Essentialized ingroup memberships channel blameworthy acts into image threat and shame

Evidence

We use the term essentiality to refer to the degree to which a social association is perceived to reflect a deep and immutable aspect of identity thatisoftenusedbysocialperceiverstomakecausalinferencesaboutgroup members’ behavior. Examples of group memberships that perceivers are particularly likely to treat as highly essentialized include gender, ethnicity, nationality, and kinship (Gil-White, 2002; Haslam et al., 2000; Hirschfeld, 1995; Lickel et al., 2000). When people perceive that a member of one of these ingroups has engaged in a blameworthy act, they might be more inclined to consider how that act threatens the image of their group and of themselves. When we perceive our ethnic group as harming another ethnic group or when we see a member of our family engage in what we consider immoral behavior, the sense that we might be “cut from the same cloth” as these others prompts an interpretation of the event as threatening our image of ourselves. As we discussed earlier, these image-threat appraisals are particularly linked to collective shame. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 332

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Provides the working definition of essentiality and its named examples, tying it to the shame pathway.
  • XREF: connects to: Mere ingroup membership biases members to deny their group’s causal role in harm — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 298; Threat amplifies attribution biases that exonerate ingroups and damn outgroups — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 358; Perceived group tightness drives collective blame for members’ misdeeds — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 268 (+12 more)

Broader Connections