Overcoming Apartheid: Can Truth Reconcile a Divided Nation?
Open accessAbstract
Throughout the world, truth commissions are being constructed under the hope that discovering the “truth” about a country's conflictual past will somehow contribute to “reconciliation.” Most such efforts point to South Africa's process as an exemplar of the powerful influence of truth finding. But has truth actually contributed to reconciliation in South Africa? No rigorous and systematic assessment of the truth and reconciliation process has ever been conducted. This article investigates the hypothesis that truth leads to reconciliation. Based on a survey of thirty-seven hundred South Africans in 2001, the author begins by giving both “truth” and “reconciliation” clear conceptual and operational meaning. The author reports empirical evidence that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's “truth” is fairly widely accepted by South Africans of all races, that some degree of reconciliation characterizes South Africa today, and that the collective memory produced by the process (“truth”) did indeed contribute to reconciliation. The author then considers whether other divided countries might be able to use a similar process to propel themselves toward a more peaceful and democratic future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Truth commissions abound in South America (Paraguay, Ecuador, Peru) and Africa (Kenya, South Africa, Liberia), and can also be found in Indonesia and East Germany.
“Truth commissions abound in South America (Paraguay, Ecuador, Peru) and Africa (Kenya, South Africa and Liberia); they can also be found in Indonesia and East Germany (United States Institute of Peace 2011a, 2011b, 2011c, 2011d, 2011e, 2011f, 2011h, 2011i; Gibson 2006).”
From Accountability by Numbers: A New Global Transitional Justice Dataset (1946–2016) (2020) · cites this paper as Gibson 2006
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation
Tyler, T. R. (2006) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190038 · Cited by 2,381 · see citing works
Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimating Beliefs
Levi, M., Sacks, A., & Tyler, T. (2009) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764209338797 · Cited by 729 · see citing works
State Repression and the Domestic Democratic Peace
Davenport, C. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511510021 · Cited by 549 · see citing works
Overcoming apartheid: can truth reconcile a divided nation?
Gibson *, J. L. (2004) · Politikon · doi:10.1080/0258934042000280698 · Cited by 244 · see citing works
Self-citationMillar, G. (2011) · Human Rights Review · doi:10.1007/s12142-011-0195-x · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Law and Politics in Transitional Justice
Vinjamuri, L., & Snyder, J. (2015) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-122013-110512 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Transitional justice in the world, 1970-2007: Insights from a new dataset
Olsen, T. D., Payne, L. A., & Reiter, A. G. (2010) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343310382205 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Armed conflict and post-conflict justice, 1946–2006
Binningsbø, H. M., Loyle, C. E., Gates, S., & Elster, J. (2012) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343312450886 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Loyle, C. E., & Appel, B. J. (2017) · International Studies Quarterly · doi:10.1093/isq/sqx045 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
The economic benefits of justice
Appel, B. J., & Loyle, C. E. (2012) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343312450044 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Accountability by Numbers: A New Global Transitional Justice Dataset (1946–2016)
Bates, G., Cinar, I., & Nalepa, M. (2020) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592719000756 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Reconciliation in a Transitional Justice Perspective
Skaar, E. (2013) · Transitional Justice Review · doi:10.5206/tjr.2012.1.1.4 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Mendeloff, D. (2012) · Journal of Human Rights · doi:10.1080/14754835.2012.675502 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Gibson, J. L.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gibson, James L.
- ORCID
- Gibson, James L.
- Venue
- The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-01
- Volume
- 603
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 82-110
- ISSN
- 0002-7162 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3349
- OpenAlex
- W2155405090
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 110.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- kb.osu.edu
- Locations
- The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (publishedVersion)
- The Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University) (submittedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › War, Law, and Justice
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Memory, violence, and history
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › South African History and Culture
- Keywords
- truth commissions, truth and reconciliation, reconciliation, South Africa, apartheid, collective memory, truth-finding, post-conflict societies, democratic transition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review