04/19/23 1

Teaching for Peace and Sustainability

Sherri McCarthy, Ph.D Kathie Malley-Morrisson, Ph.DJohn Davis, Ph.DEros DeSouza, PhDS. D. Shantinath, PhD

Presentation Overview

As we present data gathered as part of the GIPGAP project, we will each discuss how we used this project to develop psychological literacy as we teach for peace, sustainability and global health. First, Kathie and I will provide an overview of the project. Then, John Davis will address data from US, Canada and Australia and Eros de Sousa will discuss South American data as they explain how the project has been integrated into their teaching. I will address data from Asia and give examples of how it was included my courses. Finally, S.D. Shantinath will offer other ideas and projects that can be used to teach psychology for peace and sustainability.

04/19/23 3

Background of Project-Group on International Perspectives on Government Aggression and Peace (GIPGAP) Initial research centered on youth &

family violence; this was extended to state/governmental violence. Research was student generated and led, and has been on-going for almost a decade.

GIPGAP is led by Kathleen Malley-Morrison, Ph.D. at Boston University, with us today via Skype.

Websites with updates and relevant info: http://engagingpeace.com

http://people.bu.edu/gipgap

6 volumes -a powerful framework for peace-building in the context of teaching psychological literacy

Survey distributed in more than 42 countries

Data analyzed first by country, then by region—both qualitative and quantitative components to analysis. Based in grounded theory/naturalistic exploration.

04/19/23 5

Research Instrument: PAIRTAPS Personal and Institutional Rights to Aggression and Peace Survey Sample Items

Part A. Rights Questions Rate each item below on a scale of 1 to 7 to indicate the extent to which you agree with it.

Put your rating on the line in front of each item, and then explain your rating below the item. Please provide as much detail as possible concerning the reasoning behind your judgment that sometimes individuals or governments do (or do not) have the right to carry out the behavior specified in the item.

1= total disagreement 4=neither agree nor disagree 2=fairly strong disagreement 5=mild agreement 3=mild disagreement 6=fairly strong agreement 7=total agreement

__1. Sometimes the police or military have the right to use violence against their own citizens.

Explanation of rating:

__2. Sometimes a government has the right to execute one of its citizens. Explanation of rating:

__3. Sometimes one country has the right to invade another country. Explanation of rating:

PAIRTAPS Part B Part B. Governmental Beliefs Survey Rate each item below on a scale of 1 to 7 to indicate the

extent to which you agree with it. Put your rating on the line in front of each item, and then explain your rating below the item. Please provide as much detail as possible concerning the reasoning behind your rating for each judgment.

1= total disagreement 4=neither agree nor disagree 2=fairly strong disagreement 5=mild agreement 3= mild disagreement 6=fairly strong agreement 7=total agreement 1. It is unpatriotic to disagree with your government on the

decisions it makes. Explanation of rating: 2. It is important to support the government in time of war. Explanation of rating:

PAIRTAPS Part C Part C. Emotional Responses Survey  Instructions: Assume that you have very direct and dramatic exposure to

each of the situations below—that is, either you witness them directly or you see them happening live on a TV show or documentary that exposes you to the event in the most immediate and dramatic way. Please indicate first how you would feel in the situation and then what you would want to do.

   Another country is indiscriminately bombing a major city in your country,

and women, children, the elderly, and civilian men are running around bloody and screaming.

What you would feel? What you would want to do?

Military officials are torturing somebody suspected of having information

about terrorists. What you would feel? What you would want to do?  

PAIRTAPS Part D Part D. Definitions

Please provide your personal definition and understanding of each of the following terms:

1. War2. Torture

3. Terrorism 4. Reconciliation 5. Peace 6. Rights

PAIRTAPS E Part E. Views on Peace and Security Rate each item below on a scale of 1

to 7 to indicate the extent to which you agree with it. Put your rating on the line in front of each item, and then explain your rating below the item. Please provide as much detail as possible concerning the reasoning behind your rating for each judgment.

1= total disagreement 4=neither agree nor disagree 2=fairly strong disagreement 5=mild agreement 3=mild disagreement 6=fairly strong agreement 7=total agreement

1. I believe that world peace can be achieved. Explanation of rating: The best way to achieve world peace is:

2. National security is essential for individual and family security. Explanation of rating: The best way to achieve security for individuals and families throughout the

world is:

PAIRTAPS Part F DIRECTIONS: Please answer each question as accurately as

possible by circling the correct answer or filling in the space provided.

1. What is your ethnic background? 2. What is the gender of your preferred partner? 3a. What country were you born in? 3b. Where do you live now?

How long have you lived there? 4a. What country was your mother born in? 4b. What country does

your mother live in now? 5a. What country was your father born in? 5b. What country does

your father live in now? 6. What was/is your religion? Please specify both major religious

grouping (e.g., Catholic, Muslim, etc.) and denomination or sect (e.g., Sunni Muslim): religion in childhood: denomination in childhood: religion now: denomination now:

7. Please choose one of the following that best describes your social class. Lower Working Middle Upper middle Upper

PAIRTAPS Part F (con.) 8a. What is the highest level of education you have completed? 8b. Are you currently a student? Major: 9. Describe your employment status: 10. What is your marital status? 11. With which political party in your country do you identify most? 12a. Have you ever been in the military service? 12b. If yes: which service? How long? Are you in now? Draft or

volunteer? Have you seen combat? 13a. Has any member of your family ever been in the military

service? 13b. If so, please specify the relationship of the family members, the

service to which he/she belonged/belongs, length of time in service, draft or volunteer, and whether or not he/she/they saw combat:

14. Have you ever participated in any conflict resolution or peace education programs in a school or community setting? If yes, please indicate when and where and describe:

15. Have you ever been involved in any sort of protest against war and in favor of peace? If yes, explain.

We will each give examples of how we used GIPGAP in teaching for peace

First, some more background from Kathie!

Teaching examples based on Asian dataFOR UNDERGRADUATE AND

GRADUATE PSYCHOLOGY COURSES IN THE U.S.

STUDENT-CREATED PRESENTATIONS FOLLOW

Positive and Negative Definitions of Peace in Asian Countries

Country Positive Negative Ideal Malaysia 47% 43% 3% Indonesia 57% 25% 6% China 51% 41% 13% Japan 59% 24% 10% Korea 67% 29% 2% Afghanistan 80% * * Pakistan 59% 30% 10% Laos 50% * * Australia 38% 51% 5%*=no information provided by chapter authors/researchers.

Do We Have a Right to Peace?

Country Yes No Other Malaysia 88% 1% 11% Indonesia 100% China 68% 8% 24% Japan 71% 7% 22% Korea 86% 2% 12% Afghanistan 100% Pakistan 87% 0% 13% Laos 100% India 79% 4% 17% Philippines 89% 2% 9% Australia 75% 25% 0%

Does a Country Have the Right to Invade Another Country?

Country Yes No Other Malaysia 15% 80% 5% Indonesia 17% 72% 11% China 68% 27% 5% Japan 40% 41% 19% Korea 16% 72% 9% Afghanistan 33% 26% 41% Pakistan 47% 50% 3% Laos 27% 45% 29% India 33% 60% 7% Philippines 24% 69% 7% Australia 65% 25% 10%

Do Citizens Have the Right to Protest War?

Country Yes No Other Malaysia 70% 15% 14% Indonesia 75% 25% 0% China 95% 0% 5% Japan 91% 1% 8% Korea 90% 1% 9% Afghanistan 90% 5% 5% Pakistan 87% 0% 13% Laos 100% 0% 0% India 92% 1% 7% Philippines 88% 6% 6% Australia 100% 0% 0%

Do Governments Have the Right to Kill Civilians to Fight Terrorism?

Country Yes No Other Malaysia 10% 80% 10% Indonesia 15% 85% 0% China 30% 70% 0% Japan 12% 78% 10% Korea 14% 80% 6% Afghanistan 30% 70% 0% Pakistan 6% 94% 0% Laos 0% 100% 0% India 8% 78% 14% Philippines 6% 85% 9% Australia 16% 75% 9%

Do Governments Have the Right to Torture Prisoners of War?

Country Yes No Other Malaysia 10% 77% 12% Indonesia 33% 58% 9% China 26% 63% 11% Japan 17% 72% 11% Korea 32% 49% 19% Afghanistan 29% 71% 0% Pakistan 46% 44% 10% Laos 27% 43% 30% Philippines 9% 41% 50% Australia 30% 59% 11%

Is National Security Essential for Family and Individual Security?

Country Yes No Other Malaysia 73% 2% 25% Indonesia 90% 10% China 88% 3% 9% Japan 74% 10% 16% Laos 80% 20% Philippines 70% 6% 24% Australia 66% 17% 17%

Is World Peace Possible?Country YES NO Malaysia 60% 18% Indonesia 69% 23% China 54% 30% Japan 59% 33% Korea 64% 36% Afghanistan 43% 57% Pakistan 26% 50% Philippines 100% Australia 52% 46%

Discussing the data: Offers interesting comparisons and provides

information for students to generate informed theories and conclusions regarding role of socialization and experiences in attitude formation.

Can be used in research methods, statistics, developmental, cross-cultural and social psychology courses—just to name a few!

Offers an avenue to engage many graduate students in cross-cultural research, presentations and publications.

Introduces Bandura’s moral engagement/ disengagement theories in context of qualitative analysis.

Useful for student presentations connecting current issues to study of psychology.

Student-generated example from an undergraduate human development class discussing role of gender stereotypes and socialization in personality development and from a graduate student research project follow:

Right to Invade YES NO South/Southeast Asia 23% 77% East Asia 32% 68% Russia and Balkans 34% 66% Latin America 24% 75% UK/Anglo countries 62% 38% Western Europe 51% 49% Middle East 38% 62% Africa 21% 78%04/19/23 24

Summary

Support for a state’s right to invade other countries varied by region. National experiences appeared to play an important role. Strongest endorsement of invasion came from respondents living in nations that have participated in NATO and other multilateral military actions. Moderate support was seen in the Middle East, the Russia and the Balkan states, and in East Asia. Lower degrees of support were found in Latin America, Africa, and South and Southeast Asia. Gulf States residents were highly unlikely to support invasion of another country. Interestingly, helping people threatened by their own government was the most commonly cited justification for invasion in the regions with the highest level of support for invasion (UK/Anglo and Western Europe) as well as in those with the lowest level of support. Among regions showing an intermediate level of support for a right to invasion, self-defense was the most frequently cited justification. For both self-defense and defense of others, the assertion that an invasion may be used as a last resort to prevent deaths in another country or in one’s own was used. Justification of invasion as an act of revenge was less common. It was notable that women were less likely to support invasion than men in the regions with the greatest overall levels of support (UK/Anglo and Western Europe) and in the Russian and Balkan states, but not in other regions. How does gender socialization differ and does it account for this?

04/19/23 25

04/19/23 26

Which other cultural factors influencing socialization might be important?

History of experiencing war, slavery and oppression in one’s home country

Philosophical/ religious orientation Tolerance for diversity Political system/government

(dictatorship, democracy, oligarchy, monarchy, etc..)

Can research such as this influence policy and action?

An APA-award winning student poster from one of my graduate students in 2012 based on the data follows.

For more information on the data presented here:K. Malley-Morrison (2009) State violence and the right to

peace: The views of ordinary people. Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4. Santa Barbara, CA, USA: Praeger Security International/ABC-Clio. EISBN: 978-0-275-99648-2

K. Malley-Morrison, Hines, D. & McCarthy, S. (2012). International handbook of war, torture and terrorism. New York: Springer; Peace Psychology Book Series DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-1638-8_29

K. Malley-Morrison, et al (In press) International handbook of peace and reconciliation. New York: Springer; Peace Psychology Book Series.

04/19/23 28

04/19/23 29

Thank you for listening!

KEEP TEACHING PSYCHOLOGICAL LITERACY FOR PEACE AND SUSTAINABILITY! FIND RESEARCH PROJECTS IN TUNE WITH YOUR OWN STUDENTS’ INTERESTS. OUR FINAL PANELIST HAS SEVERAL IDEAS AND PROJECTS TO GET YOU STARTED!