We examined the idea that endorsement of state-level restrictive language policies can be understood as an ingroup-preserving behaviour driven by majority group members’ experiences of linguistic-based collective angst (i.e., concern about the future vitality of the ingroup’s language). We did so in the context of legislative reform aimed to enforce monolinguistic public education in Ukraine – a linguistically heterogeneous nation-state with a history of a foreign ethno-political domination. Specifically, we hypothesized that collective angst is most likely to be experienced when majority group members feel higher attachment to Ukraine (vs. glorification) and shared beliefs about historical linguicide of the Ukrainian language. Using data from a public opinion survey (N = 774), we found support for the mediation model – higher attachment and beliefs about historical linguicide predicted increased support for restrictive policies directly and through collective angst, whereas glorification was found to be a non-significant predictor in this relation. Our results highlight the role of the specific content of protagonists’ social identities in predicting their support for cultural assimilation of ethnic minority groups within heterogeneous societies.

我们研究了以下观点：认可州级限制性语言政策可以理解为保留群体行为，这是由多数群体成员基于语言的集体焦虑经验（即，对未来群体语言的未来活力的关注）引起的。我们是在旨在加强乌克兰单一语言公共教育的立法改革的背景下这样做的。乌克兰是一个语言上异质的民族国家，具有外国民族政治统治的历史。具体来说，我们假设当多数团体成员对乌克兰的依恋感（与荣耀）和对乌克兰语言的历史性杀人持相同看法时，最有可能发生集体焦虑。使用来自民意调查的数据（N（= 774），我们发现了对调解模型的支持-对历史上的杀人剂的更高依恋和信念预测直接或通过集体焦虑会增加对限制性政策的支持，而光荣化在这种关系中是不重要的预测因子。我们的结果强调了主角社会身份的特定内容在预测他们对异质社会中少数民族群体的文化同化的支持中的作用。