The pros and cons of ingroup ambivalence: the moderating roles of attitudinal basis and individual difference in ingroup attachment and glorification

Two studies examined modes of social identification ('attachment' to the group and ingroup 'glorification') that can lead people to experience positive or negative psychological consequences from their cognition-based or affect-based ambivalent evaluations of the ingroup. As expected, among highly attached participants but not high glorifiers, cognitive ambivalence had positive consequences, predicting a stronger perception of their ambivalent views about fellow group members as a personal contribution to the ingroup. By contrast, as also expected, among highly glorifying but not highly attached participants, cognitive ambivalence had negative consequence, eliciting a negative affective response. To sum up, the present data highlight the opposing valence of the psychological consequences of being ambivalent towards one's own group for high glorifiers and highly attached individuals. These findings point to the importance of taking both group members' individual differences in facets of social identification and the affective as well as cognitive components of their ingroup ambivalence into account when considering the effects of such ambivalent attitude because these factors can moderate these effects.