Two studies explored a theoretical distinction between "blind" and "constructive" patriotism. Blind patriotism is defined as an attachment to country characterized by unquestioning positive evaluation, staunch allegiance, and intolerance of criticism. Constructive patriotism is defined as an attachment to country characterized by support for questioning and criticism of current group practices that are intended to result in positive change. Items designed to investigate these dimensions of national attachment were administered to two groups of undergraduates in separate surveys. Measures of the two constructs derived from factor analysis of the responses proved to be reliable and valid. Blind patriotism was positively associated with political disengagement, nationalism, perceptions of foreign threat, perceived importance of symbolic behaviors, and selective exposure to pro-U.S. information. In contrast, constructive patriotism was positively associated with multiple indicators of political involvement, including political efficacy, interest, knowledge, and behavior. The implications of this distinction for theory and research on patriotism are discussed.

Research on altruism has focused on its positive roots, whereas research on the effects of victimization and suffering has focused on aggression and difficulties in functioning. However, anecdotal evidence, case studies, and some empirical research indicate that victimization and suffering can also lead people to care about and help others. This article examines the relation of "altruism born of suffering" to resilience and posttraumatic growth, and proposes potentially facilitating influences on altruism born of suffering during, after, and preceding victimization and trauma. These include experiences that promote healing, understanding what led harm doers to their actions, having received help and having helped oneself or others at the time of one's suffering, caring by others, and prosocial role models. We suggest psychological changes that may result from these influences and lead to altruistic action: strengthening of the self, a more positive orientation toward people, empathy and belief in one's personal responsibility for others' welfare. The article critically reviews relevant research, and suggests future research directions and interventions to promote altruism born of suffering. Given the amount of violence between individuals and groups, understanding how victims become caring rather than aggressive is important for promoting a more peaceful world.

This article explores psychological avenues to reconciliation between groups. It describes the psychological changes in survivors, perpetrators, and passive bystanders in the course of the evolution of increasing violence and points to healing from the psychological wounds created as an essential component of reconciliation. It also explores the role of understanding the roots of genocide, and of violence between groups in general, in contributing to healing, to the creation of a shared history in place of the usually contradictory histories held by groups that have been in violent conflict, and to reconciliation in general. The role of processes that have been emphasized in the literature on reconciliation, such as truth, justice, and contact between groups are discussed. Bottom up approaches focusing on the population and top down approaches involving leaders and the media, and the importance of changes in institutions and structures are discussed. The article exemplifies many of the issues and processes by a discussion of the genocide in Rwanda, and by the description of interventions, ranging from work with small groups, including leaders and the media, to radio programs that aimed to further reconciliation, as well as research evaluating an intervention.

This article describes a theory-based intervention in Rwanda to promote healing and reconciliation, and an experimental evaluation of its effects. The concept of reconciliation and conditions required for reconciliation after genocide or other intense intergroup violence are discussed, with a focus on healing. A training of facilitators who worked for local organizations that worked with groups of people in the community is described. The training consisted of psycho-educational lectures with extensive large group and small group discussion, as well as engagement by participants with their painful experiences during the genocide, with empathic support. The effects of the training were evaluated not on the participants, but on members of newly set up community groups they subsequently worked with. Two types of control groups were created: treatment controls, groups led by facilitators we did not

No abstract