Defensive national identity relates to support for collective violence, in contrast to secure national identity, in a sample of displaced Syrian diaspora members

This paper examines national identities and collective violence beliefs in a sample of Syrian diaspora members (N = 521). Most of the Syria diaspora fled the ongoing civil war and are therefore opposed to President Assad and his regime, which still control most of their homeland. It is therefore a compelling question if national identities, which remain strong in the diaspora despite displacement, shape attitudes towards the regime at home. To this end, we contrast national narcissism (i.e., defensive national identity), an exaggerated belief in one’s national ingroup’s greatness, and national identification (i.e., secure national identity), a feeling of belonging to the nation and evaluating it positively, as differential predictors of collective violence beliefs. We find that a defensive national identity was related to support for both upward (i.e., violence targeted at regime leaders) and diffuse (i.e., violence targeted at regime supporters) collective violence. Meanwhile, secure national identity was linked to opposition to diffuse collective violence and was unrelated to upward collective violence. Thus, in a sample of displaced, non-WEIRD people, a pattern often found in similar research in the West is replicated, in that secure national identity can relate to benevolent and peaceful group processes. Meanwhile, national narcissism seems to be a driver of hostile intergroup attitudes. National sentiments should therefore be central in any discussion on diasporic attitudes towards the Syrian homeland’s regime and fellow citizens. The results could be utilised in designing interventions to promote harmony in diaspora communities around the world, and ultimately reconciliation once peace is finally restored

When less is more: defensive national identity predicts sacrifice of ingroup profit to maximize the difference between groups

We propose that defensive forms of identity (i.e., nationalism and national narcissism) can harm the nation through a tendency to maximize the difference between own and other groups in resource allocation. We test this hypothesis by adopting a classic social psychological paradigm, the Tajfel’s matrices, to real-life scenarios designed in the COVID-19 context. We captured maximizing the difference as a preference for one’s nation being allocated more medical resources relative to other countries, but at the expense of absolute ingroup profit. In Studies 1 and 2, defensiveness in national identity predicted this counterproductive strategy that ultimately benefits neither ingroup nor outgroup. In experimental Study 3, inducing ingroup disadvantage led to a greater tendency to maximize the difference. The results provide evidence that defensive national identity might be liked to support for policies that offer a positive intergroup comparison, but simultaneously harm one’s own ingroup

Party people: differentiating the associations of partisan identification and partisan narcissism with political skill, integrity, and party dedication

AbstractWe investigated outcomes associated with different types of partisan identity in a sample of political candidates for parliament and local offices (N = 214). We distinguished partisan narcissism, a belief in the greatness of one's political party that is not appreciated by others, from partisan identification, feeling part of the party and evaluating it positively. We examined their links with self‐reported measures of politicians' functioning in their work: political skill, integrity, and party dedication. Partisan narcissism was associated with lower integrity in one's political role, meaning those high in partisan narcissism reported more inclination to engage in secrecy, deception, and political blood‐sport (behavior also known as politicking). Partisan narcissism did not predict party dedication: it was not associated with intentions to leave the party and volunteering in party activities, and in fact, it was linked to past membership in other political parties. Meanwhile, we found that partisan identification was associated with higher levels of political skill, while also predicting party dedication in that it predicted lower intentions to leave the party and volunteering in party activities but was unrelated to membership in other parties in the past. Cumulatively, these results suggest that partisan identification is associated with competence and dedication in politicians' work. Conversely, partisan narcissism seems to contribute to being cunning in the political arena and relates to more devious work habits that many find stereotypical of politicians

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

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 predict 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 (Pre-study, N=179) and treating co-workers 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 selfserving 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

Dehumanization of outgroup members and cross-group interactions

Subtle and blatant dehumanization exacerbates negative intergroup relations while intergroup contact ameliorates them. An emerging body of research has started to examine the link between intergroup contact and dehumanization as a potential method for promoting harmony and social cohesion between different social groups. In this article, we examine how direct and indirect contact strategies can reduce both subtle and blatant dehumanization and how humanization can increase willingness for contact with outgroup members. This suggests a range of ways in which exploring contact and dehumanization might contribute to improved intergroup relations. Last, we explore how enhanced empathy, trust, prejudice, and inclusive norms toward outgroups, along with lower anxiety, explain the link between contact and dehumanization

National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic

Changing collective behaviour and supporting non-pharmaceutical interventions is an important component in mitigating virus transmission during a pandemic. In a large international collaboration (Study 1, N = 49,968 across 67 countries), we investigated self-reported factors associated with public health behaviours (e.g., spatial distancing and stricter hygiene) and endorsed public policy interventions (e.g., closing bars and restaurants) during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-May 2020). Respondents who reported identifying more strongly with their nation consistently reported greater engagement in public health behaviours and support for public health policies. Results were similar for representative and non-representative national samples. Study 2 (N = 42 countries) conceptually replicated the central finding using aggregate indices of national identity (obtained using the World Values Survey) and a measure of actual behaviour change during the pandemic (obtained from Google mobility reports). Higher levels of national identification prior to the pandemic predicted lower mobility during the early stage of the pandemic (r = −0.40). We discuss the potential implications of links between national identity, leadership, and public health for managing COVID-19 and future pandemics.publishedVersio

Predicting attitudinal and behavioral responses to COVID-19 pandemic using machine learning

At the beginning of 2020, COVID-19 became a global problem. Despite all the efforts to emphasize the relevance of preventive measures, not everyone adhered to them. Thus, learning more about the characteristics determining attitudinal and behavioral responses to the pandemic is crucial to improving future interventions. In this study, we applied machine learning on the multinational data collected by the International Collaboration on the Social and Moral Psychology of COVID-19 (N = 51,404) to test the predictive efficacy of constructs from social, moral, cognitive, and personality psychology, as well as socio-demographic factors, in the attitudinal and behavioral responses to the pandemic. The results point to several valuable insights. Internalized moral identity provided the most consistent predictive contribution—individuals perceiving moral traits as central to their self-concept reported higher adherence to preventive measures. Similar results were found for morality as cooperation, symbolized moral identity, self-control, open-mindedness, and collective narcissism, while the inverse relationship was evident for the endorsement of conspiracy theories. However, we also found a non-neglible variability in the explained variance and predictive contributions with respect to macro-level factors such as the pandemic stage or cultural region. Overall, the results underscore the importance of morality-related and contextual factors in understanding adherence to public health recommendations during the pandemic.Peer reviewe

National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic.

Changing collective behaviour and supporting non-pharmaceutical interventions is an important component in mitigating virus transmission during a pandemic. In a large international collaboration (Study 1, N = 49,968 across 67 countries), we investigated self-reported factors associated with public health behaviours (e.g., spatial distancing and stricter hygiene) and endorsed public policy interventions (e.g., closing bars and restaurants) during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-May 2020). Respondents who reported identifying more strongly with their nation consistently reported greater engagement in public health behaviours and support for public health policies. Results were similar for representative and non-representative national samples. Study 2 (N = 42 countries) conceptually replicated the central finding using aggregate indices of national identity (obtained using the World Values Survey) and a measure of actual behaviour change during the pandemic (obtained from Google mobility reports). Higher levels of national identification prior to the pandemic predicted lower mobility during the early stage of the pandemic (r = -0.40). We discuss the potential implications of links between national identity, leadership, and public health for managing COVID-19 and future pandemics