In this article, we examine how group identity and protection of group interests shape morality judgments. We argue that actions serving ingroup interests are more likely to be judged as moral (or less immoral) than the same actions that do not serve ingroup interests. However, this group-interest bias should be especially strong among those high in collective narcissism—a defensive belief in ingroup greatness that is not appreciated by others. In Studies 1 (N = 185, Polish and British participants) and 2 (N = 404, British participants), participants judged actions favouring interests of outgroup members as less moral than similar actions favouring interests of their ingroup. However, this effect was only present for those high in national collective narcissism. In Study 3 (N = 400, American participants), moral judgments of the US Senate's decision about Brett Kavanaugh's nomination depended on partisanship, but this effect was strengthened by partisan collective narcissism. Finally, in Study 4 (N = 711, American participants), the association between national collective narcissism and morality judgments of President Trump's decision to remain an ally of Saudi Arabia was especially strong when national interest was salient (vs. not). None of the studies observed similar moderating effects of conventional ingroup identification. Overall, these results suggest that ingroup interests shape moral judgments, but this bias is most prevalent among those who are defensive about their group identity.

在本文中，我们研究了群体身份和群体利益保护如何塑造道德判断。我们认为，为群体利益服务的行为比不为群体利益服务的行为更有可能被认为是道德的（或不道德的）。但是，这种集体利益偏见在那些集体自恋程度很高的人中应该尤其强烈，这是一种对集体伟大的防御性信念，但其他人却不认同。在研究1（N  = 185，波兰和英国参与者）和研究2（N  = 404，英国参与者）中，参与者认为有利于外来成员利益的行为比道德上有利于外来成员利益的行为不道德。但是，这种效果仅适用于那些具有高度民族自恋精神的人。在研究3（N  = 400，美国参与者），美国参议院关于布雷特·卡瓦诺（Brett Kavanaugh）提名的决定的道德判断取决于党派关系，但这种效果由于党派的集体自恋而得到加强。最后，在研究4（ 美国参与者为N = 711）中，当国家利益突出时（而不是），国家集体自恋与特朗普总统决定保留沙特阿拉伯的道德判断之间的关联特别强烈。没有一项研究观察到常规群体识别的类似调节作用。总体而言，这些结果表明，群体利益塑造了道德判断，但是这种偏见在捍卫群体身份的人们中最为普遍。