Although social identity and categorization process motivate members of a group to achieve oneness and uniformity, social groups may be internally divided into subgroups (Hornesey & Hogg, 2000) and in some situations the members of a subgroup may decide to undergo a schism (Liebman, et al., 1988; Worchel, 1984), that is they may leave the parent group either to form a break way group or to join a different group.
Sani (1999, 2000, 2005) posited that a schism stems from a debate concerning the relationship between a new norm and the group identity. Some group members may see the norm as fully consistent with the group identity and may be willing to support it, or, on the contrary, they may see the norm as threatening the group identity and in this case they may oppose the norm to defend the identity, and be more likely to join a schism once the norm is adopted. However, the role of affective and cognitive reactions to a perceived identity threat in predicting intentions to leave a social group has not been addressed yet.
We argue that the decision to break-up with a group may represent a defensive reaction aimed to reaffirm one¿s group¿s identity. In particular, we advance that when a conflict over morality emerges (a critical dimension of one¿s identity), a defensive experience of moral outrage and psychological disengagement are more likely to occur (Tauberne & Zoomer, 2013). These processes have been previously found to reduce the distress from a perceived threat and to reshape the self-concept in a way that reduce the salience of the group¿s identity.
Specifically, the present research is aimed to investigate whether a conflict on moral values trigger outraged feelings that facilitate psychological disengagement and reduce the cognitive dissonance when contemplating leaving intention. A modified version of a group coordination game will be employed and asymmetry results will be manipulated to affect social perception and group membership preferences
Much of the current literature focuses on the causes of an individual leaving a radical social group with the intention of countering fundamentalism, stigmatization and violent extremism or as an extreme reaction to norm-violating behavior. However, the link between the cause and the decision to leave a group is unclear as one cause may facilitate leaving for one member and not another. What is lacking in this field is a broader understanding of the core psychological experience across a broad range of social group types and contexts. The current research is aimed to address this gap by manipulating the identification of participants with a diverse range of social groups, where the criterion that defined these social groups is the member¿s identification.
The current research is also aimed at offering an explanation for the observation that group members may engage in schismatic intention to improve their moral shortcomings. From the different lines of though in the literature on the effects of group-based emotions on social action (e.g. Iyer et al., 2007; Leach et al., 2006; Thomas et al., 2009) and in the literature on threats to morality (Monin et al., 2007; Tetlock, 2002; 2003) we will try to give further insight on the decisive association between the nature of threat to group and motivation to defense one¿s social identity by individuals expression of moral outrage. Similarly, we believe that the results of the studies about moral outrage will be meaningfull with respect to Gausel and Leach¿s (2011) and Rotshild (2013) recent analysis of shame and guilt.
The present studies are designed to further determine whether psychological disengagement can protect individuals expressing feelings of moral outrage derived from moral threats to their social identity. These mechanisms are thought to reflect social-identity relevant behavior and thus be viewed as an expression of commitment to the social identity under threat. We believe than the research presented here may point out practical solution for situations in which individuals really want other groups to improve in certain domain, and that they expose their self to the costs associated with leaving a social group to validate their identity. In light of the increasing moralization of previously non-moral issues in public discourse (e.g. Rozin, 1999) these are important conclusions to be drawn from the current research.
The current research seek to further improve the understanding of what trigger moral outrage and psychological disengagement by investigating two class of intra-group moral threat: one as coming out from being a minority, the other coming out from leadership failure.
As leaders are expected to be exemplary and on the path of salvation, their behaviour has to be consistent with the group¿s ideals and goals. As Haslam and Platow (2001a) phrase, social identity-based leadership endorsement may not only derive from being ¿one of us¿ (i.e. being prototypical), but also from being seen to be ¿doing it for us¿. When a leader behaves in ways that favor the ingroup, he or she is acting in a highly ingroup prototypical manner. Instead, leaders¿ failure to adhere to expectations cause members to doubt their involvement and the sacrifices made for the group to be vulnerable to a loss of status and confidence within the group (Bjørgo, 2011).
At last, as most sources on schismatic intentions and psychological disengagement provide descriptive reviews, the present research is aimed to provided statistical data trough experimental procedure where variables will be manipulated accordingly to the research hypotheses