Attachment and glorification positively correlate as shared group identification.

Evidence

How do glorification and attachment relate to each other? The two modes of identification should be positively related because they both tap the common concept of identification with a group. Thus people who are strongly attached to their in-group should also tend to glorify it. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 39

Categorization

• XREF: Central to the reader’s Question 1 — whether attachment normally coexists with glorification or represents an alternative trajectory. — connects to: Shared identity generates expectations of support and trust among group members — John Drury, The role of social identity processes…, 16; National attachment and glorification are independent modes of identification. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 40; Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 90 (+2 more)

Related

• Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds (similarity 0.90)
• Attachment and glorification are distinct facets of national identification. (similarity 0.90)
• Glorification’s correlation to attachment suppresses attachment’s observable effects. (similarity 0.90)
• National attachment and glorification are independent modes of identification. (similarity 0.90)
• Attachment and glorification form two distinct latent factors (similarity 0.89)
• Attachment can be experimentally induced toward an ideal rather than actual group (similarity 0.88)
• Attachment to country is one component of national identification (similarity 0.88)
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. (similarity 0.87)
• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness (similarity 0.87)
• Attachment to the in-group and glorification predict opposite reactions to one’s group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.86)
• Glorification predicts defensive denial of the in-group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.86)
• Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt. (similarity 0.85)
• Glorification means national in-group superiority and deference to its symbols and rules. (similarity 0.85)
• Attachment only predicts in-group guilt once glorification is statistically removed. (similarity 0.85)
• National glorification but not attachment blocks critical evaluation of ingroup wrongdoing. (similarity 0.84)

Broader Connections

• Shared identity generates expectations of support and trust among group members #expands (0.72) — John Drury, The role of social identity processes…, 16