General in-group identification does not predict moral disengagement toward victims

Evidence

Contrary to our expectations, however, identification did not moderate the infra-humanization of victims. One possibility is that our measure of identification did not adequately distinguish between two different dimensions of identification, namely attachment and glorification (Roccas, Klar, & Liviatan, 2006). These two facets map into the distinction between patriotism and nationalism, (e.g., Kosterman & Feshbach, 1989; Staub, 1997). Although patriotism can be considered a healthy attachment to one’s nation, nationalism is an uncritical aggrandizing of the in-group at the expense of other groups, which are perceived as inferior, and as a consequence often discriminated against (see also Brewer, 1999). — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2113

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2113
• XREF: connects to: National identification crucially shapes perpetrators’ emotional responses to their group’s misdeeds. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 682; Perceived moral agency uniquely suppresses perceived victimhood, separable from general agency — Kurt Gray and Daniel M. Wegner, Moral Typecasting: Divergent…, 105; Group immersion and ideological training erode individual moral decision making in perpetrators. — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 136 (+1 more)