The Evocation of Moral Emotions in Intergroup Contexts: The Distinction Between Collective Guilt and Collective Shame

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139106931.005

3 - The Evocation of Moral Emotions in Intergroup Contexts: The Distinction Between Collective Guilt and Collective Shame

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2012

Brian Lickel ,

Toni Schmader and

Marchelle Barquissau

Edited by

Nyla R. Branscombe and

Bertjan Doosje

Show author details

Brian Lickel: Affiliation:
University of Southern California
Toni Schmader: Affiliation:
University of Arizona
Marchelle Barquissau: Affiliation:
University of Arizona
Nyla R. Branscombe: Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Bertjan Doosje: Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Conflict, in many cases extending to war, genocide, enslavement, and other forms of violence and domination, is the unfortunate hallmark of much of intergroup relations. Nonetheless, though humans tend to view even the most violent acts of their group against outsiders as morally justified, there are exceptions. Some individuals, in some situations, experience compunction for what people in their group have done to outsiders. Understanding when such reactions are likely to occur, and the consequences of such responses, is a potentially crucial element in attenuating intergroup conflict.

Our interest in understanding collective guilt concerns when individuals will take responsibility for and make reparations for their group's mistreatment of another group. It is important to recognize that the word “guilt” can be used to refer to both an emotional response (“I feel guilty”) and a judgment of responsibility (“I am guilty”). Obviously, the two usages are related, however, our work is derived from a conceptualization of guilt first and foremost as an emotional experience. As such, our approach is grounded in basic research on emotion and strives to describe the interpretative process by which a person proceeds from a simple awareness that a negative intergroup event has taken place to having an emotional reaction and a behavioral response to that event.

Our primary objective in this chapter is to outline some of the main steps in this interpretive process.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Collective Guilt
International Perspectives
, pp. 35 - 55

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139106931.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley

Barrett, H. C. (in press). On the functional origins of essentialism. Mind and Society, 3, 1–30Google Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Stillwell, A. M., & Heatherton, T. F. (1995). Personal narratives about guilt: Role in action control and interpersonal relationships. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 173–98CrossRef Google Scholar

Biernat, M., Vescio, T. K., & Billings, L. S. (1999). Black sheep and expectancy violation: Integrating two models of social judgment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 523–423.0.CO;2-J>CrossRef Google Scholar

Boehm, C. (1984). Blood revenge: The anthropology of feuding in Montenegro and other tribal societies. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press

Branscombe, N. R., Doosje, B., & McGarty, C. (2002) Antecedents and consequences of collective guilt. In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups (pp. 49–66). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press

Daley, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: De Gruyter

Doosje, B., & Branscombe, N. R. (2003). Attributions for the negative historical actions of a group. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 235–48CrossRef Google Scholar

Doosje, B., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one's group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872–86CrossRef Google Scholar

Ellemers, N., Kortekass, P., & Ouwerkerk, J. W. (1999). Self-categorization, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 371–893.0.CO;2-U>CrossRef Google Scholar

Fiske, A. P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99, 689–723CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gil-White, F. J. (2001). Are ethnic groups biological “species” to the human brain?: Essentialism in our cognition of some social categories. Current Anthropology, 42, 515–54Google Scholar

Hamilton, D. L., Sherman, S. J., & Castelli, L. (2002). A group by any other name – The role of entitativity in group perception. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.) European Review of Social Psychology (pp. 139–66). Chichester, UK: WileyCrossRef

Hardy, M. J. L. (1963). Blood feuds and the payment of blood money in the Middle East. Beirut: Catholic Press

Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 113–27CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game: A case study. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 129–34CrossRef Google Scholar

Hirschfeld, L. A. (1995). Do children have a theory of race?Cognition, 54, 209– 52CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Janoff-Bulman, R. (1982). Esteem and control bases of blame: “Adaptive” strategies for victims versus observers. Journal of Personality, 50, 180–92CrossRef Google Scholar

Lewis, H. B. (1971). Shame and guilt in neurosis. New York: International Universities Press

Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223–46CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. (2001). Elements of a lay theory of groups: Types of groups, relational styles, and the perception of group entitativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 129–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Lickel, B., Miller, N., Stenstrom, D., Denson, T., & Schmader, T. (2004). The role of vicarious retribution in intergroup conflict. Manuscript in preparation

Lickel, B., Schmader, T., Ames, D. R., & Curtis, M. (2004). Vicarious shame and guilt. Unpublished manuscript

Lickel, B., Schmader, T., & Hamilton, D. L. (2003). A case of collective responsibility: Who else was to blame for the Columbine High School shootings?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 194–204CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Marques, J. M., Robalo, E. M., Rocha, S. A. (1992). Ingroup bias and the “black sheep” effect: Assessing the impact of social identification and perceived variability on group judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 331–52CrossRef Google Scholar

Niedenthal, P. M., Tangney, J. P. & Gavanski, I. (1994). “If only I weren't” versus “If only I hadn't”: Distinguishing shame and guilt in counterfactual thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 585–95CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press

Pettigrew, T. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 461–76CrossRef Google Scholar

Rantilla, A. K. (2000). Collective task responsibility allocation: Revisiting the group-serving bias. Small Group Research, 31, 739–66CrossRef Google Scholar

Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Rothbart, M., & Taylor, M. (1992). Category labels and social reality: Do we view social categories as natural kinds? In K. Fiedler & G. R. Semin (Eds.), Language, interaction and social cognition (pp. 11–36). Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Scher, S. J., & Darley, J. M. (1997). How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 127–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Smith, E. R., & Henry, S. (1996) An in-group becomes part of the self: Response time evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 635–42CrossRef Google Scholar

Snyder, C. R., Lassegard, M. A., Ford, C. E., (1986). Distancing after group success and failure: Basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 382–8CrossRef Google Scholar

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). Social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In W. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall

Tangney, J. P. (1992). Situational determinants of shame and guilt in young adulthood. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 199–206CrossRef Google Scholar

Tangney, J. P. (1995). Shame and guilt in interpersonal relationships. In J. P. Tangney & K. W. Fischer (Eds.) Self-conscious emotions (pp. 64–113). New York: Guilford Press

Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., Barlow, D. B., (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1256–69CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York: The Guilford Press

Weinstein, M., Finnegan, M., & Watanabe, T. (2001, September 24). Racial profiling gains support as search tactic. The Los Angeles Times

Wicker, F. W., Payne, G. C., & Morgan, R. D. (1983). Participant descriptions of guilt and shame. Motivation and Emotion, 7, 25–39CrossRef Google Scholar

Wilder, D. & Simon, A. F. (1998) Categorical and dynamic groups: Implications for social perception and intergroup behavior. In C. Sedikides, J. Schopler, & C. A., Insko (Eds.) Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior (pp. 27–44). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Yzerbyt, V. Y. Corneille, & Estrada, C. (2001). The interplay of subjective essentialism and entitativity in the formation of stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 141–55CrossRef Google Scholar

Yzerbyt, V. Y., Rocher, S., & Schadron, G. (1997). Stereotypes as explanations: A subjective essentialistic view of group perception. In R. Spears, P. J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The social psychology of stereotyping and group life (pp. 20–50). Oxford: Blackwell

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.