↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Perceived In-group Moral Superiority in Reparative Intentions and Approach Motivation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Role of Perceived In-group Moral Superiority in Reparative Intentions and Approach Motivation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00912
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zsolt P. Szabó, Noémi Z. Mészáros, István Csertő

Abstract

Three studies examined how members of a national group react to in-group wrongdoings. We expected that perceived in-group moral superiority would lead to unwillingness to repair the aggression. We also expected that internal-focused emotions such as group-based guilt and group-based shame would predict specific, misdeed-related reparative intentions but not general approach motivation toward the victim groups. In Study 1, facing the in-group's recent aggression, participants who believed that the Hungarians have been more moral throughout their history than members of other nations, used more exonerating cognitions, experienced less in-group critical emotions and showed less willingness to provide reparations for the members of the victim group. Study 2 and Study 3 confirmed most findings of Study 1. Perceived in-group moral superiority directly or indirectly reduced willingness to provide either general or specific reparations, while internally focused in-group critical emotions predicted specific misdeed-related reparative intentions but not general approach motivation. The role of emotional attachment to the in-group is considered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Professor 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 58%
Social Sciences 3 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 July 2017.
All research outputs
#13,339,338
of 23,508,125 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,391
of 31,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,921
of 317,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#332
of 607 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,508,125 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,533 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 607 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.