High outgroup prejudice outweighs weak belief in the invoked principle

Evidence

This clarifies our finding from Study 1 where support for religious freedom was uncorrelated with preference for digressive victimhood and supports our prediction that a strong belief in the digressive principle is not necessary for the endorsement of digres­ sive victimhood. — Felix Danbold, Ivuoma N. Onyeador, and Miguel M. Unzueta, Dominant groups support digressive…, 107

Categorization

• XREF: This refinoculates the reader’s vicarious-victimhood thesis: highly prejudiced individuals adopt the subordinate group’s own moral vocabulary (free speech) purely as hierarchy-maintenance cover. — connects to: People endorse digressive victimhood claims without believing the principle they invoke — Felix Danbold, Ivuoma N. Onyeador, and Miguel M. Unzueta, Dominant groups support digressive…, 69; Highly prejudiced individuals endorse free speech arguments they do not personally value — Felix Danbold, Ivuoma N. Onyeador, and Miguel M. Unzueta, Dominant groups support digressive…, 109; Outgroup prejudice predicts support for both competitive and digressive victimhood

Related

• Support for digressive victimhood claims tracks outgroup prejudice. (similarity 0.91)
• Prejudice alone can drive endorsement of freedom-based justifications for rejecting bias accusations (similarity 0.90)
• People endorse digressive victimhood claims without believing the principle they invoke (similarity 0.89)
• Outgroup prejudice predicts support for both competitive and digressive victimhood (similarity 0.89)
• Highly prejudiced individuals endorse free speech arguments they do not personally value (similarity 0.88)
• Dominant groups adopt victimhood claims even when they reject the principle the claim invokes. (similarity 0.88)
• Endorsement and perceived effectiveness of victimhood claims are mutually reinforcing (similarity 0.87)
• Dominant-group members endorse digressive victimhood claims more than competitive ones (similarity 0.86)
• Insincerity marks some dominant-group victimhood claims meant to forestall criticism. (similarity 0.84)
• Majority Christians endorse religious-freedom victimhood claims more than claims that Christians themselves are victims. (similarity 0.82)
• Digressive victimhood shifts debate to a different dimension of suffering rather than denying bias (similarity 0.81)
• Dominant groups prefer abstract rights claims as a strategic silencing tactic (similarity 0.81)
• Digressive victimhood claims confound topic-shifting with universal-rights framing and higher construal level (similarity 0.81)
• Non-dominant and dominant groups may prefer the same framing for different reasons (similarity 0.80)
• Digressive victimhood deflects discrimination accusations onto an unrelated topic (similarity 0.80)