In-group glorification drives justification of wrongdoings while attachment drives guilt

Evidence

In the political science and social psychological literature, a distinction between nationalism and patriotism has long been discussed (e.g., Kosterman & Feshbach, 1989; see also Brewer, 1999; Staub, 1997). While patriotism is generally considered a healthy attachment to one’s nation, nationalism is characterized by an uncritical aggrandizing of the in-group at the expense of other groups, which are thus considered inferior. In the words of George Orwell (1945): ‘A nationalist is one who thinks solely, or mainly, in terms of competitive prestige.’ Recently Sonia Roccas and her colleagues have refined this distinction into a more broadly applicable scale that distinguishes between in-group attachment (akin to patriotism) and in-group glorification (akin to nationalism) (Roccas, Klar, & Liviatan, 2006). These measures were first used in a study conducted around the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and showed that, among Israelis, in-group attachment was negatively related to justificatory processes for Israeli mistreatments of Palestinians and positively to self-reported guilt. In spite of being correlated with attachment, in-group glorification showed the opposite relationship to both of these variables. The more in-group glorification, the more justification of the wrongdoings, and the less guilt. — Emanuele Castano, On the Perils of Glorifying the In-group, 49

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the core conceptual distinction driving the whole paper: attachment/patriotism vs. glorification/nationalism, operationalized by Roccas et al. into a measurable scale.
• XREF: This is precisely the threshold variable the reader is cross-checking — Castano’s review and Leidner et al. both hinge on attachment-vs-glorification predicting moral disengagement outcomes. — connects to: Affective group attachment, not mere membership perception, drives non-linear responses to collective guilt — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 26; 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 (+14 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Emanuele Castano, On the Perils of Glorifying the…, 49

Related

• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups (similarity 0.95)
• Attachment to the in-group and glorification predict opposite reactions to one’s group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.92)
• Glorification enables moral disengagement while attachment resists in-group wrongdoing justification. (similarity 0.90)
• Uncritical in-group glorification, not mere attachment, drives justification of wrongdoing (similarity 0.90)
• Glorification and attachment separately predict reactions to national misdeeds (similarity 0.89)
• Attachment to the in-group predicts guilt while glorification predicts defensiveness (similarity 0.89)
• Glorification predicts defensive denial of the in-group’s moral violations. (similarity 0.89)
• Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt. (similarity 0.88)
• Controlling for glorification reveals attachment’s true link to group guilt. (similarity 0.88)
• Attachment and glorification form two distinct latent factors (similarity 0.86)
• Glorification means national in-group superiority and deference to its symbols and rules. (similarity 0.86)
• Glorification’s correlation to attachment suppresses attachment’s observable effects. (similarity 0.85)
• National glorification but not attachment blocks critical evaluation of ingroup wrongdoing. (similarity 0.85)
• Attachment makes individuals vulnerable to guilt over in-group misdeeds. (similarity 0.84)
• Attachment only predicts in-group guilt once glorification is statistically removed. (similarity 0.84)