Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Psychology

Program Name/Specialization

Social Psychology

Faculty/School

Faculty of Science

First Advisor

Dr. Anne Wilson

Advisor Role

Supervisor

Second Advisor

Dr. Frank Kachanoff

Advisor Role

Co-supervisor

Abstract

Many societies with colonial histories have begun to grapple with their legacy of historical injustices and their ongoing consequences, leading to national apologies and sometimes consideration of reparations. In this context, it is important to understand the factors enhancing or impeding public support for reparations. This dissertation focused on the role of beliefs (ideology) and identity (collective narcissism) as predictors of support for reparations addressing historical injustices. Drawing from existing research, we expected that those higher in conservatism – and those higher in collective narcissism - would oppose reparations more strongly. We also examined the interaction between ideology and collective narcissism, which has not been investigated in past research. Notably, a pilot study preceding the three main dissertation studies revealed a surprising pattern: higher collective narcissism predicted lower reparation support among liberals, but unexpectedly, higher collective narcissism predicted greater reparations support among conservatives. This discovery became the starting point of the dissertation studies aiming to replicate and explain this intriguing finding.

In the main dissertation, three studies examined the relation between collective narcissism, political ideology and reparation support in different contexts. Study 1 (N = 785) used a pre-registered correlational design with Canadians examining Indigenous reparations support. Study 2 (N = 245) employed a two-wave design with White Americans examining Black reparations support. Studies 1 and 2 replicated this unexpected interaction across Canadian and American contexts – those who are high in conservatism and collective narcissism reported higher support for reparations, whereas the opposite tendency was observed among liberals.

Study 3 (N = 1,047) experimentally tested a possible explanation for the observed pattern in the pilot and Studies 1 and 2. Specifically, we examined whether White conservative collective narcissists might support reparations particularly when it makes their group appear more moral, by framing the leaders of a described reparation effort as either White (ingroup) or Black (outgroup). However, the hypotheses tested in Study 3 were not supported, and this study also failed to detect the originally observed effect, with collective narcissism consistently predicting lower support in both conditions. Therefore, the current dissertation has identified an intriguing and potentially important pattern, but has not yet illuminated the underlying mechanism.

These findings challenge existing theoretical understandings of collective narcissism by revealing that collective narcissism's relationship with outgroup attitudes is not uniform but varies systematically with political ideology at least in some contexts. Further, examining patterns another way, we see that traditional ideological divides disappear at high levels of collective narcissism, suggesting that psychological factors related to group identity may be more fundamental than conventional political categories in shaping reconciliation attitudes. The research opens new possibilities for understanding how defensive group identification can facilitate rather than impede support for addressing historical injustices.

Convocation Year

2025

Convocation Season

Fall

Download

Share

COinS