Glorification predicts defensive denial of the in-group’s moral violations.

Evidence

We suggest that distinguishing between the two modes of national identification may be the first step in resolving the paradox of identification and group-based guilt. Glorification of the national group involves the motivation to view the group in the best possible light. Inherent to this mode of identification is justification of the group’s acts and denial of any criticism toward the group (e.g. Staub, 1997). Thus, high glorifiers are likely to reject information that implies that the in-group has been involved in moral violations. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 42

Categorization

• SEED: Directly bears on reader’s question about mechanisms linking identification to glorification-driven defensiveness.
• XREF: connects to: Attachment to the in-group and glorification predict opposite reactions to one’s group’s moral violations. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 2; Glorification means national in-group superiority and deference to its symbols and rules. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 35; Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 48 (+10 more)

Related

• Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt. (similarity 0.95)
• Attachment to the in-group and glorification predict opposite reactions to one’s group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.94)
• Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds (similarity 0.94)
• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness (similarity 0.93)
• Glorification means national in-group superiority and deference to its symbols and rules. (similarity 0.92)
• Glorification enables moral disengagement while attachment resists in-group wrongdoing justification. (similarity 0.91)
• Perceived in-group moral violations trigger defensive cognitive distortions. (similarity 0.90)
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. (similarity 0.90)
• Glorification’s correlation to attachment suppresses attachment’s observable effects. (similarity 0.90)
• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups (similarity 0.89)
• In-group glorification drives justification of wrongdoings while attachment drives guilt (similarity 0.89)
• Group identification can simultaneously raise and lower group-based guilt. (similarity 0.88)
• Ingroup glorification, not attachment, triggers moral disengagement and reduced justice demands. (similarity 0.88)
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt (similarity 0.88)
• Attachment and glorification form two distinct latent factors (similarity 0.87)

Broader Connections

• Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt. #expands (0.90) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 48
• 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
• 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 drives justification of wrongdoings while attachment drives guilt #expands (0.85) — Emanuele Castano, On the Perils of Glorifying the In-group, 49
• Glorification enables moral disengagement while attachment resists in-group wrongdoing justification. #expands (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 138
• Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds #expands (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 90
• Threat to in-group moral image triggers defensive reinterpretation of atrocity reports. #expands (0.75) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2136
• Highly identified group members minimize collective guilt by morally reinterpreting ingroup wrongs #expands (0.75) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2278