In-group identification relates to collective guilt in a non-linear fashion.

Evidence

In three studies (Ntotal = 304), the present paper aims at adding new (and more robust) evidence to the assumption that the relationship between in-group identification and collective guilt might be non-linear. — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 25

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Group-based guilt peaks at medium self-investment and drops at high levels — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 7; Identification relates to collective guilt along a nonlinear inverted-U curve. — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 15; Group identification can simultaneously raise and lower group-based guilt. — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt: Modes…, 25 (+12 more)

Related

• Identification relates to collective guilt along a nonlinear inverted-U curve. (similarity 0.96)
• High identification with a group suppresses collective guilt, not only enables it. (similarity 0.95)
• Group identification can simultaneously raise and lower group-based guilt. (similarity 0.95)
• Affective group attachment, not mere membership perception, drives non-linear responses to collective guilt (similarity 0.93)
• Guilt grows monotonically harder to feel as identification strengthens (similarity 0.93)
• The identification-guilt relation is curvilinear and inverted U-shaped, not linear. (similarity 0.92)
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt (similarity 0.92)
• Strongly identified group members resist collective guilt more than weakly identified ones. (similarity 0.91)
• Group self-investment relates to collective guilt in an inverted-U curve. (similarity 0.91)
• Group-based guilt peaks at medium self-investment and drops at high levels (similarity 0.91)
• Studies conflict on whether high identification predicts more or less guilt (similarity 0.90)
• Strongest ingroup identifiers are least likely to feel collective guilt (similarity 0.90)
• Guilt requires self-categorizing as a group member (similarity 0.89)
• Highly identified group members minimize collective guilt by morally reinterpreting ingroup wrongs (similarity 0.89)
• Group self-investment predicts guilt up to a tipping point where further investment suppresses it (similarity 0.88)

Broader Connections

• Group identification can simultaneously raise and lower group-based guilt. #corroborates (0.95) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 25
• Group identification can both enable and block feelings of group-based guilt #corroborates (0.95) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 16
• High identification with a group suppresses collective guilt, not only enables it. #corroborates (0.90) — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 63
• Group self-investment relates to collective guilt in an inverted-U curve. #exemplifies (0.90) — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 52
• Strongest ingroup identifiers are least likely to feel collective guilt #qualifies (0.85) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 1170
• Highly identified group members minimize collective guilt by morally reinterpreting ingroup wrongs #expands (0.85) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2278
• Highly identified group members resist feeling collective guilt by reinterpreting events #expands (0.85) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2278
• Affective group attachment, not mere membership perception, drives non-linear responses to collective guilt #expands (0.80) — Torsten Masson and Markus Barth, The identification-guilt paradox…, 26
• Glorification predicts exonerating cognitions that blunt group-based guilt. #expands (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 48
• Studies conflict on whether high identification predicts more or less guilt #qualifies (0.80) — Sonia Roccas and Yechiel Klar and Ido Liviatan, The Paradox of Group-Based Guilt, 23