This research integrates social judgement and social identity theories to examine evaluations of defensive (narcissistic) and secure social identity (vs. lack of identification) expressed by targets with varying group statuses (advantaged vs. disadvantaged). Across three studies (total N = 2,915), we manipulated target group status and forms of identity. In socioeconomic groups (Study 1), an advantaged target with a defensive identity was deemed assertive, while a disadvantaged counterpart was perceived as moral. Unexpectedly, in ethnocultural groups (Studies 2–3), the disadvantaged target expressing a defensive identity was judged equally or more assertive than the advantaged target. Notably, defensive identity from a disadvantaged target consistently garnered higher moral judgement than from an advantaged target. These results highlight that defensive identity can receive positive evaluations and confer elevated status. Nonetheless, we observed differential evaluation strategies depending on intergroup settings, suggesting system justification in socioeconomic groups versus ingroup favouritism in U.S. ethnic groups.
AbeleA. E.EllemersN.FiskeS. T.KochA.YzerbytV. (2021). Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psychological Review, 128(2), 290–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000262
2.
AbeleA. E.HaukeN. (2020). Comparing the facets of the big two in global evaluation of self versus other people. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(5), 969–982. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2639
3.
AbeleA. E.HaukeN.PetersK.LouvetE.SzymkowA.DuanY. (2016). Facets of the fundamental content dimensions: Agency with competence and assertiveness—Communion with warmth and morality. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1810. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810
4.
Abou-IsmailR.GronfeldtB.MarintheG. (2024). Defensive national identity relates to support for collective violence, in contrast to secure national identity, in a sample of displaced Syrian diaspora members. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 99, Article 101954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.101954
5.
ArmentaB. M.StroebeK.ScheibeS.van YperenN. W.StegemanA.PostmesT. (2017). Permeability of group boundaries: Development of the concept and a scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(3), 418–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216688202
6.
BabaJ.CichockaA.CislakA. (2024). Missing a beam in thine own eye: Motivated perceptions of collective narcissism. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 27(6), 1331–1356. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302231208398
7.
BettencourtB. A.CharltonK.DorrN.HumeD. L. (2001). Status differences and in-group bias: A meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 520–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.4.520
8.
BrambillaM.LeachC. W. (2014). On the importance of being moral: The distinctive role of morality in social judgment. Social Cognition, 32(4), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2014.32.4.397
9.
CambonL. (2022). Tell me who you are and I’ll tell you what you are worth: The role of societal value in the structuration of six facets of the big two. International Review of Social Psychology, 35(1), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.689
10.
CambonL.YzerbytV. Y. (2017). Compensation is for real: Evidence from existing groups in the context of actual relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(6), 745–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215625782
11.
CarothersT.O’DonohueA. (Eds.). (2019). Democracies divided: The global challenge of political polarization. Brookings Institution Press.
12.
CichockaA. (2016). Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism. European Review of Social Psychology, 27(1), 283–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2016.1252530
13.
CichockaA.CislakA.GronfeldtB.WojcikA. D. (2022). Can ingroup love harm the ingroup? Collective narcissism and objectification of ingroup members. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(7), 1718–1738. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211038058
14.
CichockaA.Golec de ZavalaA.MarchlewskaM.BilewiczM.JaworskaM.OlechowskiM. (2018). Personal control decreases narcissistic but increases non-narcissistic in-group positivity. Journal of Personality, 86(3), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12328
15.
CohenJ.DarnonC.MollaretP. (2017). Distinguishing the desire to learn from the desire to perform: The social value of achievement goals. The Journal of Social Psychology, 157(1), 30–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2016.1152216
16.
DayM. V.FiskeS. T. (2017). Movin’ on up? How perceptions of social mobility affect our willingness to defend the system. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(3), 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616678454
17.
EasterbrookM. J.KuppensT.MansteadA. S. R. (2020). Socioeconomic status and the structure of the self-concept. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(1), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12334
18.
Golec de ZavalaA.BierwiaczonekK. (2021). Male, national, and religious collective narcissism predict sexism. Sex Roles, 84(11), 680–700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01193-3
19.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA.BilewiczM. (2013). The paradox of in-group love: Differentiating collective narcissism advances understanding of the relationship between in-group and out-group attitudes: The paradox of in-group love. Journal of Personality, 81(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00779.x
20.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA.EidelsonR.JayawickremeN. (2009). Collective narcissism and its social consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1074–1096. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016904
21.
Golec de ZavalaA.CichockaA.Iskra-GolecI. (2013). Collective narcissism moderates the effect of in-group image threat on intergroup hostility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(6), 1019–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032215
22.
GrahamJ.NosekB. A.HaidtJ.IyerR.KolevaS.DittoP. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
23.
GronfeldtB.CislakA.MarintheG.CichockaA. (2024). When less is more: Defensive national identity predicts sacrifice of ingroup profit to maximize the difference between groups. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 15(5), 570–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506231185406
24.
GronfeldtB.CislakA.SterniskoA.EkerI.CichockaA. (2023). A small price to pay: National narcissism predicts readiness to sacrifice in-group members to defend the in-group’s image. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 49(4), 612–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221074790
25.
GuimondS.de la SablonnièreR.NugierA. (2014). Living in a multicultural world: Intergroup ideologies and the societal context of intergroup relations. European Review of Social Psychology, 25(1), 142–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2014.957578
26.
IacovielloV.Lorenzi-CioldiF. (2019). Collectivism and individualism in status hierarchies: Socialization and social identity explanations. International Review of Social Psychology, 32(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.285
27.
JostJ. T.KayA. C.ThorisdottirH. (2009). Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification. Oxford University Press.
28.
JostJ. T.SterlingJ. L.LangerM. (2015). From “is” to “ought” and sometimes “not”: Compliance with and resistance to social norms from a system justification perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(10), 1287–1291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115600268
29.
KervynN.BergsiekerH. B.GrignardF.YzerbytV. Y. (2016). An advantage of appearing mean or lazy: Amplified impressions of competence or warmth after mixed descriptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.09.004
30.
KervynN.YzerbytV. Y.DemoulinS.JuddC. M. (2008). Competence and warmth in context: The compensatory nature of stereotypic views of national groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(7), 1175–1183. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.526
31.
KochA.ImhoffR.UnkelbachC.NicolasG.FiskeS.TeracheJ.CarrierA.YzerbytV. (2020). Groups’ warmth is a personal matter: Understanding consensus on stereotype dimensions reconciles adversarial models of social evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 89, Article 103995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103995
32.
LeachC. W.van ZomerenM.ZebelS.VliekM. L. W.PennekampS. F.DoosjeB.OuwerkerkJ. W.SpearsR. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144
33.
MarchlewskaM.CichockaA.PanayiotouO.CastellanosK.BataynehJ. (2018). Populism as identity politics: Perceived in-group disadvantage, collective narcissism, and support for populism. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617732393
34.
MarintheG.CichockaA.CislakA.Alexander-GroseN.AzevedoF. (2022). Understanding identity processes in support for reactionary and progressive social movements among advantaged and disadvantaged groups: The role of collective narcissism and secure ingroup identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 52(7), 1047–1063. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2885
35.
MarintheG.CislakA.StrongeS.BiddlestoneM.AzevedoF.KasperA.SibleyC. G.CichockaA. (2024). Yes, we can (but for different reasons): Collective narcissism is linked to different values but similar pro-ingroup collective action tendencies among disadvantaged and advantaged ethnic groups. The British Journal of Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12790
36.
OldmeadowJ.FiskeS. T. (2007). System-justifying ideologies moderate status = competence stereotypes: Roles for belief in a just world and social dominance orientation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(6), 1135–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.428
37.
PlautV. C.ThomasK. M.HurdK.RomanoC. A. (2018). Do color blindness and multiculturalism remedy or foster discrimination and racism?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(3), 200–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721418766068
38.
RoccasS.KlarY.LiviatanI. (2006). The paradox of group-based guilt: Modes of national identification, conflict vehemence, and reactions to the in-group’s moral violations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 698–711. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.698
39.
Sánchez-RodríguezÁ.WillisG. B.JettenJ.Rodríguez-BailónR. (2019). Economic inequality enhances inferences that the normative climate is individualistic and competitive. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(6), 1114–1127. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2557
40.
SchatzR. T.StaubE.LavineH. (1999). On the varieties of national attachment: Blind versus constructive patriotism. Political Psychology, 20(1), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00140
41.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In WorchelS.AustinW. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall Publishers.
42.
YzerbytV. (2018). The dimensional compensation model. In AbeleA. E.WojciszkeB. (Eds.), Agency and communion in social psychology (pp. 126–141). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203703663-11
43.
YzerbytV.BarbedorJ.CarrierA.RohmerO. (2022). The facets of social hierarchy: How judges’ legitimacy beliefs and relative status shape their evaluation of assertiveness and ability. International Review of Social Psychology, 35(1), Article 18. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.695
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
