Group Heroes and Villains in Post-conflict Societies: Evaluating Perpetrators of Historical Transgressions

Abstract

In two post-conflict societies (Serbia and Cyprus), we investigated how people react when presented with a historical transgression perpetrated by heroes relevant for their collective identity. We set the events in foundational periods for Serbian (Experiment 1) and Greek Cypriot (Experiment 2) ethnic identity: historical representations of the Battle of Kosovo (1389) and the Liberation Struggle (1955–1959). In both experiments, we used a between-subjects design to manipulate the representation of the salient character (hero or neutral) and group membership (in-group or out-group) in fictitious but historically plausible accounts of transgressions. In Experiment 1 (N=225), the participants rejected (blamed and derogated) an in-group hero less than a neutral in-group character or an out-group character, even though they committed an identical transgression. Additionally, participants who based their ethnic identification on perceiving the in-group as superior rejected the in-group transgressors (hero or neutral) less than those low in ingroup superiority. In Experiment 2 (N=136), the in-group hero was also the most leniently treated historical character. Irrespective of the mode of ethnic identification (superiority or importance), high-identifying participants rejected an in-group hero less, but an out-group transgressor more. Taken together, the experiments show that an in-group hero from a foundational historical period, as a highly valued ethnic symbol, is exempt from the black sheep effect and the sanctions even of critically attached group members. We discuss the implications of the status of in-group heroes in political discourse and education.