Abstract
The focus of my commentary is two-fold. First, I discuss what appeared to me as the central theoretical focus of the article; the possibility to create a space, if at all, for integrating post-colonial theory into the broader research field of social and psychological studies of the consequences of colonial past. Second, I intend to show why, in my opinion, the methodological choices of the authors and the criteria adopted for corpus construction allowed for data that, although too thin to establishing the state of knowledge in the field of study on consequences of colonial past, is nevertheless very informative and thoughts-provoking. My conclusions suggest that this study is an innovative attempt at describing and grasping the results of a search guided by two among the more consolidated electronic datasets currently available for English-speaking scholars. However, this study may not easily understand which can be the space to integrate post-colonial theory in the field of research on consequences of colonial past. To better reach this aim, it is perhaps necessary to build another kind of corpus, open to other languages (starting from French) and focused also on other scientific products, as books or proceedings of congress. In addition, disciplinary boundaries have to be even more explored, starting from interdisciplinary studies on education and historical culture. In spite of these limitations, I am convinced that this innovative study by Tomicic and Berardi tackles issues of relevance to any serious effort towards reflecting on long-term consequences of colonial violence and opens up to valuable new research questions and methods, to be taken into serious account and further explored in future works.
References
Allpress, J. A., Barlow, F. K., Brown, R., & Louis, W. R. (2010). Atoning for colonial injustices: Group-based shame and guilt motivate support for reparation. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 4(1), 76–90. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/ijcv.59.
De Rosa, A. S. (1994). From theory to metatheory in social representations: the lines of argument of a theoretical-methodological debate. Social Science Information, 33(2), 273–304.
Kelman, H. C. (2008). Reconciliation from a social-psychological perspective. In A. Nadler, T. Malloy, & J. D. fisher (Eds.), Social psychology of intergroup reconciliation (pp. 15–32). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leach, C., Zeineddine, F., & Čehajić-Clancy, S. (2013). Moral immemorial: The rarity of self-criticism for previous generations’ genocide or mass violence. Journal of Social Issues, 69(1), 34–53.
Leone, G., & Curigliano, G. (2009). Coping with collective responsibilities an explorative study on Italian historical identity across three generations. Journal of Language and Politics, 8(2), 305–326.
Leone, G., d'Ambrosio, M., Migliorisi, S., & Sessa, I. (2018). Facing the unknown crimes of older generations: Emotional and cognitive reactions of young Italian students reading an historical text on the colonial invasion of Ethiopia. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 62, 55–67.
Lewin, K. (1943). Defining the ‘field at a given time. Psychological Review, 50(3), 292–310.
López, A. J., & Marzec, R. P. (2010). Postcolonial studies at the twenty-five year mark. MFS Modern Fiction Studies, 56(4), 677–688.
Mycock, A. (2017). After empire: The politics of history education in a post-colonial world. In M. Carretero, S. Berger, & M. Grever (Eds.), Palgrave handbook of research in historical culture and education (pp. 391–410). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Obradović, S. (2017). Whose memory and why: A commentary on the role of power and the construction of memory. Culture and Psychology, 23(2), 208–216.
Ortega y Gasset, J. (1930). La rebelión de las masas [The revolt of the masses]. Madrid.
Psaltis, C., Carretero, M. & Cehajic-Clancy A (Eds.) (2017). History education and conflict transformation: Dealing with the past and facing the future. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shepherd, L., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. (2013). ‘This will bring shame on our nation’: The role of anticipated group-based emotions on collective action. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(1), 42–57.
Shnabel, N., & Nadler, A. (2015). The role of agency and morality in reconciliation processes: The perspective of the needs-based model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), 477–483.
Tomicic, A., & Berardi, F. (2018). Between past and present: The Sociopsychological constructs of colonialism, Coloniality and Postcolonialism. Integrative Psychological Behavior, 52, 152–175.
Volpato, C., & Licata, L. (2010). Collective memories of colonial violence. Special issue of International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 4(1), 4–10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Author Giovanna Leone declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Studies
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leone, G. Is there a Space for Post-Colonial Theory in the Socio-Psychological Research on Consequences of Colonial Past?. Integr. psych. behav. 53, 14–23 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-018-9426-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-018-9426-x