Increasing cognitive complexity and meta-awareness among at-risk youth in Bosnia-Herzegovina in order to reduce risk of extremism and interethnic tension.

Abstract

This investigation sought to expand the theoretical and practical knowledge of intervention approaches to reduce the risk of interethnic violence and extremism in fragile contexts by leveraging increases in cognitive complexity and resilience among at-risk young Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats (n = 121, ages 16-33) in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Low cognitive complexity, characterized by categorical thinking that does not recognize the validity of other viewpoints, is an important psychological predictor of violence in intergroup conflicts (Suedfeld et al., Looking back, looking forward: Perspectives on terrorism and responses to it, strategic multi-layer assessment, 2013). In collaboration with the International Organization of Migration (IOM), local experts, and community members, a multiday course was developed, piloted, and tested in ten ethnically representative towns and villages across BiH which aimed to enhance participants' cognitive complexity on contested social issues. To do this, the intervention used structured group activities and facilitator-led reflections to develop meta-awareness of thoughts and feelings when engaging with group dynamics. Pre-and posttesting over ten courses showed that, as hypothesized, cognitive complexity increased significantly by the end of the course (Cohen's d = .78, 95% CI [.53, 1.02]). Resilience and cognitive perspective-taking scores also increased significantly. Without a control group, causal inferences should be made cautiously and in concert with additional evidence. Follow-up monitoring deployed by the funding organization suggested continued benefits at 6 and 12 months after the course. Implications for broader prevention efforts are discussed. Public Significance StatementWe present evidence from an intervention designed to develop cognitive and emotional skills among at-risk youth with the aim of reducing the risk of extremism and violence arising from interethnic tensions. Results from this field study in Bosnia and Herzegovina suggest increases in complex thinking, empathy, and resilience. Policymakers may be interested in the potential of such interventions to promote peace-building abilities among youth in fragile postconflict contexts.

Addressing social polarization through critical thinking: Theoretical application in the “Living Well With Difference” course in secondary schools in England

“…Overall, results from 103 assessed courses designed to increase cognitive complexity each show significant IC gain, including courses run in secondary schools in Scotland, Finland and Pakistan (reviewed in Boyd-MacMillan et al, 2016;Nemr & Savage, 2019;Peracha, Savage, Khan, Ayub, & Zahr, forthcoming). This body of research, leveraging and measuring IC, has been delivered across 10 countries to address a range of extremisms (Islamist, right wing, left wing, sectarianism, national separatism, and inter-group conflicts), showing cross-cultural replication, with each course adapted to context, using a process similar to the A, B, C, D stages described above (Boyd-MacMillan et al, 2016;Liht & Savage, 2013;Nemr & Savage, 2019;Peracha et al, forthcoming;Savage & Andrews Fearon, 2021;Savage, Liht, & Khan, 2014). Of this, LWWD is the first critical thinking course designed to increase cognitive complexity to address social polarisations or extreme thinking of any kind in secondary schools in England.…”

“…Since then, all IC courses leveraging and measuring IC have been delivered using the full A, B, C, D process with consistently significant results cross-culturally mentioned above. Longitudinal evidence is accruing, showing maintained behaviour change observed at intervals from 6 months to 2 years as a result of delivering the full method (Savage & Andrews Fearon, 2021).…”

“…Each of the four cumulative sessions follows a four-stage A, B, C, D pattern (with A and B stages usually of equal duration to C and D stages) which developed through piloting the method over years in different contexts (Boyd-MacMillan, Andrews Fearon, Ptolomey, & Mathieson, 2016;Liht & Savage, 2013;Savage & Andrews Fearon, 2021). The A, B, C, D pattern is explained below in terms of how attention is shifted between Heart Thinking and Head Thinking through the type of stimuli per task, and later in the session to promote interaction between the two subsystems at higher levels of complexity.…”

What has Shakespeare got to do with it?

“…In line with the peace education theme of the Special Section , the main focus of these empirical studies is on youth. The first group of papers examine the potential for peace psychology, the vulnerabilities of youth to extremism, and the cognitive training that can reduce youth vulnerability to extremism (Harpviken, 2021; Savage & Fearon, 2021; Torres-Madronero et al, 2021). The second group of empirical reports provide a picture of the risk assessment undertaken by psychologists and the various risks confronted by youth, including biases in the media that depreciate their particular group (Ehsan et al, 2021; Haji et al, 2021; Reiter et al, 2021).…”