Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Arie Nadler, Thomas Malloy, and Jeffrey D. Fisher

Print publication date: 2008

Print ISBN-13: 9780195300314

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2008

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195300314.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 28 March 2020

Social Categorization, Standards of Justice, and Collective Guilt

Social Categorization, Standards of Justice, and Collective Guilt

Chapter:
(p.77) Chapter 4 Social Categorization, Standards of Justice, and Collective Guilt
Source:
The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation
Author(s):

Anca M. Miron

Nyla R. Branscombe

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195300314.003.0005

This chapter outlines a model describing when and how one particular intergroup emotion — collective guilt — will be experienced depending on the standard employed for judging the social injustice perpetrated by the in-group against an out-group. In line with the common in-group identity model and self-categorization theory, it is argued that perpetrators or advantaged group members can categorize victims along a continuum of increasing inclusiveness — with the most inclusive category being humans. Under certain conditions, out-group members (they) can be seen as members of a more inclusive group (us) that also includes the in-group (we); shifting to such inclusive categorization of out-group members can have beneficial effects for the in-group's relationship with that out-group. It is argued that the extent to which victims of harm doing are included in a salient social category will affect the harshness of the standards used to evaluate the in-group's harmful actions toward them. That is, when out-group members are included in a common in-group, harsher judgments should be made about in-group members who perpetrated harm against the former out-group members who are now seen as part of a larger, superordinate in-group. The severity of the standard used, will, in turn, affect the appraisal of injustice and the extent to which collective guilt is experienced.

Keywords:   victims, intergroup relations, reconciliation, social injustice, in-group, out-group

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .