Type of ingroup association moderates whether collective guilt or shame is evoked

Evidence

It is likely that a variety of factors influence the appraisal process leading to feelings of guilt and shame, including individual differences in the extent to which a person is shame versus guilt prone (Tangney, 1995) and perhaps features of the victim or event. However, we have focused on how the nature of the association between the wrongdoer and others moderates the degree to which those other people feel shame or guilt for the wrongdoer’s actions. We propose that some types of ingroup associations might be more likely to evoke feelings of collective guilt, whereas other types of ingroup associations might be more likely to evoke feelings of collective shame. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 325

These results indicate that if one wants to predict the emotional response that people will have to the wrongdoings of their ingroup, it is essential that one consider how they interpret the event with respect to themselves. This consideration is particularly important because, as we discuss at the end of the chapter, shame and guilt might promote very different responses to intergroup events. Because these responses may affect the process by which intergroup conflicts unfold, it is important to understand the factors that evoke collective guilt rather than collective shame through the different appraisal processes just described. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 324

Categorization

• ADDENDUM: Directly relevant to the reader’s interest in what determines guilt vs. exoneration responses - mirrors the Roccas variable question at the appraisal level.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 325; Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 324
• XREF: connects to: Identification mode shapes whether ingroup versus outgroup criticism triggers collective guilt — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 721; Perceived justification of ingroup harm blocks collective guilt regardless of harm severity — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 156; Mere ingroup membership biases members to deny their group’s causal role in harm — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 298 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Strongest ingroup identifiers are least likely to feel collective guilt #qualifies (0.80) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 1170
• Ingroup identification can moderate or mediate how deprivation produces prejudice #exemplifies (0.80) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 464
• Highly identified group members minimize collective guilt by morally reinterpreting ingroup wrongs #expands (0.78) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2278
• Collective emotions like group anger and guilt arise from ingroup appraisals #qualifies (0.75) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2264