Gender groups validate the distinction between assigning and accepting collective guilt.

Evidence

In order to ensure that such group history differences were not specific to linguistic or racial group memberships, we employed gender as a high versus low status categorization in a final known-groups validation study. Canadian participants (N = 80) were asked to indicate first their gender group membership and then to complete the acceptance and assignment of collective guilt subscales. By first making salient participants’ own gender group membership, we expected that men and women would differentially respond to the collective guilt measures. As expected, women (M = 4.48) were reliably more likely to assign collective guilt compared to men (M = 3.25) when gender was salient. Although in the expected direction, with men (M = 4.77) more likely to accept collective guilt than women (M = 4.35), their acceptance scores did not significantly differ. Women did not differentially assign versus accept collective guilt, although men were 28 Nyla R. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 213

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Accepting collective responsibility makes both assigning and accepting guilt feasible. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 160; Collective guilt acceptance and assignment rest on different psychological conditions. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 92; Perpetrator and victim groups favor accepting versus assigning guilt — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 152

Broader Connections

• Collective guilt acceptance and assignment rest on different psychological conditions. #corroborates (0.88) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 92
• Perpetrator and victim groups favor accepting versus assigning guilt #expands (0.85) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 152