High ingroup identifiers recall disproportionately more victimization than perpetration by their group.

Evidence

All members of an ingroup do not necessarily react to memories of collective victimisation in the same manner. In a study, the recall of violent incidents showed that those high on ingroup identity recalled more incidents of violence and hate relative to low identity members in which their group was a victim than incidents in which their group was a victimiser (Sahdra & Ross, 2007). Ingroup identity is a factor which makes members of a group to respond on behalf of others in their group, although they had not been personally harmed (Lickel, Miller, Stenstrom, Denson, & Schmader, 2006). — R. C. Tripathi, R. Kumar, and V. N. Tripathi, When the Advantaged Feel Victimised, 23

Categorization

• QUESTION: This selectively-asymmetric recall asymmetry is central evidence that victimhood claims may be memory distortion, not just rhetoric — worth chasing the Sahdra & Ross 2007 design.
• XREF: connects to: People are more likely to be victimized by those like them than by strangers — bell hooks, Teaching to Transgress: Education as…, 69; Strong group identification distorts even objective perception of ingroup wrongdoing — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 699; A majority, advantaged group reports feeling more victimised than the minority it once victimised. — R. C. Tripathi, R. Kumar, and V. N. Tripathi, When the Advantaged Feel Victimised:…, 52

Broader Connections

• Strong group identification distorts even objective perception of ingroup wrongdoing #expands (0.85) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 699
• A majority, advantaged group reports feeling more victimised than the minority it once victimised. #exemplifies (0.85) — R. C. Tripathi, R. Kumar, and V. N. Tripathi, When the Advantaged Feel Victimised, 52