Does self-love lead to love for others?: A story of narcissistic game playing.

Five studies investigated the links among narcissism, self-esteem, and love. Across all studies, narcissism was associated primarily with a game-playing love style. This link was found in reports of general love styles (Study 1a) and of love in ongoing romantic relationships (Studies 1b–3, 5). Narcissists ’ game-playing love style was the result of a need for power and autonomy (Study 2) and was linked with greater relationship alternatives and lesser commitment (Study 3). Finally, narcissists ’ self-reports of game playing were confirmed by their partners in past and current relationships (Studies 4, 5). In contrast, self-esteem was negatively linked to manic love and positively linked to passionate love across studies. Implications for the understanding of narcissism in relationships are discussed. If you do not love yourself, you will be unable to love others. (Popular belief quoted by Branden, 1994) There are a whole lot of hearts breakin ’ tonight from the disease of conceit.—Bob Dylan, “Disease of Conceit” It is popularly believed that self-love is a necessary prerequisite for loving others. As exemplified by the first quote above, this belief permeates the realm of self-help literature (Branden, 1994)

The doormat effect: When forgiving erodes self-respect and self-concept clarity.

We build on principles from interdependence theory and evolutionary psychology to propose that forgiving bolsters one's self-respect and self-concept clarity if the perpetrator has acted in a manner that signals that the victim will be safe and valued in a continued relationship with the perpetrator but that forgiving diminishes one's self-respect and self-concept clarity if the perpetrator has not. Study 1 employed a longitudinal design to demonstrate that the association of marital forgiveness with trajectories of self-respect over the first 5 years of marriage depends on the spouse's dispositional tendency to indicate that the partner will be safe and valued (i.e., agreeableness). Studies 2 and 3 employed experimental procedures to demonstrate that the effects of forgiveness on self-respect and self-concept clarity depend on the perpetrator's event-specific indication that the victim will be safe and valued (i.e., amends). Study 4 employed a longitudinal design to demonstrate that the association of forgiveness with subsequent self-respect and self-concept clarity similarly depends on the extent to which the perpetrator has made amends. These studies reveal that, under some circumstances, forgiveness negatively impacts the self

Middle class and marginal? Socioeconomic status, stigma, and self-regulation at an elite university.

In four studies, the authors investigated the proposal that in the context of an elite university, individuals from relatively lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds possess a stigmatized identity and, as such, experience (a) concerns regarding their academic fit and (b) self-regulatory depletion as a result of managing these concerns. Study 1, a correlational study, revealed the predicted associations between SES, concerns about academic fit, and self-regulatory strength. Results from Studies 2 and 3 suggested that self-presentation involving the academic domain is depleting for lower (but not higher) SES students: After a self-presentation task about academic achievement, lower SES students consumed more candy (Study 2) and exhibited poorer Stroop performance (Study 3) relative to their higher SES peers; in contrast, the groups did not differ after discussing a nonacademic topic (Study 3). Study 4 revealed the potential for eliminating the SES group difference in depletion via a social comparison manipulation. Taken together, these studies support the hypothesis that managing concerns about marginality can have deleterious consequences for self-regulatory resources

The Manhattan effect: When relationship commitment fails to promote support for partners’ interests

Research on close relationships has frequently contrasted one’s own interests with the interests of the partner or the relationship and has tended to view the partner’s and the relationship’s interests as inherently aligned. The present article demonstrated that relationship commitment typically causes people to support their partner’s personal interests but that this effect gets weaker to the extent that those interests misalign or even threaten the relationship. Studies 1a and 1b showed that (a) despite their strong correlation, partner-oriented and relationship-oriented concerns in goal-directed behaviors are separable and (b) relationship commitment strengthens only the link between relationship-oriented motivation and the goal pursuit (not the link between partner-oriented motivation and the goal pursuit). The remaining 7 studies zero in on circumstances in which the partner’s and the relationship’s interests are in conflict, demonstrating that (c) relationship commitment reliably increases the tendency to support the partner’s personal interests when those interests do not pose a strong threat to the relationship but that (d) this effect becomes weaker—and even reverses direction—as the relationship threat posed by the partner’s interests becomes stronger. The reduction or reversal of the positive link between relationship commitment and propartner behaviors in such situations is termed the Manhattan effect. These findings suggest that the partner-versus-relationship conflicts provide fertile ground for novel theorizing and empirical investigations and that relationship commitment appears to be less of a partner-promoting construct than relationship science has suggested; instead, its role appears to be focused on promoting the interests of the relationship