In-group glorification reduces justice responses only when the in-group is the perpetrator.

Evidence

In our next round of studies, focusing on the ongoing war in Iraq (Leidner, Castano, Zaiser, & Giner-Sorolla, 2010), we thus used attachment and glorification, instead of our original, cruder measure of identification. In a first study, we presented our participants with an alleged newspaper article which discussed a case very similar to the Abu-Ghraib scandal, in which U.S. personnel (versus Iraqi themselves, in another experimental condition), were responsible for the torturing and eventual death of several Iraqi prisoners. … Two main findings emerged. First, the identity of the perpetrator (in-group vs. out-group) and the level of glorification interact in predicting support for justice. Although in-group glorification did not predict justice in the out-group-perpetrator condition, it did in the in-group-perpetrator condition; the higher the glorification, the lesser the justice offered. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 2116

Categorization

• SEED: An experimental design that varies perpetrator identity (in-group vs. out-group) to isolate when moral disengagement kicks in could anchor an article on how group loyalty distorts justice judgments.
• XREF: connects to: Group glorification suppresses demands for justice for ingroup violence — Bernhard Leidner et al., Ingroup Glorification, Moral…, 49; In-group glorification drives dehumanization and minimization which reduce justice support for own-side atrocities. — Emanuele Castano, On the Perils of Glorifying the…, 54; Glorification uniquely suppresses justice demands when the perpetrator is one’s own group — Bernhard Leidner et al., Ingroup Glorification, Moral…, 49 (+1 more)