Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Collective narcissism is the group-level equivalent of individual narcissism and is currently defined as the belief that one's own group is exceptional and entitled to privileged treatment but it is not sufficiently recognized by others. Current research findings show that it has relatively strong explanatory power for intergroup hostility, because collective narcissists are hypersensitive to threats to their in-group image, status, or identity, and are prone to overestimate threats and suspect out-groups; and that lacking sense of self-worth and personal control is one important source of collective narcissism. After reviewing the past research on collective narcissism, combined with latest progress in the field of individual narcissism, this paper proposes several important questions that remain to be investigated in the field of collective narcissism. First, does collective narcissism necessarily entail vulnerability? Currently, collective narcissism tends to be understood as collective self-esteem that is contingent on admiration and recognition from others. This suggests that collective narcissists are generally conceived to be fragile internally, in that it is because of the vulnerability implicit in their own beliefs—or in other words, their own lack of confidence in their in-group's exceptional image—that they are prone to demand external affirmation or recognition. However, vulnerability may not be a necessary attribute of collective narcissism because there may be collective narcissism that is not fragile, just as there may be individual narcissism that is not fragile. Therefore, researchers may consider appropriately narrowing the connotation of collective narcissism to expand its denotation so as to explore more diverse forms of collective narcissism, such as collective narcissism with and without vulnerability. Second, is the structure of collective narcissism one-dimensional? If not, what dimensions does it have? Although the most widely used collective narcissism scale has a one-dimensional structure, recent studies have developed and validated collective narcissism scales with a multidimensional structure. These studies are preliminary, however, and only suggest it is necessary to carry out multidimensional exploration. As for the exact structure of collective narcissism, further exploration is needed. And future research should not only explore the dimensions of collective narcissism, but also explore the sub-dimensions of both of vulnerable collective narcissism and grandiose collective narcissism. Third, are the consequences of collective narcissism always negative? The vast majority of current research has focused on revealing the negative effects of collective narcissism, and very few studies have directly examined and found positive effects of collective narcissism. However, according to E. Fromm's classical theoretical view, collective narcissism may also have its benign forms within certain limits, just as individual narcissism may also have an adaptive side. Therefore, future research should explore the effects of collective narcissism from a more complete theoretical perspective, and especially, examine more the positive effects of collective narcissism. Finally, does collective narcissism stem simply from frustrated individual needs? Although studies in recent years have begun to investigate the causes of collective narcissism, these studies largely focus on individual motivational factors and fail to examine them together with factors such as cognitions and sociocultural contexts. Future research may draw on ideas from theories such as system justification theory, social identity theory, and self-categorization theory to explore a more complete explanation for the phenomenon of collective narcissism. In summary, after more than a decade of research, there are still many theoretically meaningful questions in the field of collective narcissism that deserve further exploration. And in today's world, such exploration also has profound practical significance, and it may bring a wealth of insights into how to deal with the struggles of various social groups for recognition.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： A large number of studies conducted in Europe and the Americas have explored the negative relationships between social class and redistributive preferences in recent years. However, few studies have addressed the cross-cultural consistency or explored the internal mechanism and intervention strategies of the effects of social class on redistributive preferences. The present study aimed to systematically and deeply explore the relationships between social class and redistributive preferences through three studies in the context of Chinese society. Study 1 explored the direct relationship between social class and redistributive preferences. Based on national data from the Chinese General Social Survey of 2015, 8376 participants from all provinces and autonomous regions of China and indexes of measuring social class and redistributive preferences were obtained. Based on the inequality maintenance model of social class, Study 2 further explored the mediating role of attribution for the rich-poor gap between social class and redistributive preferences. 621 urban and rural residents were investigated by using objective and subjective socioeconomic status (SES) scales, a rich-poor attribution questionnaire, and a redistributive preferences scale. Study 3 was devoted to exploring the intervention effect of humility on the redistributive preferences of the upper social classes. A sample of 103 undergraduates from the upper social class were randomly assigned to humility priming group or control group. The results showed that all social class indexes can strongly and negatively predict redistributive preferences, meaning that, as in Western society, upper social-class Chinese individuals also tend to have lower redistributive preferences than those from lower social classes. In addition, the influences of social class on redistributive preferences could be partly mediated through the attribution for the rich-poor gap. Compared with individuals from a subjectively lower class, upper-class individuals tended to attribute the gap between rich and poor to internal causes. That is to say, they tended to attribute the rich-poor gap to personal factors, such as abilities, efforts, and ambition. This attitude lowered upper-class individuals’ redistributive preferences even further. Finally, a short video was used to prime participants’ feelings of humility. Compared with a control group that watched a neutral video, those upper-class undergraduates who watched life stories of people with humble qualities experienced higher states of emotional humility. Priming a humble state lowered their tendency to attribute the gap between rich and poor to internal causes, and further improved their redistributive preferences to a significant extent. In conclusion, these three studies deeply explore the relationships between social class and redistributive preferences in the context of Chinese society. Combined with other studies performed in Western societies, these results showed that, to some extent, the negative relationship between social class and redistributive preferences is cross-cultural. The exploration of this mechanism provides supporting data and enrichment for the inequality maintenance model of social class. The finding that humility is an important intervention strategy will further insight into social redistribution. These results suggest that, in order to render the benefits of economic development accessible to more people, social governance could cultivate individual humility through moral education, cultural development, and fostering a community spirit.
Subjects: Psychology >> Personality Psychology Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2022-02-15
Abstract：
Collective narcissism is the group-level equivalent of individual narcissism and is currently defined as the belief that one’s own group is exceptional and entitled to privileged treatment but it is not sufficiently recognized by others. Current research findings show that it has relatively strong explanatory power for intergroup hostility, because collective narcissists are hypersensitive to threats to their in-group image, status, or identity, and are prone to overestimate threats and suspect out-groups; and that lacking sense of self-worth and personal control is one important source of collective narcissism. Although collective narcissism is preconceived in current research as fragile and negative, its attributes are not necessarily so. Thus, future studies on it should first clarify its concept and structure; then, continue to explore its negative and positive consequences, its multiple causes and interventions; and in the meantime, advance cross-cultural research.
Peer Review Status:
Awaiting Review
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment