Culture of Peace: Sociostructural Dimensions, Cultural Values, and Emotional Climate

Abstract

This article examines how objective measures of sociostructural dimensions of a culture of peace are related to subjective national values, attitudes, and emotional climate. National scores on objective measures of four sociostructural dimensions were correlated with national means from a number of cultural value data sets and national indexes of emotional climate. Liberal Development was congruently associated with egalitarian, individualist values, a low negative emotional climate, and less willingness to fight in a new war. By contrast, Violent Inequality was associated with lower harmony values and less valuing of intellectual autonomy. State Use of Violent Means was strongly associated with low harmony values. Nurturance was associated with horizontal individualism, tolerance, cooperative values, and positive emotional climate. The conclusion discusses how the construction of a culture of peace must be based on values as well as objective sociocultural factors.A broad definition of peace requires the consideration of the construct as a system. Peace, however it is conceived, is a characteristic of a system, at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, intrasocial, or intraglobal level. It is a concept applied to a system and it is, therefore, necessarily impregnated with the traditions that in a given civilization are responsible for concept formation and system development (Galtung, 1985, p. 75).There is increasing agreement that a culture of peace must refer to the meeting of human needs and not simply the absence of war (Kimmel, 1985;Wagner, 1988;White, 1988). It must also be based on societal structures such as democracy,

Roots of tolerance among second-generation immigrants

“…Uncertainty avoidance is an indicator of a society's rejection of ambiguity, the extent to which people feel uncomfortable in unstructured situations. We think it relates negatively to tolerance, since this attitude refers to whether the uncertainty associated with people who are different is embraced or rejected (in line with correlational evidence by Basabe and Valencia, 2007).…”

Political Conservatism, Need for Cognitive Closure, and Intergroup Hostility

“…On the other hand, a liberal political outlook may be related to a cooperative conflict schema. As mentioned above, a liberal worldview is related to egalitarianism, support for civic rights and liberties, and rejection of war (Basabe & Valencia, 2007; McFarland & Mathews, 2005). However, it may also be likely that whereas political conservatism contains clear, general prescriptions for actions in intergroup conflicts, a liberal worldview is related to greater responsiveness to situational particularities and a lesser tendency to rely on “ready‐made” solutions to all conflict situations.…”

“…They are also less likely to choose one-sided and hostile intergroup actions. Previous studies show that people who endorse a liberal worldview tend to be more egalitarian, less punitive, and less willing to fight a war than people who identify with a conservative worldview (Basabe & Valencia, 2007). Thus, a chronically accessible conservative worldview that provides clear cues for aggressive behavior in intergroup conflicts is likely to strengthen the relationship between high need for closure and aggressiveness.…”

Age-Related Differences in Lay Conceptions of Well-Being and Experienced Well-Being

“…The increased emphasis on self-development as indicative of well-being among younger adults is likely due to several factors related to the sociostructural climate (i.e., social expectations concerning appropriate behavior and supporting institutions). Research has shown that sociostructural climate influences a number of aspects of psychosocial functioning, including personally-held values, attitudes, and beliefs (Basabe and Valencia 2007;Berenguer et al 2005;Ryff 1987). The social structure of many Western cultures provides many opportunities for self-development at younger ages (e.g., compulsory education, job training) but fewer opportunities at later points in the lifespan (Baltes 1997).…”