Group source credibility determines whether high identifiers accept versus dismiss negative ingroup history.

Evidence

Doosje et al., (2003, Study 1) investigated the effects of source of information and national identification on collective guilt acceptance. They argued that high identifiers may question the authority of a non-involved outgroup, and that this may lead to lower levels of guilt. In contrast, when the same unfavorable information stems from an ingroup member, this may not be so easily dismissed and may therefore have more impact. For example, Hornsey, Oppes, and Svensson (2002) have shown that people were more likely to perceive negative feedback as constructive when they thought it was from an ingroup member, but as destructive when it came from an outgroup member. Thus, negative information about the ingroup may be perceived as more credible and acceptable when it comes from an ingroup member. As a result, feelings of collective guilt may be greater in the ingroup source condition than the outgroup source condition. However, all group members do not identify equally with their group; differences in identification should be especially related to feelings of collective guilt when the ingroup is the source of information. Specifically, when ingroup identification is high, people may be influenced by the information most when it comes from an ingroup source. This could result in relatively high levels of collective guilt among high identifiers. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 704

Categorization

• QUESTION: This finding — that ingroup-sourced criticism can paradoxically raise guilt among high identifiers — interestingly seems to complicate a simple glorifier/attacher split; worth chasing how Roccas’s distinction resolves it.
• XREF: connects to: Strong group identification distorts even objective perception of ingroup wrongdoing — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 699; Ingroup identification reduces collective guilt only when group history is ambiguous. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 201; Group members’ responses to threats to group image depend on how strongly they identify — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 1052 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Ingroup identification reduces collective guilt only when group history is ambiguous. #qualifies (0.82) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 201
• Group members’ responses to threats to group image depend on how strongly they identify #expands (0.78) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 1052
• Identification mode shapes whether ingroup versus outgroup criticism triggers collective guilt #qualifies (0.75) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 721