Affective group attachment, not mere membership perception, drives non-linear responses to collective guilt

Evidence

Self-investment refers to feelings of a close psychological bond between the self and the group and the importance of the group to the self (three components fall along this dimension: in-group solidarity, in-group satisfaction, in-group centrality). In contrast, self-definition refers to perceptions of in-group similarity and prototypicality (two components: self-stereotyping, in-group homogeneity). We expect that self-investment (i.e. affective group attachment & group commitment; “hot” components of identification) but not self-definition (i.e. perceptions of mere group membership) should be associated non-linearly with collective guilt. — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 26

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the hot versus cold components of identification relative to group-level guilt.
• XREF: Directly extends Roccas et al.’s attachment/glorification distinction with the Leach multidimensional framework. — connects to: Identification relates to collective guilt along a nonlinear inverted-U curve. — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 15; In-group identification relates to collective guilt in a non-linear fashion. — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 25; Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 7 (+17 more)
• QUESTION: The hypothesized curvilinearity for self-investment but not self-definition is exactly the tipping-point candidate this research seeks — worth tracking how they operationalize the non-linearity.

Related

• Group identification can simultaneously raise and lower group-based guilt. (similarity 0.94)
• In-group identification relates to collective guilt in a non-linear fashion. (similarity 0.93)
• Identification relates to collective guilt along a nonlinear inverted-U curve. (similarity 0.93)
• High identification with a group suppresses collective guilt, not only enables it. (similarity 0.92)
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt (similarity 0.91)
• Framing attachment around ideals rather than current traits raises group-based guilt. (similarity 0.91)
• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness (similarity 0.90)
• Critical attachment produces guilt through refusing to exonerate the group (similarity 0.90)
• Attachment makes individuals vulnerable to guilt over in-group misdeeds. (similarity 0.90)
• Studies conflict on whether high identification predicts more or less guilt (similarity 0.90)
• Critical attachment primes stronger group-based guilt than conventional attachment. (similarity 0.90)
• Guilt requires self-categorizing as a group member (similarity 0.89)
• Group self-investment relates to collective guilt in an inverted-U curve. (similarity 0.89)
• Group-based guilt peaks at medium self-investment and drops at high levels (similarity 0.89)
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. (similarity 0.88)

Broader Connections

• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness #corroborates (0.85) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 7
• In-group glorification drives justification of wrongdoings while attachment drives guilt #corroborates (0.85) — Emanuele Castano, On the Perils of Glorifying the In-group, 49
• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups #corroborates (0.85) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2115
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt #qualifies (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 16
• Critical attachment primes stronger group-based guilt than conventional attachment. #exemplifies (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 113
• Emotional identification with a group, not mere membership, drives group-based fear and anger #corroborates (0.80) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2267
• Framing attachment around ideals rather than current traits raises group-based guilt. #expands (0.75) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 128
• Highly identified group members resist feeling collective guilt by reinterpreting events #qualifies (0.75) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2278
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. #expands (0.75) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 44
• Strongest ingroup identifiers are least likely to feel collective guilt #complicates (0.75) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 1170
• Highly identified group members minimize collective guilt by morally reinterpreting ingroup wrongs #qualifies (0.75) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2278
• Critical attachment produces guilt through refusing to exonerate the group #expands (0.75) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 91