Moral tribalism: Moral judgments of actions supporting ingroup interests depend on collective narcissism

Morality, Social Inclusion, and In-Group Superiority: The Differential Role of Individualizing and Binding Foundations in Perceptions of the Social Identity of In-Group and Out-Group Members

Research into social identity and morality judgments typically focuses on how the former influences the latter. We approach this theme from the opposite direction, establishing the influence of morality on perceptions of social identity. In three studies, conducted in two cultures, we show that in-group members acting immorally are excluded from the group. Extending this investigation to the overlooked study of out-group-on-out-group behavior, in Studies 2 and 3, we compare perceptions of social inclusion for in-group members following (im)moral behavior toward the in-group with perceptions of out-group members following (im)moral behavior toward the out-group. We show that people treat in-group and out-group members alike with respect to binding morals, which concern preservation and protection of the group, but not individualizing morals, which concern preservation and protection of individual rights. Finally, in Study 3, we confirm the underlying motivating mechanism of reasserting in-group superiority by affirming the positive distinctiveness of one's own group.

Preregistered Replication and Extension of "Moral Hypocrisy: Social Groups and the Flexibility of Virtue"

The tendency for people to consider themselves morally good while behaving selfishly is known as moral hypocrisy. Influential work by Valdesolo and DeSteno (2007) found evidence for intergroup moral hypocrisy such that people were more forgiving of transgressions when they were committed by an in-group member than an out-group member. We conducted two experiments to examine moral hypocrisy and group membership in an online paradigm with Prolific workers from the United States: a direct replication of the original work with minimal groups (N = 610; nationally representative) and a conceptual replication with political groups (N = 606; 50% Democrats and 50% Republicans). Although the results did not replicate the original findings, we observed evidence of in-group favoritism in minimal groups and out-group derogation in political groups. The current research finds mixed evidence of intergroup moral hypocrisy and has implications for understanding the contextual dependencies of intergroup bias and partisanship.

Double trouble: How sectarian and national narcissism relate differently to collective violence beliefs in Lebanon

Collective narcissism is a belief in ingroup greatness which is contingent on external validation. A lack of research on collective narcissism amongst non-Western contexts and minority groups remains a challenge for the field. However, here we test two types of collective narcissism (sectarian and national) as differential predictors of two dimensions of collective violence beliefs (against outgroup members and leaders) in a large, diverse, community sample from Lebanon (N = 778). We found that sectarian narcissism (narcissism related to smaller political and religious ingroup identity) predicted support for collective violence against members of different sects, while national narcissism predicted opposition to such collective violence. Neither form of collective narcissism had any significant relationship with collective violence against outgroup leaders. We controlled for both sectarian and national identification and found no significant effects in predicting either one of the two dimensions of collective violence beliefs. In this non-Western context, in which a coherent national identity is undermined by sectarianism, national narcissism seems to be a progressive motivator for unity and social change, while sectarian narcissism is rather associated with extreme attitudes, such as support for collective violence.

Shake it off! Adaptive coping with stress reduces national narcissism

Examining the role of coping with stress strategies in shaping national narcissism, we proposed that this type of defensive national commitment (stemming from psychological shortcomings) should be lowered by adaptive coping strategies. In Study 1 (longitudinal, N = 603), we found that higher adaptive (i.e. self-sufficient) coping attenuated national narcissism. In Study 2 (experimental, N = 337), the priming of adaptive coping significantly decreased national narcissism. We also demonstrated the indirect effects of the induced adaptive coping strategy on conspiracy beliefs via national narcissism. These findings suggest that using adaptive coping strategies (either dispositional or situationally induced) may attenuate national narcissism. We discuss the role of coping with stress in shaping group-level phenomena.

Generosity during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of collective narcissism

This study analyzes how a novel psychological factor-collective narcissism-affects giving behavior to national and international charities during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that collective narcissists tended to keep more resources for themselves or national charities while giving less to international charities. In line with the group threat theory, this tendency is more pronounced in countries with a high share of foreign population. Our findings suggest that the shared experience of the global COVID-19 public health crisis did not blur the boundaries between ingroups and outgroups for collective narcissists. These results imply that mitigating outgroup hostility associated with collective narcissism is critical to strengthening cross-national solidarity during unprecedented crises. However, more contact with foreign nationals might not reduce the negative impact of collective narcissism.

A Small Price to Pay: National Narcissism Predicts Readiness to Sacrifice In-Group Members to Defend the In-Group's Image

Collective narcissism is a belief in one's in-group greatness that is underappreciated by others. Across three studies conducted in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we found that collective narcissism, measured with respect to the national group, was related to support of policies that protect the national image at the expense of in-group members' health. In Study 1, British national narcissism was related to opposing cooperation with the European Union (EU) on medical equipment. In Study 2, American national narcissism predicted opposition to COVID-19 testing to downplay the number of cases. In Study 3, American national narcissism was related to support for releasing an untested COVID-19 vaccine, to beat other countries to the punch. These relationships were mediated by concern about the country's reputation. Our studies shed light on collective narcissism as a group-based ego-enhancement strategy in which a strong image of the group is prioritized over members' well-being.

Am I being dehumanized? Development and validation of the experience of dehumanization measurement

Scholarly interest in the experience of dehumanization, the perception that one is being dehumanized, has increased significantly in recent years, yet the construct lacks a validated measurement. The purpose of this research is therefore to develop and validate a theoretically grounded experience of dehumanization measurement (EDHM) using item response theory. Evidence from five studies using data collected from participants in the United Kingdom (N = 2082) and Spain (N = 1427), shows that (a) a unidimensional structure replicates and fits well; (b) the measurement demonstrates high precision and reliability across a broad range of the latent trait; (c) the measurement demonstrates evidence for nomological and discriminant validity with constructs in the experience of dehumanization nomological network; (d) the measurement is invariant across gender and cultures; (e) the measurement demonstrates incremental validity in the prediction of important outcomes over and above conceptually overlapping constructs and prior measurements. Overall, our findings suggest the EDHM is a psychometrically sound measurement that can advance research relating to the experience of dehumanization.

When Do Observers Deprioritize Due Process for the Perpetrator and Prioritize Safety for the Victim in Response to Information-Poor Allegations of Harm?

We examined how observers assess information-poor allegations of harm (e.g., "my word against yours" cases), in which the outcomes of procedurally fair investigations may favor the alleged perpetrator because the evidentiary standards are unmet. Yet this lack of evidence does not mean no harm occurred, and some observers may be charged with deciding whether the allegation is actionable within a collective. On the basis of theories of moral typecasting, procedural justice, and uncertainty management, we hypothesized that observers would be more likely to prioritize the victim's safety (vs. to prioritize due process for the perpetrator) and view the allegation as actionable when the victim-alleged perpetrator dyad members exhibit features that align with stereotypes of victims and perpetrators. We supported our hypothesis with four studies using various contexts, sources of perceived prototypicality, due-process prioritization, and samples (students from New Zealand, Ns = 137 and 114; Mechanical Turk workers from the United States; Ns = 260 and 336).

How Does Collective Moral Judgment Induce Unethical Pro-Organizational Behaviors in Infrastructure Construction Projects: The Mediating Role of Machiavellianism

The sustainable development of infrastructure construction projects heavily depends on favorable cooperation of all parties and ethical code of conduct, while Un-ethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) may undermine the mutual efforts and cause serious consequences. UPB has aroused wide interest of researchers, but what may trigger construction employees to engage in UPB at team-level has not been elucidated completely. With information asymmetry and huge uncertainty, the behaviors of employees in temporary project teams are marked by environmental and personal characters. The study discusses the influences of collective moral judgement focus on self (CMJS) and Machiavellianism on UPB. Through a moderated mediation analysis conducted on a set of survey data from Chinese construction projects, the empirical results of the two-level hierarchical linear model indicate that CMJS positively impacts UPB directly, and meanwhile Machiavellianism acts as a partial mediator in the relationship between CMJS and UPB. The findings also reveal that performance-avoidance goal orientation (PAGO) and motivation to learn (MTL) moderate and strengthen the relationship between Machiavellianism and UPB. The study offers practical suggestions for both project managers and policymakers of construction projects.

“‘Cause We Are the Champions of the World”

Abstract. National narcissism is a defensive form of group identity that is contingent on external validation and involves unrealistic belief in the nation’s greatness. Those high in national narcissism are susceptible to ingroup-enhancing narratives. In two pre-registered studies, conducted in Poland ( N = 1,134) and the United Kingdom ( N = 501), we hypothesized and found that national narcissism predicts support for historical policies that emphasize the great achievements and past dominance of one’s own group. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between national narcissism and support for ingroup-enhancing historical policies can be accounted for by the perceived contribution of one’s own country to the world’s history. We discuss implications for research on collective narcissism and historical policies.

Their own worst enemy? Collective narcissists are willing to conspire against their in-group

Collective narcissism - a belief in in-group greatness that is not appreciated by others - is associated with using one's group for personal benefits. Across one pilot and four studies, we demonstrated that collective narcissism predicts readiness to conspire against in-group members (r_{meta-analysis}  = .24). In Study 1, conducted in Poland (N = 361), collective narcissism measured in the context of national identity predicted readiness to engage in secret surveillance against one's own country's citizens. In Study 2 (N = 174; pre-registered), collective narcissism in UK workplace teams predicted intentions to engage in conspiracies against co-workers. In Study 3 (N = 471; pre-registered), US national narcissism predicted intentions to conspire against fellow citizens. Furthermore, conspiracy intentions accounted for the relationship between collective narcissism and beliefs in conspiracy theories about the in-group. Finally, in Study 4 (N = 1064; pre-registered), we corroborated the link between Polish national narcissism and conspiracy intentions against fellow citizens, further showing that these intentions were only directed towards group members that were perceived as moderately or strongly typical of the national in-group (but not when perceived in-group typicality was low). In-group identification was either negatively related (Studies 1 and 2) or unrelated (Studies 3 and 4) to conspiracy intentions (r_{meta-analysis}  = .04). We discuss implications for research on conspiracy theories and populism.

Affected more than infected: The relationship between national narcissism and Zika conspiracy beliefs is mediated by exclusive victimhood about the Zika outbreak

Many conspiracy theories appeared along with the Zika outbreak. While the virus is still circulating, motives underlying Zika conspiracy beliefs remain underexplored. National narcissism has been shown to be a robust social motive predicting conspiracy beliefs about other public health crises. This relationship has been interpreted as conspiracy beliefs protecting one's idealistic national image from the crisis by externally attributing any potential threatening factors. We seek to provide an additional account by proposing that such external projection of grievances is rooted in the ethnocentric tendency to frame one's nation's suffering as central to the crisis. We argue that this inflated perception of victimhood, which we operationalized through exclusive victimhood, legitimizes national narcissists’ expression of their (conspiracy) view of the crisis, hence managing their identity. Based on a representative sample of the French population ( N = 1,104), results confirmed that national narcissism was related to Zika conspiracy beliefs, and that this relationship was mediated by the belief that French people suffered uniquely and more than others from the Zika outbreak. These results held even when controlling for potential confounding variables. We discuss the possible functions of exclusive victimhood in times of global threats, and the defensive role played by conspiracy beliefs.

Can ingroup love harm the ingroup? Collective narcissism and objectification of ingroup members

We examined how collective narcissism (a belief in ingroup greatness that is underappreciated by others) versus ingroup identification predicts treatment of ingroup members. Ingroup identification should be associated with favorable treatment of ingroup members. Collective narcissism, however, is more likely to predict using ingroup members for personal gain. In organizations, collective narcissism predicted promoting one’s own (vs. group) goals (prestudy: N = 179), and treating coworkers instrumentally (Study 1: N = 181; and longitudinal Study 2: N = 557). In Study 3 ( N = 214, partisan context), the link between collective narcissism and instrumental treatment of ingroup members was mediated by self-serving motives. In the experimental Study 4 ( N = 579, workplace teams), the effect of collective narcissism on instrumental treatment was stronger when the target was an ingroup (vs. outgroup) member. Across all studies, ingroup identification was negatively, or nonsignificantly, associated with instrumental treatment. Results suggest that not all forms of ingroup identity might be beneficial for ingroup members.

Deconstructing moral character judgments

People often make judgments of others' moral character - an inferred moral essence that presumably predicts moral behavior. We first define moral character and explore why people make character judgments before outlining three key elements that drive character judgments: behavior (good vs. bad, norm violations, and deliberation), mind (intentions, explanations, capacities), and identity (appearance, social groups, and warmth). We also provide taxonomy of moral character that goes beyond simply good vs. evil. Drawing from the theory of dyadic morality, we outline a two-dimensional triangular space of character judgments (valence and strength/agency), with three key corners - heroes, villains, and victims. Varieties of perceived moral character include saints and demons, strivers/sinners and opportunists, the nonmoral, virtuous, and culpable victims, and pure victims.

Moderators of the Liking Bias in Judgments of Moral Character

Previous research found evidence for a liking bias in moral character judgments because judgments of liked people are higher than those of disliked or neutral ones. This article sought conditions moderating this effect. In Study 1 (N = 792), the impact of the liking bias on moral character judgments was strongly attenuated when participants were educated that attitudes bias moral judgments. In Study 2 (N = 376), the influence of liking on moral character attributions was eliminated when participants were accountable for the justification of their moral judgments. Overall, these results suggest that although liking biases moral character attributions, this bias might be reduced or eliminated when deeper information processing is required to generate judgments of others’ moral character.