Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt.

Evidence

In our study we focus on exonerating cognitions that minimize the perceived severity of moral violations committed by the ingroup. Past research indicates that using this legitimization strategy can decrease group-based guilt (Branscombe & Miron, 2004). How should glorification and attachment to the group be related to the use of exonerating cognitions? The relations between glorification and the use of such defensive cognitions seem rather straightforward. High glorifiers are likely to reject any negative interpretation of their in-group’s past deeds. Thus, glorification of the national group should be positively related to the use of exonerating cognitions. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 48

Categorization

• XREF: Central to the reader’s foundation: glorification’s defensiveness is hypothesized to operate through exonerating cognitions that minimize in-group moral violations, versus attachment which allows guilt. — connects to: In-group identification relates to collective guilt in a non-linear fashion. — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 25; 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; 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 (+15 more)

Related

• Glorification predicts defensive denial of the in-group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.95)
• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness (similarity 0.95)
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group 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 0.93)
• Glorification enables moral disengagement while attachment resists in-group wrongdoing justification. (similarity 0.92)
• Glorification’s correlation to attachment suppresses attachment’s observable effects. (similarity 0.91)
• Critical attachment produces guilt through refusing to exonerate the group (similarity 0.91)
• Group identification can simultaneously raise and lower group-based guilt. (similarity 0.90)
• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups (similarity 0.90)
• Attachment makes individuals vulnerable to guilt over in-group misdeeds. (similarity 0.90)
• Framing attachment around ideals rather than current traits raises group-based guilt. (similarity 0.89)
• Attachment only predicts in-group guilt once glorification is statistically removed. (similarity 0.89)
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt (similarity 0.89)
• Glorification means national in-group superiority and deference to its symbols and rules. (similarity 0.88)

Broader Connections

• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups #corroborates (0.95) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2115
• In-group glorification drives justification of wrongdoings while attachment drives guilt #corroborates (0.92) — Emanuele Castano, On the Perils of Glorifying the In-group, 49
• Glorification enables moral disengagement while attachment resists in-group wrongdoing justification. #expands (0.90) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 138
• Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds #epitomizes (0.85) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 90
• Highly identified group members minimize collective guilt by morally reinterpreting ingroup wrongs #corroborates (0.82) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2278
• Framing attachment around ideals rather than current traits raises group-based guilt. #contradicts (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 128
• Guilt is presumed to motivate people to control their prejudiced responses #complicates (0.75) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2108