........................................................................................................................................ .iii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ .iv Ch. 1 The Nature of Collective Guilt ........................................................................................... 5 The Khmer Rouge A Brief Overview .............................................................................. 6 Guilt ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Guilt on the Group Level .................................................................................................. 12 Perceptions of the lngroup and Outgroup ...................................................................... 15 Guilt, Apology, and Remediation ..................................................................................... 16 Conceptualization ............................................................................................................ 19 Ch. 2 Methods ............................................................................................................................ 23 Ch. 3 Results .............................................................................................................................. 29 Ch. 4 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 33 Ch. 5 References ........................................................................................................................ 41 Appendices ................................................................................................................................... 45 Appendix A (Collective identity condition) ................................................................. ..45 Appendix B (Individual identity condition) ................................................................... 58 Appendix C (Historical account: no action) ................................................................... 71 Appendix D (Historical account: aid) ............................................................................. 72 Appendix E (Historical account: apology) ..................................................................... 73 Appendix F (National geography bee) ........................................................................... 74 Empathy, Group-Level Guilt iii Abstract A collective approach to emotions suggests that, in some cases, members of groups may experience collective guilt when they consider the negative actions performed by other members of their group, even when they were not personally involved themselves. Social identity theory suggests that such group-level reactions are more likely when individuals strongly identify with their group, and less likely when their sense of identity is not linked as strongly to their group membership. This hypothesis was examined by directly manipulating the salience of individuals' collective identities through priming through an identification manipulation. The identification manipulation primed participants to feel more a part of the collective or more an individual in regards to the ingroup. After being primed, participants were asked to read one of three historical accounts, which chronicled their ingroup's negative past involvement with an outgroup. Participants' empathy levels were also measured. After completing a questionnaire about their feelings of identification, participants were asked a behavior measure, which prompted them to decide whether or not they would like to donate to a cause related to their ingroup's past actions. A sex effect was identified through this study: men who were primed as individuals felt more a part of the collective than the men primed in the collective condition. Empathy was correlated with guilt levels: the more guilt felt by a participant, the more empathic they self-reported. Those participants who were primed to identify with the collective were the most likely to donate through the behavior measure.A collective approach to emotions suggests that, in some cases, members of groups may experience collective guilt when they consider the negative actions performed by other members of their group, even when they were not personally involved themselves. Social identity theory suggests that such group-level reactions are more likely when individuals strongly identify with their group, and less likely when their sense of identity is not linked as strongly to their group membership. This hypothesis was examined by directly manipulating the salience of individuals' collective identities through priming through an identification manipulation. The identification manipulation primed participants to feel more a part of the collective or more an individual in regards to the ingroup. After being primed, participants were asked to read one of three historical accounts, which chronicled their ingroup's negative past involvement with an outgroup. Participants' empathy levels were also measured. After completing a questionnaire about their feelings of identification, participants were asked a behavior measure, which prompted them to decide whether or not they would like to donate to a cause related to their ingroup's past actions. A sex effect was identified through this study: men who were primed as individuals felt more a part of the collective than the men primed in the collective condition. Empathy was correlated with guilt levels: the more guilt felt by a participant, the more empathic they self-reported. Those participants who were primed to identify with the collective were the most likely to donate through the behavior measure. Empathy, Group-Level Guilt iv Acknowledgments I would like to thank Dr. Donelson Forsyth for advising me through the duration of this project. Not only did he introduce me to the field of social psychology through his Group Dynamics course two years ago, but he also inspired me to question the role social psychology takes in our daily lives. Because of his inquisitive perspective towards social psychology, Dr. Forsyth piqued my interest in the social psychological aspect of guilt, and it because of him that I was able to complete this research. I greatly appreciate all of the time and expertise that he was able to offer me throughout the past year. Special thanks to the other members of my committee, Dr. J. Thomas Wren and Professor Sungmoon Kim, for their continuous support and ideas throughout the completion of this project. Their insight and thoughtful comments helped me to better understand the dimensions of my project outside the realm of social psychology, bringing it into different contexts. I would also like to thank Dr. Hoyt and Dr. Price for their assistance in helping me to configure the initial design of this project Thank you to the Jepson School of Leadership Studies for granting me the funds to conduct this experiment Without the Jepson School's generosity this research would not have been possible I also would like to thank Dr. Kirk Jonas and the IRB for reviewing and approving this study. Last but not least, I thank my friends and family for putting up with me while I tried to balance this project with everything else going on during my senior year at Richmond. Empathy, Group-Level Guilt 5 1 The Nature of Collective Guilt When Pope John Paul II started apologizing, the world listened. After maintaining thousands of years of divine authority, the man with the sole ability to speak "God's words" assumed some of the responsibilities for the past action of his group, the Catholics. While in the Czech Republic he apologized to a group of Protestants by stating: "I, the Pope of the Church of Rome, in the name of all Catholics, ask for forgiveness for the wounds inflicted on non-Catholics in the course of the troubled history of these peoples" (Gibney, H-H., Coicaud & Steiner, 2008, p. 259). While Pope John Paul II did not cause the "wounds" referenced in this speech, he felt compelled to apologize for the past actions of his group. This apology, an attempt to make reparations for hundreds of years of tension, raises questions about the nature of guilt in a group context. Does guilt extend beyond the actions of the self to the actions of a one's group? Is it possible for individuals to feel guilty about actions that their group has taken towards others when they did not complete these actions themselves? In this "Age of Apology" where leaders are facing up to the past, questions like this are pertinent and must be examined (Gibney, H-H., Coicaud & Steiner, 2008, p. 3). Thus, I will examine questions of such group-level guilt through this thesis. This thesis will present the results of a study that I conducted regarding group-level guilt. Before presenting the findings of this study, however, I will provide an overview of the prior theories and research relevant to guilt, particularly on the group level. First we'll examine an instance where one group committed an atrocity towards another group in the 1970s. Empathy, Group-Level Guilt 6 The Khmer Rouge Regime: A Brief Review In the 1970s many US citizens had Southeast Asia on their minds as the war in Vietnam dragged on. Americans were dying, and the response of the American public was to "bring the boys home." The war unfolded on peoples' television screens, and after watching casualties mount on both sides, many people decided that enough was enough: too many people had been killed, Americans and Vietnamese alike. These sentiments turned into actions as the Americans eventually withdrew troops from Vietnam, beginning the long process of healing and rebuilding, but at the expense of others. One question that history books often leave out regarding the Vietnam War