Attachment items express love and commitment while glorification items assert superiority and leader deference

Evidence

Attachment I love Israel. Glorification Other nations can learn a lot from us. Attachment Being an Israeli is an important part of my identity. Glorification In today’s world, the only way to know what to do is to rely on the leaders of our nation. Attachment It is important to me to contribute to my nation. Glorification The IDF is the best army in the world. Attachment It is important to me to view myself as an Israeli. Glorification One of the important things that we have to teach children is to respect the leaders of our nation. Attachment I am strongly committed to my nation. Glorification Relative to other nations, we are a very moral nation. Attachment It is important to me that everyone will see me as an Israeli. Glorification It is disloyal for Israelis to criticize Israel. Attachment It is important for me to serve my country. Glorification Israel is better than other nations in all respects. Attachment When I talk about Israelis I usually say “we” rather than “they.” Glorification There is generally a good reason for every rule and regulation Note. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 221

Categorization

• DEFINE: Empirical item-level illustration of the attachment-versus-glorification construct gap the reader is exploring: attachment reads as love/belonging, glorification as superiority and deference to authority.
• XREF: When talking about in-groups I say ‘we’ rather than ‘they’ maps to minimal-group and self-categorization markers of identification. — connects to: Attachment and glorification form two distinct latent factors — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 58; 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; Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 44 (+1 more)
• SEED: The glorification item ‘It is disloyal for Israelis to criticize Israel’ is a live wire: the attachment scale’s own guilt-lead item would be the mirror critique. Useful raw contrast for an essay.

Related

• Attachment and glorification form two distinct latent factors (similarity 0.88)
• Attachment to the in-group and glorification predict opposite reactions to one’s group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.88)
• Glorification means national in-group superiority and deference to its symbols and rules. (similarity 0.85)
• Focusing on the ideal rather than actual image of a nation reduces glorification (similarity 0.85)
• Attachment can be experimentally induced toward an ideal rather than actual group (similarity 0.84)
• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups (similarity 0.84)
• Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds (similarity 0.84)
• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness (similarity 0.84)
• Glorification’s correlation to attachment suppresses attachment’s observable effects. (similarity 0.84)
• In-group glorification drives justification of wrongdoings while attachment drives guilt (similarity 0.83)
• Glorification predicts defensive denial of the in-group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.83)
• Attachment and glorification positively correlate as shared group identification. (similarity 0.83)
• Uncritical in-group glorification, not mere attachment, drives justification of wrongdoing (similarity 0.83)
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. (similarity 0.83)
• Attachment only predicts in-group guilt once glorification is statistically removed. (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness #expands (0.85) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 7
• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups #expands (0.85) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2115
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. #qualifies (0.75) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 44