sought to document adolescents' perspectives on the Colombian armed conflict and the 2016 peace treaty, as well as their preferred resolutions to move forward after decades of harm and division. We interviewed 77 adolescents (39 girls, 38 boys) ranging from ages 14 to 19 years (M = 16.49, SD =.95) from two public schools in Bogotá, Colombia. We asked youth open‐ended questions about the history of the armed conflict, their position toward the peace accord, and their proposed optimal resolutions to address harms committed by the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia—Ejército del Pueblo (FARC). Using thematic analysis, we identified three overall themes in adolescents' responses: (1) cynicism toward peace and desires for retribution, (2) improving the lives of those they thought were most impacted, and (3) restoring relationships and ending cycles of violence. We discuss the implications of our findings for psychological scholarship, peace education, and politics of reconciliation in light of Colombia's current political and social climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated Colombian adolescents' evaluations and expectations about different solutions to seeking justice in the aftermath of group-based harms and how their judgments of solutions were associated with self-reported levels of trust. In individual interviews, 74 adolescents (Mage = 16.48 years; 36 girls, 38 boys) in Bogotá, Colombia, were presented with scenarios depicting two forms of group harm (involving damage to infrastructure and loss of life) based on events relevant to the Colombian armed conflict. For each scenario, adolescents rated the desirability and likelihood of five solutions (apologies, compensation by the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), compensation by the government, punishment, and a combination of compensation and punishment). Participants also completed a questionnaire assessing their general levels of trust. Compensation by the FARC and the government were more strongly endorsed in the context of damage to infrastructure, whereas punishment was endorsed more in response to loss of life. Youth also expected compensation by the FARC to be more likely to occur for damage to infrastructure, while they believed punishment was more likely for loss of life. Higher levels of trust were associated with support for restorative solutions, particularly in response to loss of life. Youths' open-ended justifications for their evaluations of different solutions to address the harms reflected varied concerns, including their perceptions of how to meet the needs of victims and communities, ensure accountability for the harms committed, and achieve revenge. Public Significance Statement: In this study, we examined how urban Colombian adolescents reasoned about different solutions to address harms committed within the context of an enduring armed conflict. Youths' responses varied based on the type of harm, such that punitive solutions were more favored for loss of life. Our findings also uncovered beliefs and concerns that guided youths' reasoning, such as their beliefs about the trustworthiness of individuals and their social environment, as well as their restorative and retributive concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This mixed‐methods study examined how adolescents understand and evaluate different ways to address intergroup harms in schools. In individual interviews, 77 adolescents (M age = 16.49 years; 39 girls, 38 boys) in Bogotá, Colombia, responded to hypothetical vignettes wherein a rival group at school engaged in a transgression against their group. Adolescents reported that students who were harmed should and would talk to school authorities, but also noted they would likely retaliate. In terms of teacher‐sanctioned responses to harm, youth endorsed compensation most strongly, followed by apologies, and rated suspension least positively. Youths' explanations for their endorsement of different disciplinary practices reflected varied concerns, including their perceptions of how justice is best achieved and how restoration could be attained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]