Collective narcissism and intergroup hostility: the dark side of 'in group love'.

This paper addresses the relationship between ‘in-group love’ and ‘out-group hate’ and integrates findings of psychology of intergroup relations with findings regarding psychological outcomes of narcissism. It reviews current research on intergroup consequences of collective narcissism – an emotional investment in an unrealistic belief in exaggerated greatness of an in-group - which indicates that the differentiation between narcissistic and genuine positive group regard uncovers the potential of genuine ‘in-group’ love to motivate positive out-group attitudes and intergroup tolerance. It also sheds new light on these aspects of positive group attachment that inspire intergroup hostility. Narcissistic idealization of an in-group is contingent on external validation and underlain by internal doubts. Collective narcissists are never fully satisfied with external acknowledgment of the in-group and they are sensitive to anything that may undermine the in-group’s exaggerated image. Collective narcissism is reliably related to defensive and retaliatory intergroup hostility

Negative evaluation of the group increases collective narcissism and intergroup hostility under intergroup threat.

Results of 3 experimental studies in two countries indicate that collective narcissism can be experimentally manipulated. Collective narcissism is an emotional investment in a belief in exaggerated greatness of an in-group (Golec de Zavala et al. 2009). It increases when people face negative evaluation of the in-group (e.g. national group or university peers). This effect is independent of initial identification with the group. Momentary increase in collective narcissism results in retaliatory out-group negativity under intergroup threat. Thus, the present results replicate and extend the previous findings that individual levels of narcissistic identification with an in-group increase sensitivity to and hostile responses to intergroup threat. Unlike collective self-esteem that does not change in response to in-group evaluations, collective narcissism is unstable and defensive positive regard for the in-group. Study 2 indicates that it increases because the negative evaluation of the in-group is perceived as offence. Study 2 also shows that pairing negative evaluation with positive assessment of the in-group on a different dimension prevents the increase in collective narcissism. Therefore, it reduces a chance of escalation of intergroup hostility

Understanding responses to political conflict: interactive effects of the need for closure and salient conflict schemas.

Two studies examined the relationship between the need for cognitive closure and preferences for conflict-resolution strategies in two different samples of elite political actors. While research suggests that the high need for closure should be associated with competitiveness, we argue that this relationship should be strongest among political actors with a hostile “conflict schema,” or representation of what a conflict is and how it should be dealt with. We provide evidence for this hypothesis using archival survey data on American foreign policy officials’ attitudes toward international conflict at the height of the Cold War (Study 1) and our own data on the relationship between the need for closure and conflict-strategy preferences among samples of activists from two political parties in Poland – a centrist party with a reputation for cooperativeness and an extremist party with a reputation for confrontation (Study 2). The broader implications of these findings are discussed

Correspondence between images of terrorists and preferred approaches to counterterrorism: the moderating role of ideological orientations.

Two studies examined the moderating effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on the relationship between terrorist images (soldiers vs. criminals) and preference for counterterrorist actions (military aggression vs. criminal prosecution). Study 1 indicated that the perception of Al-Qaeda terrorists as soldiers was related to preference for military counterterrorism, especially among people high in social dominance orientation. The relationship between the perception of Al-Qaeda terrorists as criminals and preference for the criminal prosecution of terrorists was strengthened among those high in right wing authoritarianism. Study 2 showed that when terrorists were framed as soldiers, social dominance orientation was related to support for military counterterrorism. When terrorists were framed as criminals, only people who endorsed high levels of right wing authoritarianism supported criminal prosecution of terrorists. Social dominance orientation was related to opposition towards military counterterrorism when terrorists were not perceived as soldiers or framed as criminals. It was also related to opposition towards criminal prosecution of terrorists when terrorists were framed as criminals. The findings suggest that different terrorist images are related to preference for counterterrorism that corresponds with the content of the images and individuals’ chronic ideological orientations

Authoritarians and “revolutionaries in reverse”: Why collective narcissism threatens democracy

Collective narcissism is a belief that the ingroup deserves but is denied special treatment and recognition. It is a projection of the narcissistic need to be recognized as better than others on the social level of the self. It is an aspect of ingroup identification, one of the ways group members favour their ingroup. National narcissism is associated with collective narcissism of advantaged national subgroups (e.g., Whites, men). National collective narcissism and collective narcissism of advantaged groups similarly predict discrimination of disadvantaged national subgroups (e.g., racial minorities, women) and legitimization of group-based inequality. Members of disadvantaged groups who endorse national narcissism internalize beliefs legitimizing inequality. Ultraconservative populists propagate national narcissism to undermine the political system that does not sufficiently serve the interests of advantaged groups. National narcissism predicts patriotism and nationalism. Once the three forms of national favouritism are differentiated, it becomes clear that patriotism does not come at the expense of nationalism, discrimination, societal polarization, or erosion of democracy. Instead, it may be a remedy against them

Collective narcissism and anti-semitism in Poland

Two survey studies examined the relationship between collective narcissism - an identification with an in-group linked to an emotional investment in an unrealistic belief about its unparalleled greatness (Golec de Zavala et al., 2009) - and anti-Semitism in Poland. The results indicate that this relationship is simultaneously mediated by (a) a belief that the in-group is constantly threatened by hostile intentions of other groups (the Polish siege beliefs; Bar-Tal & Antebi, 1992a, b) and (b) a belief that the Jewish out-group is particularly threatening because its members secretly aim to dominate the world (the conspiracy stereotype of Jews; Bergmann, 2008; Kofta & Sędek, 2005). The results confirm the earlier findings that collective narcissism is linked to increased sensitivity to intergroup threat which drives its association with intergroup hostility. The results also support earlier suggestions that Polish anti-Semitism is grounded in threatened national pride

Conditional Parochial Vicarious Ostracism: Gender Collective Narcissism Predicts Distress at the Exclusion of the Gender Ingroup in Women and Men

Three experiments (two pre-registered) tested whether gender collective narcissism (i.e., a belief that one’s gender ingroup’s exceptionality is not sufciently recognized by others) predicts parochial vicarious ostracism (i.e., feeling ostracized and distressed while recognizing the gender ingroup’s exclusion, but not when recognizing the exclusion of the gender outgroup). In all studies (overall N=1480), gender collective narcissism was positively associated with distress among women who witnessed the exclusion of women, but not among men who witnessed the exclusion of women. In Study 3, gender collective narcissism was positively associated with distress among men who witnessed the exclusion of men, but not among women who witnessed the exclusion of men. These fndings help explain why men do not universally feel distressed by the discrimination of women and why some women may mobilize to challenge gender discrimination

Collective Narcissism and the 2016 United States Presidential Vote

Explaining support for Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy has become a key social-science challenge. An emerging literature highlights several important individual-level precursors of Trump support, including racial attitudes, sexism, and authoritarianism. In this report, we provide evidence for the role of a novel psychological factor: collective narcissism, an inflated, unrealistic view of the national ingroup’s greatness contingent on external recognition. Using data from a recent national survey, we demonstrate that collective narcissism is a powerful predictor of 2016 presidential votes and evaluations of Trump, even after controlling for other variables known to predict candidate preferences in general and Trump support in particular

The Psychology of Collective Narcissism: Insights from Social Identity Theory

The Psychology of Collective Narcissism is a ground-breaking text that presents a new theory of collective narcissism, a belief that exaggerated greatness of one’s own group should be but is not sufficiently appreciated by others. The book presents this concept against the background of social identity theory and research. It explores antecedent as well as social and political consequences of collective narcissism. The author discusses how this burgeoning theory and research can help to elucidate a wide range of psychological dynamics involved in pressing societal issues, such as the declining appeal of democracy, increasing populism, decreasing social solidarity, increasing societal polarization and prejudice, intergroup hostility and political violence, social inequality, and fake news and belief in conspiracy theories. Also referring to societal problems exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, this highly topical work explores socially shared beliefs as risk factors when predicting responses to crises and highlights conditions in which collective narcissism can be expected. The author also reviews research on interventions reducing the link between collective narcissism, prejudice, and retaliatory intergroup hostility focusing on her recent research on mindfulness. This is a valuable read for academics and students in psychology and the social sciences, those interested in societal processes as well as professionals dealing with the impact of collective narcissism

Need for cognitive closure and conservative political beliefs: differential mediation by personal worldviews.

The paper investigates the relationships between motivated social cognition (need for cognitive closure), personal worldviews (traditional, modern or postmodern), and conservative political beliefs. The relationships were analyzed in a sample of 189 Polish adults. High need for closure was found to be associated with support for both traditional and modern worldviews. Although different in content (i.e. endorsing different values and assumptions about the methods and limits of cognition), the worldviews share similar formal characteristics: both assume the absolute nature of values and the existence of definite truths. However, acceptance of the traditional worldview was related political conservatism (i.e., support for nationalist and isolationist opinions and a stronger role for traditional, religious values in public life), whereas acceptance of the modern worldview was associated with a rejection of conservative political beliefs. Moreover, personal worldviews mediated the relationship between need for closure and political beliefs: support for social conservatism was mediated by acceptance of the traditional worldview, whereas acceptance of the modern worldview predicted rejection of conservative values