Complexity under stress: Integrative approaches to overdetermined vulnerabilities

Over four decades of cognitive complexity research demonstrate that higher integrative complexity (measured by the ability to differentiate and integrate multiple dimensions or perspectives on an issue) predicts more lasting, peaceful solutions to conflict. Interventions that seek to raise integrative complexity offer a promising approach to preventing various forms of intergroup conflict (e.g. sectarianism, violent extremism). However, these contexts can also be extremely stressful, and dominant theory suggests that cognitive complexity diminishes in the face of high stress. However, we know that this is not always the case, with some findings demonstrating the opposite pattern: increases in complexity under high stress. How is it that some people in the midst of stressful conflict are able to recognize multiple perspectives and solutions, while others become increasingly narrow and rigid in their thinking? The aim of this paper is to integrate these divergent findings through the broader framework of the biopsychosocial model of stress and to explore possible underlying mechanisms such as affect. Implications for intervention will also be discussed

I See! Scotland: Tackling sectarianism and promoting community psychosocial health

We developed and tested through two studies a new intervention run as a course, I SEE! Scotland, to reduce and prevent Protestant-Catholic sectarianism in Scotland, a historic inter-group conflict expressed in forms ranging from polite to violent, within a wider population that includes those who feel untouched. Designed to reflect the social ecology of Scotland and engage individuals regardless of sectarian involvement, the intervention aimed to increase cognitive complexity, measured as integrative complexity, through participatory theatre and experiential methods. We hypothesised that the confluence of experiential learning to support multiple forms of self, other, and systems awareness with narrative framing would increase integrative complexity management capacities. Tested with a diverse sample of 104 participants (secondary school staff; achieving, disruptive or vulnerable students; young adults returning to education; other professionals; prisoners; recovering drug addicts; unemployed), study one pre-post comparisons showed significant integrative complexity gains that cohered with second end of intervention integrative complexity measures, replicating results from other integrative complexity interventions despite differences in samples, conflicts, and context. Study two with twenty-eight of the one hundred and four participants showed significant pre post increases in resilience. These results predict peaceful outcomes to intergroup conflict, tackling sectarianism and promoting community psychosocial health. We note future research plans