How does transitional justice affect trust in government? Political trust is central to peaceful conflict resolution, but less is known about the ability of different transitional justice efforts to build confidence in government after war. Using survey-experimental evidence from post-conflict Guatemala, I compare how three commonly deployed justice policies (trials, truth commissions, and reparations) and political rhetoric accompanying them affect citizen attitudes toward government. Exposure to information about a trial or reparations program, which convey costly signals, led to significantly higher levels of political trust and perceived political legitimacy, when compared to the truth commission treatment. Further, a moral rhetoric emphasizing the normative claims of war victims was significantly more effective than either an instrumental rhetoric emphasizing institutional benefits or the absence of justification, regardless of policy content. The micro-level evidence reveals how the trust-building functions of transitional justice are far from uniform, speaking to the pivotal role of political communication.

中文翻译：

---

从政治暴力到政治信任？过渡期司法如何影响公民对政府的看法

过渡时期司法如何影响对政府的信任？政治信任是和平解决冲突的核心，但人们对不同的过渡时期司法努力在战后建立对政府的信心的能力知之甚少。使用来自冲突后危地马拉的调查实验证据，我比较了三种常用的司法政策（审判、真相委员会和赔偿）以及伴随它们的政治言论如何影响公民对政府的态度。与真相委员会的待遇相比，接触有关审判或赔偿计划的信息会传达代价高昂的信号，从而导致政治信任和政治合法性的感知水平显着提高。更远，无论政策内容如何，​​强调战争受害者的规范要求的道德修辞比强调制度利益或缺乏正当理由的工具修辞要有效得多。微观层面的证据揭示了过渡时期司法的信任建立功能是如何远非统一的，这说明了政治沟通的关键作用。