Implicit self-esteem and narcissism: rethinking the link

Several studies have found that explicit and implicit self-esteem interact to predict narcissism. These findings have been interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that narcissists have high but fragile self-esteem. However, we contend that these findings are neither empirically consistent nor conceptually coherent. We instead hypothesize that explicit and implicit self-esteem should predict narcissism independently, respectively in a positive and negative direction. In a large multi-session study, we examined the interrelationships between narcissism, explicit self-esteem, and three indices of implicit self-esteem (showing good psychometric properties and some convergent validity). No evidence emerged that explicit and implicit self-esteem interacted to predict narcissism. However, as predicted, two measures of implicit self-esteem were inversely related to narcissism. Potential explanations for divergent findings are considered

Inclusion of theory-relevant moderators yield the same conclusions as Sedikides, Gaertner, and Vevea (2005): A meta-analytical reply to Heine, Kitayama, and Hamamura (2007)

Heine, Kitayama and Hamamura (2007) attributed the Sedikides, Gaertner and Vevea (2005) findings to the exclusion of six papers. We report a meta-analysis that includes those six papers. The Heine et al. conclusions are faulty, because of a misspecified meta-analysis that failed to consider two moderators central to the theory. First, some of their effect sizes originated from studies that did not empirically validate comparison dimensions. Inclusion of this moderator evidences pancultural self-enhancement: Westerners enhance more strongly on individualistic dimensions, Easterners on collectivistic dimensions. Second, some of their effect sizes were irrelevant to whether enhancement is correlated with dimension importance. Inclusion of this moderator evidences pancultural self-enhancement: Both Westerners and Easterners enhance on personally important dimensions. The Sedikides et al. conclusions are valid: Tactical self-enhancement is pancultural

Can you be yourself in business? How reminders of business affect the perceived value of authenticity

Authenticity is generally beneficial to employees and organizations, but do business students believe that the business world affords it? On the one hand, business may be regarded as incompatible with authenticity, as it is arguably ruled largely by etiquette, norms, and conventions that leave little room to be one's true self (hindering role). On the other hand, business may be seen as promoting authenticity, as it is arguably based largely on creativity, initiative, and independence that provide opportunities to thrive by being one's true self (facilitating role). We proposed that business students would be more likely to endorse the facilitating role of authenticity. We hypothesized, in particular, that mere reminders of business (i.e., primes) would raise the general value of authenticity, but only among those who dispositionally value authenticity less (than more). Results of two experiments were consistent with the hypothesis. We discuss theoretical, managerial, and educational implications

Individual differences in self-enhancement and self-protection strategies: an integrative analysis

Research has identified a large number of strategies that people use to self-enhance or self-protect. We aimed for an empirical integration of these strategies. Two studies used self-report items to assess all commonly recognized self-enhancement or self-protection strategies. In Study 1 (N = 345), exploratory factor analysis identified four reliable factors. In Study 2 (N = 416), this model was validated using confirmatory factor analysis. The factors related differentially to the key personality variables of regulatory focus, self-esteem, and narcissism. Expanding this integrative approach in the future can reveal a great deal about the structure and dynamics of self-enhancement and self-protection motivation

The why's the limit: curtailing self-enhancement with explanatory introspection

Self-enhancement is linked to psychological gains (e.g., subjective well-being, persistence in adversity) but also to intrapersonal and interpersonal costs (e.g., excessive risk taking, antisocial behavior). Thus, constraints on self-enhancement may sometimes afford intrapersonal and interpersonal advantages. We tested whether explanatory introspection (i.e., generating reasons for why one might or might not possess personality traits) constitutes one such constraint. Experiment 1 demonstrated that explanatory introspection curtails self-enhancement. Experiment 2 clarified that the underlying mechanism must (a) involve explanatory questioning rather than descriptive imagining, (b) invoke the self rather than another person, and (c) feature written expression rather than unaided contemplation. Finally, Experiment 3 obtained evidence that an increase in uncertainty about oneself mediates the effect

Collective nostalgia and domestic country bias.

Three experiments tested and supported the hypothesis that collective nostalgia-nostalgia that is experienced when one thinks of oneself in terms of a particular social identity or as a member of a particular group and that concerns events or objects related to this group-increases individuals' ethnocentric preference for ingroup (compared to outgroup) products. Greek participants who recalled collective nostalgic experiences shared with other Greeks (compared to controls) evinced a highly robust preference for Greek (compared to foreign) consumer products. This preference is referred to as domestic country bias. Following a systematic replicate-and-extend strategy, we demonstrated that both idiographic and nomothetic inductions of collective nostalgia increased domestic country bias (Experiment 1), that collective nostalgia increased domestic country bias across different product categories (Experiment 2), and that collective self-esteem mediated the effect of collective nostalgia on domestic country bias and did so independently of positive affect (Experiment 3). We discuss theoretical and practical implications. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)