Minority‐ versus Majority‐Status Group Intentions to Transgress the Law When Oppression Is Perceived 

Abstract

The materials for the studies, including data file and analytic methods, reported in this article are openly available at https://osf.io/krng4/. The hypotheses and analyses were not preregistered. For all the studies, we have reported all measures, proceedings, conditions, and sample size calculation.

Outgroup exclusion, identity, and collective action in the Brexit context

“…Highly fused individuals have been shown to be more likely to participate in extreme group actions, such as fighting or dying for one's ingroup, compared to individuals who simply show high identification (Gómez, Brooks, et al, 2011; Swann et al, 2009). In line with this, identity fusion has been shown to be a predictor in collective action and even radical tendencies for those who perceive oppression towards their ingroup (Besta et al, 2018; Lobato et al, 2020). Based on identity fusion being a driver in collective action in the presence of oppression against one's ingroup, identity fusion is an important factor when considering political engagement in a social exclusion context.…”

The significance quest theory and the 3N model: A systematic review.

“…However, research demonstrating a higher degree of significance loss among non-Muslims (vs. Muslims) questions such a relationship (Moyano et al, 2022, Study 1). Likewise, for narrative, the positive association is also observed either directly (Bélanger, Moyano, et al, 2019, Study 3; Lyons-Padilla et al, 2015; van Prooijen & Kuijper, 2020; Webber et al, 2018, Studies 2–3) or indirectly through network (Bäck et al, 2018; Lobato et al, 2020; Moyano et al, 2022, Study 2). However, in other studies, such a relationship is absent (Kruglanski et al, 2016; Troian et al, 2019, Study 1; Webber et al, 2018, Studies 1 and 4).…”

“…Actual significance loss was measured in 35 studies. In 19 of these, different negative experiences were used as proxy measures for significance loss: (a) political alienation (Jasko et al, 2019, Studies 1–2), (b) social alienation (Bélanger, Moyano, et al, 2019, Studies 1, 2a–2b; Lobato et al, 2022, Studies 1–2), (c) economic/relationship failures and traumatic experiences (Jasko et al, 2017), (d) prison conditions (Kruglanski et al, 2016), (e) perceived oppression (Lobato et al, 2018, Studies 1–2; Lobato et al, 2020), (f) perception of intergroup conflict and social exclusion (Lobato et al, 2020), (g) personal failure in achieving goals (Orehek & Kruglanski, 2018, Studies 1–2), (h) relative deprivation (Moyano et al, 2022, Studies 1–2; van Prooijen & Kuijper, 2020), and (i) perceived discrimination (Troian et al, 2019, Study 1). Five experimental studies manipulating network operationalized significance loss as death anxiety (Orehek et al, 2014, Studies 1–5).…”

Analysis of the radicalization of the 17-A terrorist cell: an empirical approach using the 3N model (Análisis del proceso de radicalización de la célula terrorista del 17-A: una aproximación empírica desde el modelo 3N)

“…Narratives, in turn, have been related to the legitimization of terrorism (Lobato et al, 2021), self-sacrifice (Bélanger et al, 2014), support for political violence (Schumpe et al, 2020), dehumanization (Bélanger et al, 2019) and the need for cognitive closure (Webber et al, 2018). Finally, social networks, which are considered vectors of ideological transmission (Webber & Kruglanski, 2017), have been related to identity fusion (Lobato et al, 2020), collective narcissism (Bélanger et al, 2019), attending worship places (Lobato et al, 2021), the social context (Jasko et al, 2020) and affiliation with a radical network (Bélanger et al, 2020). Therefore, there are multiple indicators for detecting each of these three factors.…”

“…Las narrativas, por su parte, se han relacionado con la legitimación del terrorismo (Lobato et al, 2021), el auto-sacrificio (Bélanger et al, 2014), el apoyo a la violencia política (Schumpe et al, 2020), la deshumanización (Bélanger et al, 2019) o la necesidad de cierre cognitivo (Webber et al, 2018). Y, en última instancia, las redes sociales, consideradas vectores de transmisión ideológica (Webber & Kruglanski, 2017), se han relacionado con la fusión de la identidad (Lobato et al, 2020), el narcisismo colectivo (Bélanger et al, 2019), la asistencia a oratorios (Lobato et al, 2021), el contexto social (Jasko et al, 2020) o la afiliación a una red radical (Bélanger et al, 2020). Por tanto, los indicadores para detectar cada uno de estos tres factores son múltiples.…”