The Role of Perceived In-group Moral Superiority in Reparative Intentions and Approach Motivation

Abstract

Three studies examined how members of a national group react to in-group wrongdoings. We expected that perceived in-group moral superiority would lead to unwillingness to repair the aggression. We also expected that internal-focused emotions such as group-based guilt and group-based shame would predict specific, misdeed-related reparative intentions but not general approach motivation toward the victim groups. In Study 1, facing the in-group’s recent aggression, participants who believed that the Hungarians have been more moral throughout their history than members of other nations, used more exonerating cognitions, experienced less in-group critical emotions and showed less willingness to provide reparations for the members of the victim group. Study 2 and Study 3 confirmed most findings of Study 1. Perceived in-group moral superiority directly or indirectly reduced willingness to provide either general or specific reparations, while internally focused in-group critical emotions predicted specific misdeed-related reparative intentions but not general approach motivation. The role of emotional attachment to the in-group is considered.

Citizens’ preferences for tackling xenophobic violence in an African context: A South African case study.

“…However, the existing scholarship on xenophobic violence (e.g., Gordon, 2018; Kerr et al, 2019; Misago, 2017; Misago et al, 2009; von Holdt et al, 2011) suggests that the outgroup-based external attributions observed here are grounded in prejudice rather than evidence. Similar outgroup-based construals of responsibility have been observed in other cases of mass violence (e.g., Bilali, 2013; Bilali & Vollhardt, 2019; Szabó et al, 2017) where they serve to reduce the ingroup’s accountability and moral responsibility.…”

“…Refusal to support restorative actions following mass violence has dire consequences for intergroup relations. As a result, there has been a growing interest in this issue in recent years (e.g., Bilali, 2013; Bilali & Vollhardt, 2019; Leach et al, 2013; Szabó et al, 2017). These investigations provide important insight into the general populace’s construals of violence and how these shape support for redress.…”

Inglorious glorification and attachment: National and European identities as predictors of anti‐ and pro‐immigrant attitudes

“…The authors suggested that the commitment subscale reflected genuine attachment, and superiority was a form of glorification. Relatedly, these subscales were used as the scales of attachment and glorification by, for example, Szabó, Mészáros, and Csertő ().…”

Victim and Perpetrator Groups’ Divergent Perspectives on Collective Violence: Implications for Intergroup Relations

“…Because committing harm threatens the positive self‐evaluation and image of the ingroup, it is ingroup glorification that primarily drives the distortions of ingroup harm doing in ways that are defensive and legitimizing of the violence (e.g., Bilali, ; Leidner, Castano, Zaiser, & Giner‐Sorolla, ; Roccas, Klar, & Liviatan, ) and elicit less critical reactions to it (Penic et al, ; Szabo, Mesazaros, & Cserto, ). In studies about the mistreatment of civilians by American and British troops during the war in Iraq, ingroup glorification predicted minimization of harm committed by the troops and dehumanization of the victims (Leidner et al, ).…”

“…For example, among Turkish participants ingroup glorification was related to greater minimization of harm and less acknowledgment of the ingroup’s responsibility for the Armenian genocide. In Hungary, greater ingroup glorification was related to more exonerating cognitions and less ingroup critical emotions for harm committed against Serbian minorities (Szabo et al, ).…”