Peace psychology is a subfield of psychology that deals with psychological aspects of peace, conflict, violence, and war. It has four pillars: research, education, practice, and advocacy working towards sustainable peace using non-violent means. It emerged during the Cold War focused on preventing nuclear war, but now takes a more nuanced perspective on different types of violence and meanings of peace. It aims to apply psychological knowledge to promote peace, defined as the absence of destructive conflict and creation of positive social conditions. However, peace psychology faces challenges including perceptions that it is weak, relies too much on qualitative research, and has little to offer other fields like political science.

2. It is a subfield of Psychology and Peace Research that deals
with the psychological aspects of peace, conflict, violence,
and war.

3. Peace psychology can be characterized by four interconnected
pillars:
I. Research
II. Education
III. Practice
IV. advocacy.

4. o They are usually normatively bound in their means and
objectives by working towards the ideal of sustainable peace
using (as far as possible) non-violent means.
o The ideal of peace can also be conceptualized as the
comprehensive implementation of human rights (civil,
political, economic, social, and cultural rights);
o Ensure the satisfaction of basic human needs, such as positive
personal and social identity, sense of control, security, (social)
justice, well-being, a safe environment, and access to
adequate food and shelter.

5.  In the United States the Society for the Study of Peace,
Conflict, and Violence of the American Psychological
Association
 Psychologists for Social Responsibility, a nongovernmental
organization based in Washington, DC
 Australian Psychological Society has an Interest Group called
Psychologists for Peace.
 On the international level, there is the Committee for the
Psychological Study of Peace
 International Network of Psychologists for Social
Responsibility, which links organizations from (among other
countries) Germany, Finland, the United States, Australia, Costa
Rica, India, and Italy

6. Peace psychology emerged as a distinct area of research and
practice during the Cold War, when the preeminent concern was
the prevention of nuclear war.
In the post-Cold War period, peace psychologists have shifted
away from a narrow focus on the prevention of nuclear war and
have moved toward a more geo historically nuanced,
conceptually differentiated, and systemically integrated
perspective on violence and peace.

7. Three themes are emerging in post-Cold War peace psychology:
i. Greater sensitivity to Geo historical context
ii. A more differentiated perspective on the meanings and types
of violence and peace,
iii. A systems view of the nature of violence and peace

8.  To “increase and apply psychological knowledge in the
pursuit of peace including
I. Absence of destructive conflict
II. creation of positive social conditions which minimize
destructiveness and promote human well-being” (Society for
the Study of Peace, Conflict, and Violence, 2006, para. 3).

9.  Four Challenges for Peace Psychology
1. For some people, “peace” sounds soft, weak, native, idealistic,
and even dangerous and unpatriotic, particularly when the threat
of terrorism is a salient concern for Americans (Lott, 2006;
Unger, 2006).
2. its reliance on qualitative methods; hence, some might assume
that it cannot be methodologically rigorous (Leininger, 1994)
3. APA approved the establishment of Division 48: Peace
Psychology in 1991 (because peace psychology was officially
organized at the close of the Cold War), some observers might
mistakenly identify peace psychology as the study of nuclear
issues.
4. It has little to offer IR, a specialty in political science that is well
beyond the familiar moorings of mainstream psychology

10. William James (Deutsch, 1995), who, in a speech at Stanford
University in 1906, coined the phrase “the moral equivalent of
war” (James, 1910/1995, p. 22). James argued that war provides
human beings with opportunities to express their spiritual
inclinations toward self-sacrifice and personal honor;
consequently, to end war, societies must find alternative “moral
equivalents” for the expression of these profoundly important
human values (James, 1910/ 1995)

11.  Peace psychology does not fail to stress to what extent
political economies which accentuate social inequalities both
instigate and facilitate xenophobic sentiments and other forms
of intolerance.
 Peace psychology, on the contrary, does not aim at
pacification, but at transforming the interactions and
distinguishing features of the conflict into newer and more
authentic forms of relationship and conditions of life

12.  It is a recent acquisition in fieldwork, an up-to-date instrument
based on experience drawn from the study and practice of
community work.

13.  These training groups take place at regular intervals, in
a medium to short timescale agreed on with the
participants themselves.

14. Psychological knowledge may tackle the
issue of peace in two different ways:
I. By leaving intact its own theoretical
framework and adapting it to the
study of peace.
II. By calling in question the traditional
approaches and proposing a form of
differential psychological knowledge
to encourage the evolution of the
individual and of society in all its
expressions (thought, behaviour, relationships),
according to an integrated cross-disciplinary
perspective.

15. Type of relation proposed by the aggressor is reproduced in
thought and behavior in a counter-reactive and specular-
symmetrical manner.
The aggressor may be a fully aware person, an agent unaware (or
only slightly aware) of the damage being inflicted, or a social
system which acts indirectly to the detriment of people.
The type of relation inherent in this last mode of behavior is very
widespread in our culture, on account of being socially
accredited