Collective regret versus collective guilt: Different emotional reactions to historical atrocities

Abstract

A distinction between guilt and regret in reactions to in‐group atrocities is proposed. Four studies (total N = 1249) support the notion that guilt and regret are distinct emotional reactions. Whereas guilt is a self‐focused, aversive emotional reaction following from appraisals of responsibility and associated with the intention to make amends, regret follows from an empathic victim perspective, is less aversive, and is more strongly associated with positive attitudes towards the victim groups and the intention to engage in intergroup contact. These findings suggest that less aversive emotions like regret are more likely to improve intergroup attitudes after a common history of conflict, but the aversive experience of guilt might be more potent in motivating reparations. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Shame on me? Shame on you! Emotional reactions to cinematic portrayals of the Holocaust

“…Past research revealed the emergence of group-based emotions such as shame, guilt or regret in various countries and referring to different cases of historical injustices Doosje, Branscombe, Spears, & Manstead, 1998;Gausel, Leach, Vignoles, & Brown, 2012;Imhoff et al, 2012). Referring to the Holocaust in particular, Peetz et Therefore, they were in the focus of the current research.…”

“…In contrast to former studies on group-based emotions in the context of the Holocaust that used artificial stimulus material or vignettes (Imhoff, Bilewicz, & Erb, 2012;Peetz, Gunn, & Wilson, 2010), this field study focuses on film material that was actually broadcasted and critically discussed in Germany. Starting from the critique of the influencing mechanisms of specific films and TV documentaries, the current study is carried out in two major steps.…”

“…Former research on group-based emotions in the context of the Holocaust mainly used artificial stimulus material or vignettes (Imhoff et al, 2012;Peetz et al, 2010; see also Doosje et al, 1998). In contrast, this study focused on the influences of real-life stimuli, TV-documentaries and films which were actually broadcasted and critically discussed in Germany.…”

“…Thus, they seek to Emotional Reactions to Holocaust Film Portrayals 370 avoid (subjective) fear of rejection and social isolation caused by attributions of negative characteristics (Lewis, 1971;MacDonald & Leary, 2005). They show avoidance or distancing from the involved protagonists and the threatening events themselves or other forms of defensiveness (Iyer et al, 2007;Lickel, Schmader, Curtis, Scarnier, & Ames, 2005) in order to cope with this self-threatening situation.Former research on group-based emotions in the context of the Holocaust mainly used artificial stimulus material or vignettes (Imhoff et al, 2012;Peetz et al, 2010; see also Doosje et al, 1998). In contrast, this study focused on the influences of real-life stimuli, TV-documentaries and films which were actually broadcasted and critically discussed in Germany.…”

Conflict Transformation and History Teaching: Social Psychological Theory and Its Contributions

“…Such teaching will enlarge the notion of historical literacy into a study of historical culture (Grever and Stuurman 2007) and historical consciousness (Rüsen 2004) in the classroom so that students become reflective of the role of collective memory and history teaching in processes of conflict transformation and understand the ways in which various forms of historical consciousness relate the past, present and future (Van Alphen and Carretero 2015;Psaltis 2016). This can be done through a better grasp of the way attributions of past wrongdoings (Doosje and Branscombe 2003) relate to processes of moral disengagement, apology, guilt, shame or regret (Imhoff et al 2012); how realistic and symbolic threats can become an obstacle for prejudice reduction, confidence building and reconciliation; and how intergroup contact can lead to reconciliation. This kind of history teaching is interdisciplinary in nature and can be called transformative history teaching to the extent that it facilitates both the cultivation of historical thinking and conflict transformation.…”