- Email: [email protected]
Entitlement is about ‘others’, narcissism is not: Relations to sociotropic and autonomous interpersonal styles
Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Entitlement is about ‘others’, narcissism is not: Relations to sociotropic and autonomous interpersonal styles Karen C. Rose a,⇑, Phyllis A. Anastasio b a b
Department of Psychology, Widener University, One University Place, Chester, PA 19013, United States Department of Psychology, St. Joseph’s University, 5600 City Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19131, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 21 August 2013 Received in revised form 29 October 2013 Accepted 9 November 2013 Available online 5 December 2013 Keywords: Entitlement Narcissism Interpersonal Style Sociotropy Autonomy
a b s t r a c t Although narcissism and psychological entitlement are correlated, they may predict different patterns of interpersonal relationships. We hypothesized that narcissism is primarily about the self, while entitlement is about the self in relation to others. Therefore interpersonal relationships should play a minimal role in narcissism but should occupy a larger role in entitlement. To test this, we had 621 undergraduate students complete the Personal Style Inventory II which measures sociotropic (dependence) and autonomous (independence) interpersonal styles as well as the Psychological Entitlement Scale and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. We analyzed the variance explained by entitlement and by narcissism for each interpersonal style and their subscales. Narcissism negatively predicted sociotropy and was unrelated to autonomy, indicating low levels of dependence without being overly-independent. Conversely, entitlement positively predicted both sociotropy and autonomy, revealing an inconsistent mix of dependence on others and a need for independence from them. Therefore, although psychological entitlement and narcissism share a self-centric orientation, the two constructs differ in terms of orientation to others. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction As one of the oldest constructs in the history of the field of psychology, models of narcissism are many and diverse. Across the spectrum of social-personality, developmental and clinical literatures, one can find evidence for two dimensions (e.g., Corry, Merritt, Mrug, & Pamp, 2008; Kubarych, Deary, & Austin, 2004), three dimensions (e.g., Ackerman et al., 2011), four dimensions (e.g., Emmons, 1984) and seven dimensions (e.g., Raskin & Terry, 1988) subsumed under the construct of narcissism. Despite this variability, most models suggest that an individual who is high on trait narcissism is one who exhibits self-absorption, a sense of grandiosity, exhibitionism, arrogance, and feelings of entitlement. On the other hand, the concept of psychological entitlement as a stand-alone construct is relatively new, as it has been historically viewed merely as a facet of narcissism. However Campbell, Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, and Bushman (2004) conceptualize psychological entitlement as a unique individual difference variable with its own interpersonal consequences, and as such define it as the ‘‘stable and pervasive sense that one deserves more and is entitled to more than others’’ (p. 31). They developed and ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology, Widener University, One University Place, Chester, PA 19013, United States. Tel.: +1 610 499 4526; fax: +1 610 499 4603. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.C. Rose), [email protected] (P.A. Anastasio). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.11.004
validated the 9-item, single-factor Psychological Entitlement Scale (PES), and found that scores on the PES did correlate with scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988), but that 75% of the variance of the PES is unshared with the NPI (Study 1). They also found that high scores on the PES predicted self-centered behaviors such as taking more in imagined situations (giving oneself higher salaries than coworkers, Study 6), real situations (taking candy from a purported Child Development lab, Study 5; behaving selfishly in romantic relationships, Study 8), and also predicted behaving aggressively in response to an insult (Study 9), over and above the Entitlement subscale of the NPI (ENT) when it was used as a covariate. Their findings suggest that although psychological entitlement and narcissism share variance, there is a large proportion that is not shared, indicating that the two constructs may tap into different psychological processes. Both constructs appear to inflate one’s sense of self, but may do so in different ways. One of those ways may be the role that other people play in each: the narcissist experiences self-importance, superiority, and grandiosity, and it is the self who is the star, with other people playing a peripheral role. However, the very definition of entitlement includes other people in that one ‘‘deserves more and is entitled to more than others’’ (italics added). Thus others are not merely implied, but are necessary for experiencing the feeling of entitlement. There has been research comparing outcomes predicted by entitlement with those predicted by narcissism, but the comparisons
K.C. Rose, P.A. Anastasio / Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
are typically between scores on the PES and the ENT or Entitlement/exploitativeness subscales of the NPI. Additionally, they have focused on behavioral problems (Ackerman & Donnellan, in press, Study 2) or personality disorders (Pryor, Miller, & Gaughan, 2008). None have sought to examine the role of others in either entitlement or in narcissism with respect to interpersonal orientation. This is precisely the purpose of our current study: to examine and compare the role of others in interpersonal relationships among those high in entitlement, and those high in narcissism. We hypothesized that relationships should play a minimal role in narcissism, but should occupy a much larger role in entitlement due to entitlement’s apparent reliance on others that lies at the core of its definition. To test this possibility, we examined how psychological entitlement and narcissism predict the interpersonal styles of sociotropy and autonomy (Beck, 1983), styles that dichotomize interactions into those that focus on the need for others and those that do not. Sociotropy refers to a need for positive interchange with other people and reflects dependence on others. Those high on sociotropy place a great deal of value on approval, intimacy, affection and assistance. Autonomy refers to a need for independence and mastery, and a need for personal achievement and control. Those high on autonomy are concerned about failure, maximum control, and maintaining distance from others. Both styles have been associated with a variety of interpersonal problems (e.g., Desmet, Vanheule, Meganck, & Verhaeghe, 2010; Sato & McCann, 2007;) and vulnerability to depression, although sociotropy appears to be more strongly linked (Robins et al., 1994). The present study attempts to address the possibility that the role played by other people differs for both psychological entitlement and narcissism. To do so, we analyzed the variance explained by psychological entitlement and by narcissism in both sociotropy and for autonomy, while controlling for each other’s contribution.
51
Finally, the Personality Style Inventory II was used to measure interpersonal styles in terms of sociotropy and autonomy. It consists of 48 statements rated on a 6 point scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree; scores were summed for each of six subscales. The PSI-II measures three facets of sociotropy: pleasing others (M = 40.28, SD = 7.86; 10 items, a = .82), concerns about what others think (M = 27.39, SD = 5.58; 7 items, a = .78), and dependency (M = 30.13, SD = 5.60; 7 items, a = .71) and three facets of autonomy: perfectionism/self-criticism (M = 15.84, SD = 3.41; 4 items, a = .61), need for control (M = 27.59, SD = 5.14; 8 items, a = .67), and defensive separation (M = 39.10, SD = 8.03; 12 items, a = .76). We computed a total score for sociotropy (M = 100.60, SD = 14.41; 24 items, a = .87) and autonomy (M = 82.82, SD = 13.10; 24 items, a = .82) by summing across individual subscales. 2.3. Analysis Data were analyzed in two sets of multiple regression analyses. In the first set of analyses, gender, PES, and NPI were entered as predictor variables in two steps, with total scores for sociotropy and autonomy serving as the criterion variables. In the second set of analyses, gender, PES and NPI were again entered in two steps as predictors, with individual subscales for sociotropy and autonomy serving as the criterion variables. In both sets of analyses, gender was entered as a first step to control for gender effects, as significant gender differences are typically found for measures of interpersonal style. The PES and NPI were entered simultaneously on the second step, to both control for one another and to compare the contribution of each construct as it relates to measures of sociotropy and autonomy.
3. Results 2. Method 2.1. Participants Six-hundred-twenty-one participants (464 females, 157 males) enrolled at a mid-sized university located in the northeastern United States participated in the study. They were of traditional college age (18–22) with 47%, 21%, 16%, and 16% in their first, second, third and fourth year of college, respectively. The sample was predominantly white (89%). All participants completed the study in partial fulfillment of course requirements.
Simple correlations (Pearson r) were computed between predictor (entitlement and narcissism) and criterion (sociotropy, autonomy, and their subscales) variables prior to computing regression analyses (see Table 1). The correlation between the PES and NPI was .36 (p < .01), similar to the correlation found by Campbell et al. (2004). As expected, total scores for sociotropy and autonomy correlated highly with respective subscales; correlation values ranged from .56 to .88. Further tests revealed no evidence of collinearity among independent variables (VIF < 2 and tolerance > .85). 3.1. Sociotropy and autonomy – total score analyses
2.2. Materials and procedure Participants were asked to complete the PES, the NPI, and the Personal Style Inventory II (PSI-II; Robins et al., 1994), as part of a larger correlational study of trait entitlement. All questionnaires were completed online through a secure departmental website. The PES is a 9-item inventory designed to measure trait entitlement (e.g., ‘‘I demand the best because I’m worth it,’’ ‘‘I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than others’’). Responses range from 1 = strong disagreement to 7 = strong agreement. Scores for the PES are obtained by summing individual items (M = 30.40, SD = 9.63; a = .85). The NPI is a 40-item, forced-choice measure of global narcissism (e.g. ‘‘I like to have authority over other people’’ vs. ‘‘I don’t mind following orders’’). Each pair of statements has one narcissistic and one non-narcissistic response; total scores are calculated by summing the number of narcissistic choices. The mean NPI total score for the sample was 9.19 (SD = 3.53) with an alpha coefficient of .67.
The results of two regression analyses for sociotropy and autonomy using total scores are presented in the left-most columns of Tables 2 and 3. Beginning with sociotropy (Table 2), we found that gender was a significant predictor at both steps, with females more likely to have higher scores on sociotropy than males. As expected, different patterns for entitlement and narcissism emerged on the second step of the model: the PES showed a small positive relationship and the NPI showed a strongly negative relationship to sociotropy. For autonomy (Table 3), gender was also found to be predictive but in a direction opposite of that found for sociotropy: males were more likely to have higher scores on autonomy than females. The PES was positively related to autonomy, however narcissism was not. Therefore, overall scores suggest that entitlement and narcissism show different interpersonal patterns: entitlement is positively associated with both high sociotropy and autonomy, whereas narcissism is negatively related to sociotropy and is unrelated to autonomy.
52
K.C. Rose, P.A. Anastasio / Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
Table 1 Simple correlations (Pearson r) between PES, NPI, and PSI II sociotropy and autonomy scales. 1 1. PES 2. NPI 3. Sociotropy (Total) 4. Pleasing others subscale 5. Concern others subscale 6. Dependency subscale 7. Autonomy (Total) 8. Perfectionism/self criticism subscale 9. Need control subscale 10. Def separation subscale
–
2
3
.36 –
⁄⁄
4
5 ⁄⁄
.01 .19⁄⁄
.12 .29⁄⁄ .85⁄⁄
–
6 ⁄⁄
.11 .09⁄ .84⁄⁄ .57⁄⁄
–
7 ⁄
.09 .01 .70⁄⁄ .35⁄⁄ .47⁄⁄
–
8 ⁄
.17 .04 .18⁄⁄ .09⁄ .21⁄⁄ .01 –
–
9 ⁄⁄
10 ⁄⁄
.11 .08 .40⁄⁄ .30⁄⁄ .38⁄⁄ .27⁄⁄ .57⁄⁄ –
.27 .15⁄⁄ .21⁄⁄ .06 .25⁄⁄ .19⁄⁄ .77⁄⁄ .31⁄⁄ –
.05 .06 .02 .01 .02 .22⁄⁄ .88⁄⁄ .30⁄⁄ .48⁄⁄ –
⁄
p < .05. ⁄⁄ p < .01.
Table 2 Predicting sociotropy with psychological entitlement and narcissism. Characteristics of sociotropy Predictors
Total sociotropy
DR2 Step 1 Gendera Step 2 Gender PES NPI N
Pleasing others
DR2
b
.063⁄⁄⁄
b
.043⁄⁄⁄ .252⁄⁄⁄
.098⁄⁄⁄
Dependency
DR2
b
.036⁄⁄⁄
.232⁄⁄⁄ .086⁄ .200⁄⁄⁄
b
.057⁄⁄⁄
.207⁄⁄⁄
.189⁄⁄
.114⁄⁄⁄
621
Concern for what others think
DR2
.062⁄⁄⁄
.238⁄⁄ .067⁄⁄⁄
.179⁄⁄⁄ .021 .261⁄⁄⁄
.177⁄⁄⁄ .155⁄⁄⁄ .129⁄⁄⁄
621
621
.237⁄⁄⁄ .105⁄⁄ .025 621
⁄
p < .05. ⁄⁄ p < .01. ⁄⁄⁄ p < .001. a Gender is coded as 1 = male and 2 = female.
Table 3 Predicting autonomy with psychological entitlement and narcissism. Characteristics of autonomy Predictors
Total autonomy 2
DR Step 1 Gendera Step 2 Gender PES NPI N
Perfectionism/self criticism 2
DR
b ⁄⁄
.008
Need for control 2
DR
b
.000 .090⁄⁄
.036⁄⁄⁄
621
.016
.135⁄⁄⁄
.005 .031⁄⁄⁄
.146⁄⁄⁄ .085⁄ .109⁄⁄
.005 .250⁄⁄⁄ .063 621
b
.018⁄⁄⁄
.078⁄⁄⁄ .010 .094⁄⁄ .042
621
DR2
b
.000
.014⁄⁄ .091⁄⁄ .176⁄⁄⁄ .031
Defensive separation
621
⁄
p < .05. ⁄⁄ p < .01. ⁄⁄⁄ p < .001. a Gender is coded as 1 = male and 2 = female.
3.2. Sociotropy and autonomy – subscale analyses We then explored whether differences between narcissism and entitlement held for all facets of sociotropy and autonomy. This allowed us to not only look for consistency in the findings, but also to better articulate the specific characteristics predicted by the traits of narcissism and entitlement. In this set of regression analyses, patterns for gender, PES and NPI were examined for three facets of sociotropy: pleasing others, concern for what others think, and dependency. We performed the same analyses on each of the three facets of autonomy: perfectionism/self-criticism, need for control and defensive separation. The solutions are found in Tables 2 and 3. For sociotropy (Table 2), gender was found to be a significant predictor of all facets with females showing higher scores than males on pleasing others, concern for what others think, and dependency. But to the main purpose of the study, entitlement
and narcissism showed largely opposite relationships to several facets of sociotropy. The PES positively predicted concern for what others think and dependency on others. In contrast, the NPI negatively predicted a need to please others and concern for what others think. These data mirror and refine those found for the total score analysis. Gender was less predictive in models of autonomy (Table 3), as it only predicted one facet: males were found to be higher on defensive separation than females. Most striking for autonomy is the consistent positive relationship with entitlement. PES scores significantly predicted perfectionism/self-criticism, need for control, and defensive separation, although the effects are weaker for perfectionism/self-criticism and defensive separation. In contrast, narcissism was only related to defensive separation, and this was a negative relationship. The subscale analyses provide additional support for the finding that trait entitlement is positively
K.C. Rose, P.A. Anastasio / Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
associated to both sociotropy and autonomy. Entitlement positively predicted five of the six subscales – in other words, the role of others appears to be central to the trait of entitlement in both dependency upon them, and in the need for independence from them. On the other hand, narcissism is negatively associated with sociotropy and is largely unrelated to autonomy, indicating that the role of others is not nearly as important to this construct. 4. Discussion We feel that the results of this study are noteworthy for two reasons. First, they support the view that trait entitlement is a unique personality trait with its own interpersonal consequences, similar in concept but distinct from trait narcissism, as both were revealed to have very different relationships to sociotropic and autonomous personality styles after controlling for gender and for one another. Second, we also found evidence that others occupy a much larger role in entitlement than they do in narcissism; in fact, narcissism appears to involve minimal engagement with others. Those scoring high in psychological entitlement were high in both sociotropy and autonomy. The entitled person cares about what others think, and is dependent upon them as well; that is, those high on entitlement are attuned to the thoughts of others and desire to be close to them. Yet, they also seek autonomy, manifested most strongly in the need for control: the entitled person does not want to be beholden to others nor be told what to do by them. They also appear to expect much from themselves as reflected in the relationship to perfection and self-criticism, and the small but significant relationship to defensive separation from others shows that they hold others at arm’s length. Thus, we found the profile of an entitled individual to exhibit a puzzling combination of dependence upon others with the desire for independence. As strange as the combination is, both strongly speak to centrality of others in entitlement. We also found evidence that others play a minimal role in global narcissism. Scores on the NPI were negatively related to sociotropy, and separate analyses of its three components showed that this relationship stemmed mainly from narcissists’ lack of concern with pleasing others and for what others think of them. Interestingly, the narcissist does not have a need for autonomy. Unlike those high on entitlement, individuals high on narcissism strongly resist dependency, but do not resist support and advice from others. They may recognize the pragmatic importance of advice in ultimately serving the needs of the self, whereas those high in entitlement perceive it as an affront. Together, it appears that trait narcissism manifests a consistent focus on the self with little dependence on others, and little need to be separate from them. Differences in sociotropy–autonomy patterns raise questions about potential vulnerabilities. Entitlement reflects sensitivity to others, but a resistance to their control and advice – a difficult mix of dependent and independent needs. On the other hand, high narcissism does not reflect these conflicting needs and so in the long run, may be psychologically healthier. As high levels of sociotropy and autonomy have been shown to predict depression (Robins et al., 1994), our data suggest that entitlement may be associated with a greater vulnerability to depression than narcissism. Moreover, the ties between entitlement, sociotropy and autonomy found here also have implications for explaining the
53
association between rising entitlement, depression and loneliness discussed by Twenge (2006) in her book, Generation Me. However, more research is needed to establish such a link. More broadly, the findings also suggest that interpersonal relationships may be a fruitful area within which to further explore differences between entitlement and narcissism and to further explore the nature of psychological entitlement. As our data show that those high on entitlement are both dependent on others yet crave independence from them, the question now becomes what exactly is the role that others play in entitlement. How would one wish to be both dependent on and independent from others? Future work is needed to flush out the answers to this question. Although the findings revealed an interesting pattern, several limitations are noted. First, even though there were consistent and significant effects for both sociotropy and autonomy, the PES and NPI accounted for a relatively small proportion of the variance. Second, although reliability coefficients were >.7 on most of the scales, they were in the moderate range (.61–.69) on others; this may have contributed to both nonsignificant and weak effects found for some of the sociotropy and autonomy subscales. Despite these limitations, we would argue that the observed differences in interpersonal patterns for entitlement and narcissism are both consistent and thought-provoking and as such, offer a new direction for research. As these data are correlational, it will be important that future work provide further evidence exploring differences between trait entitlement and narcissism, so as to understand the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of each. References Ackerman, R., & Donnellan, M. (2013). Evaluating self-report measures of narcissistic entitlement. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. Advance online publication. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9352-7 [2013]. Ackerman, R., Whitt, E., Donnellan, M., Trzesniewski, K., Robins, R., & Kashy, D. A. (2011). What does the Narcissistic Personality Inventory really measure? Assessment, 18, 67–87. Beck, A. T. (1983). Cognitive therapy of depression: New perspectives. In P. J. Clayton & J. E. Barrett (Eds.), Treatment of depression: Old controversies and new approaches. New York: Raven Press. Campbell, W., Bonacci, A., Shelton, J., Exline, J., & Bushman, B. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(1), 29–495. Corry, N., Merritt, R., Mrug, S., & Pamp, B. (2008). The factor structure of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 593–600. Desmet, M., Vanheule, S., Meganck, R., & Verhaeghe, P. (2010). Reconstruction and validation of the personal style inventory in a Flemish clinical and student sample. Psychological Reports, 106(2), 394–404. Emmons, R. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 291–300. Kubarych, T., Deary, I., & Austin, E. (2004). The Narcissistic Personality Inventory: Factor structure in a non-clinical sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 857–872. Pryor, L., Miller, J., & Gaughan, E. (2008). A comparison of the Psychological Entitlement Scale and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory’s Entitlement Scale: Relations with general personality traits and personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(5), 517–520. Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902. Robins, C., Ladd, J., Welkowitz, J., Blaney, P., Diaz, R., & Kutcher, G. (1994). The Personal Style Inventory: Preliminary validation studies of new measures of sociotropy and autonomy. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16(4), 277–300. Sato, T., & McCann, D. (2007). Sociotropy–autonomy and interpersonal problems. Depression and Anxiety, 24, 153–162. Twenge, J. (2006). Generation me. New York: Free Press.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Entitlement is about ‘others’, narcissism is not: Relations to sociotropic and autonomous interpersonal styles Karen C. Rose a,⇑, Phyllis A. Anastasio b a b
Department of Psychology, Widener University, One University Place, Chester, PA 19013, United States Department of Psychology, St. Joseph’s University, 5600 City Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19131, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 21 August 2013 Received in revised form 29 October 2013 Accepted 9 November 2013 Available online 5 December 2013 Keywords: Entitlement Narcissism Interpersonal Style Sociotropy Autonomy
a b s t r a c t Although narcissism and psychological entitlement are correlated, they may predict different patterns of interpersonal relationships. We hypothesized that narcissism is primarily about the self, while entitlement is about the self in relation to others. Therefore interpersonal relationships should play a minimal role in narcissism but should occupy a larger role in entitlement. To test this, we had 621 undergraduate students complete the Personal Style Inventory II which measures sociotropic (dependence) and autonomous (independence) interpersonal styles as well as the Psychological Entitlement Scale and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. We analyzed the variance explained by entitlement and by narcissism for each interpersonal style and their subscales. Narcissism negatively predicted sociotropy and was unrelated to autonomy, indicating low levels of dependence without being overly-independent. Conversely, entitlement positively predicted both sociotropy and autonomy, revealing an inconsistent mix of dependence on others and a need for independence from them. Therefore, although psychological entitlement and narcissism share a self-centric orientation, the two constructs differ in terms of orientation to others. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction As one of the oldest constructs in the history of the field of psychology, models of narcissism are many and diverse. Across the spectrum of social-personality, developmental and clinical literatures, one can find evidence for two dimensions (e.g., Corry, Merritt, Mrug, & Pamp, 2008; Kubarych, Deary, & Austin, 2004), three dimensions (e.g., Ackerman et al., 2011), four dimensions (e.g., Emmons, 1984) and seven dimensions (e.g., Raskin & Terry, 1988) subsumed under the construct of narcissism. Despite this variability, most models suggest that an individual who is high on trait narcissism is one who exhibits self-absorption, a sense of grandiosity, exhibitionism, arrogance, and feelings of entitlement. On the other hand, the concept of psychological entitlement as a stand-alone construct is relatively new, as it has been historically viewed merely as a facet of narcissism. However Campbell, Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, and Bushman (2004) conceptualize psychological entitlement as a unique individual difference variable with its own interpersonal consequences, and as such define it as the ‘‘stable and pervasive sense that one deserves more and is entitled to more than others’’ (p. 31). They developed and ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology, Widener University, One University Place, Chester, PA 19013, United States. Tel.: +1 610 499 4526; fax: +1 610 499 4603. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.C. Rose), [email protected] (P.A. Anastasio). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.11.004
validated the 9-item, single-factor Psychological Entitlement Scale (PES), and found that scores on the PES did correlate with scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Terry, 1988), but that 75% of the variance of the PES is unshared with the NPI (Study 1). They also found that high scores on the PES predicted self-centered behaviors such as taking more in imagined situations (giving oneself higher salaries than coworkers, Study 6), real situations (taking candy from a purported Child Development lab, Study 5; behaving selfishly in romantic relationships, Study 8), and also predicted behaving aggressively in response to an insult (Study 9), over and above the Entitlement subscale of the NPI (ENT) when it was used as a covariate. Their findings suggest that although psychological entitlement and narcissism share variance, there is a large proportion that is not shared, indicating that the two constructs may tap into different psychological processes. Both constructs appear to inflate one’s sense of self, but may do so in different ways. One of those ways may be the role that other people play in each: the narcissist experiences self-importance, superiority, and grandiosity, and it is the self who is the star, with other people playing a peripheral role. However, the very definition of entitlement includes other people in that one ‘‘deserves more and is entitled to more than others’’ (italics added). Thus others are not merely implied, but are necessary for experiencing the feeling of entitlement. There has been research comparing outcomes predicted by entitlement with those predicted by narcissism, but the comparisons
K.C. Rose, P.A. Anastasio / Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
are typically between scores on the PES and the ENT or Entitlement/exploitativeness subscales of the NPI. Additionally, they have focused on behavioral problems (Ackerman & Donnellan, in press, Study 2) or personality disorders (Pryor, Miller, & Gaughan, 2008). None have sought to examine the role of others in either entitlement or in narcissism with respect to interpersonal orientation. This is precisely the purpose of our current study: to examine and compare the role of others in interpersonal relationships among those high in entitlement, and those high in narcissism. We hypothesized that relationships should play a minimal role in narcissism, but should occupy a much larger role in entitlement due to entitlement’s apparent reliance on others that lies at the core of its definition. To test this possibility, we examined how psychological entitlement and narcissism predict the interpersonal styles of sociotropy and autonomy (Beck, 1983), styles that dichotomize interactions into those that focus on the need for others and those that do not. Sociotropy refers to a need for positive interchange with other people and reflects dependence on others. Those high on sociotropy place a great deal of value on approval, intimacy, affection and assistance. Autonomy refers to a need for independence and mastery, and a need for personal achievement and control. Those high on autonomy are concerned about failure, maximum control, and maintaining distance from others. Both styles have been associated with a variety of interpersonal problems (e.g., Desmet, Vanheule, Meganck, & Verhaeghe, 2010; Sato & McCann, 2007;) and vulnerability to depression, although sociotropy appears to be more strongly linked (Robins et al., 1994). The present study attempts to address the possibility that the role played by other people differs for both psychological entitlement and narcissism. To do so, we analyzed the variance explained by psychological entitlement and by narcissism in both sociotropy and for autonomy, while controlling for each other’s contribution.
51
Finally, the Personality Style Inventory II was used to measure interpersonal styles in terms of sociotropy and autonomy. It consists of 48 statements rated on a 6 point scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree; scores were summed for each of six subscales. The PSI-II measures three facets of sociotropy: pleasing others (M = 40.28, SD = 7.86; 10 items, a = .82), concerns about what others think (M = 27.39, SD = 5.58; 7 items, a = .78), and dependency (M = 30.13, SD = 5.60; 7 items, a = .71) and three facets of autonomy: perfectionism/self-criticism (M = 15.84, SD = 3.41; 4 items, a = .61), need for control (M = 27.59, SD = 5.14; 8 items, a = .67), and defensive separation (M = 39.10, SD = 8.03; 12 items, a = .76). We computed a total score for sociotropy (M = 100.60, SD = 14.41; 24 items, a = .87) and autonomy (M = 82.82, SD = 13.10; 24 items, a = .82) by summing across individual subscales. 2.3. Analysis Data were analyzed in two sets of multiple regression analyses. In the first set of analyses, gender, PES, and NPI were entered as predictor variables in two steps, with total scores for sociotropy and autonomy serving as the criterion variables. In the second set of analyses, gender, PES and NPI were again entered in two steps as predictors, with individual subscales for sociotropy and autonomy serving as the criterion variables. In both sets of analyses, gender was entered as a first step to control for gender effects, as significant gender differences are typically found for measures of interpersonal style. The PES and NPI were entered simultaneously on the second step, to both control for one another and to compare the contribution of each construct as it relates to measures of sociotropy and autonomy.
3. Results 2. Method 2.1. Participants Six-hundred-twenty-one participants (464 females, 157 males) enrolled at a mid-sized university located in the northeastern United States participated in the study. They were of traditional college age (18–22) with 47%, 21%, 16%, and 16% in their first, second, third and fourth year of college, respectively. The sample was predominantly white (89%). All participants completed the study in partial fulfillment of course requirements.
Simple correlations (Pearson r) were computed between predictor (entitlement and narcissism) and criterion (sociotropy, autonomy, and their subscales) variables prior to computing regression analyses (see Table 1). The correlation between the PES and NPI was .36 (p < .01), similar to the correlation found by Campbell et al. (2004). As expected, total scores for sociotropy and autonomy correlated highly with respective subscales; correlation values ranged from .56 to .88. Further tests revealed no evidence of collinearity among independent variables (VIF < 2 and tolerance > .85). 3.1. Sociotropy and autonomy – total score analyses
2.2. Materials and procedure Participants were asked to complete the PES, the NPI, and the Personal Style Inventory II (PSI-II; Robins et al., 1994), as part of a larger correlational study of trait entitlement. All questionnaires were completed online through a secure departmental website. The PES is a 9-item inventory designed to measure trait entitlement (e.g., ‘‘I demand the best because I’m worth it,’’ ‘‘I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than others’’). Responses range from 1 = strong disagreement to 7 = strong agreement. Scores for the PES are obtained by summing individual items (M = 30.40, SD = 9.63; a = .85). The NPI is a 40-item, forced-choice measure of global narcissism (e.g. ‘‘I like to have authority over other people’’ vs. ‘‘I don’t mind following orders’’). Each pair of statements has one narcissistic and one non-narcissistic response; total scores are calculated by summing the number of narcissistic choices. The mean NPI total score for the sample was 9.19 (SD = 3.53) with an alpha coefficient of .67.
The results of two regression analyses for sociotropy and autonomy using total scores are presented in the left-most columns of Tables 2 and 3. Beginning with sociotropy (Table 2), we found that gender was a significant predictor at both steps, with females more likely to have higher scores on sociotropy than males. As expected, different patterns for entitlement and narcissism emerged on the second step of the model: the PES showed a small positive relationship and the NPI showed a strongly negative relationship to sociotropy. For autonomy (Table 3), gender was also found to be predictive but in a direction opposite of that found for sociotropy: males were more likely to have higher scores on autonomy than females. The PES was positively related to autonomy, however narcissism was not. Therefore, overall scores suggest that entitlement and narcissism show different interpersonal patterns: entitlement is positively associated with both high sociotropy and autonomy, whereas narcissism is negatively related to sociotropy and is unrelated to autonomy.
52
K.C. Rose, P.A. Anastasio / Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
Table 1 Simple correlations (Pearson r) between PES, NPI, and PSI II sociotropy and autonomy scales. 1 1. PES 2. NPI 3. Sociotropy (Total) 4. Pleasing others subscale 5. Concern others subscale 6. Dependency subscale 7. Autonomy (Total) 8. Perfectionism/self criticism subscale 9. Need control subscale 10. Def separation subscale
–
2
3
.36 –
⁄⁄
4
5 ⁄⁄
.01 .19⁄⁄
.12 .29⁄⁄ .85⁄⁄
–
6 ⁄⁄
.11 .09⁄ .84⁄⁄ .57⁄⁄
–
7 ⁄
.09 .01 .70⁄⁄ .35⁄⁄ .47⁄⁄
–
8 ⁄
.17 .04 .18⁄⁄ .09⁄ .21⁄⁄ .01 –
–
9 ⁄⁄
10 ⁄⁄
.11 .08 .40⁄⁄ .30⁄⁄ .38⁄⁄ .27⁄⁄ .57⁄⁄ –
.27 .15⁄⁄ .21⁄⁄ .06 .25⁄⁄ .19⁄⁄ .77⁄⁄ .31⁄⁄ –
.05 .06 .02 .01 .02 .22⁄⁄ .88⁄⁄ .30⁄⁄ .48⁄⁄ –
⁄
p < .05. ⁄⁄ p < .01.
Table 2 Predicting sociotropy with psychological entitlement and narcissism. Characteristics of sociotropy Predictors
Total sociotropy
DR2 Step 1 Gendera Step 2 Gender PES NPI N
Pleasing others
DR2
b
.063⁄⁄⁄
b
.043⁄⁄⁄ .252⁄⁄⁄
.098⁄⁄⁄
Dependency
DR2
b
.036⁄⁄⁄
.232⁄⁄⁄ .086⁄ .200⁄⁄⁄
b
.057⁄⁄⁄
.207⁄⁄⁄
.189⁄⁄
.114⁄⁄⁄
621
Concern for what others think
DR2
.062⁄⁄⁄
.238⁄⁄ .067⁄⁄⁄
.179⁄⁄⁄ .021 .261⁄⁄⁄
.177⁄⁄⁄ .155⁄⁄⁄ .129⁄⁄⁄
621
621
.237⁄⁄⁄ .105⁄⁄ .025 621
⁄
p < .05. ⁄⁄ p < .01. ⁄⁄⁄ p < .001. a Gender is coded as 1 = male and 2 = female.
Table 3 Predicting autonomy with psychological entitlement and narcissism. Characteristics of autonomy Predictors
Total autonomy 2
DR Step 1 Gendera Step 2 Gender PES NPI N
Perfectionism/self criticism 2
DR
b ⁄⁄
.008
Need for control 2
DR
b
.000 .090⁄⁄
.036⁄⁄⁄
621
.016
.135⁄⁄⁄
.005 .031⁄⁄⁄
.146⁄⁄⁄ .085⁄ .109⁄⁄
.005 .250⁄⁄⁄ .063 621
b
.018⁄⁄⁄
.078⁄⁄⁄ .010 .094⁄⁄ .042
621
DR2
b
.000
.014⁄⁄ .091⁄⁄ .176⁄⁄⁄ .031
Defensive separation
621
⁄
p < .05. ⁄⁄ p < .01. ⁄⁄⁄ p < .001. a Gender is coded as 1 = male and 2 = female.
3.2. Sociotropy and autonomy – subscale analyses We then explored whether differences between narcissism and entitlement held for all facets of sociotropy and autonomy. This allowed us to not only look for consistency in the findings, but also to better articulate the specific characteristics predicted by the traits of narcissism and entitlement. In this set of regression analyses, patterns for gender, PES and NPI were examined for three facets of sociotropy: pleasing others, concern for what others think, and dependency. We performed the same analyses on each of the three facets of autonomy: perfectionism/self-criticism, need for control and defensive separation. The solutions are found in Tables 2 and 3. For sociotropy (Table 2), gender was found to be a significant predictor of all facets with females showing higher scores than males on pleasing others, concern for what others think, and dependency. But to the main purpose of the study, entitlement
and narcissism showed largely opposite relationships to several facets of sociotropy. The PES positively predicted concern for what others think and dependency on others. In contrast, the NPI negatively predicted a need to please others and concern for what others think. These data mirror and refine those found for the total score analysis. Gender was less predictive in models of autonomy (Table 3), as it only predicted one facet: males were found to be higher on defensive separation than females. Most striking for autonomy is the consistent positive relationship with entitlement. PES scores significantly predicted perfectionism/self-criticism, need for control, and defensive separation, although the effects are weaker for perfectionism/self-criticism and defensive separation. In contrast, narcissism was only related to defensive separation, and this was a negative relationship. The subscale analyses provide additional support for the finding that trait entitlement is positively
K.C. Rose, P.A. Anastasio / Personality and Individual Differences 59 (2014) 50–53
associated to both sociotropy and autonomy. Entitlement positively predicted five of the six subscales – in other words, the role of others appears to be central to the trait of entitlement in both dependency upon them, and in the need for independence from them. On the other hand, narcissism is negatively associated with sociotropy and is largely unrelated to autonomy, indicating that the role of others is not nearly as important to this construct. 4. Discussion We feel that the results of this study are noteworthy for two reasons. First, they support the view that trait entitlement is a unique personality trait with its own interpersonal consequences, similar in concept but distinct from trait narcissism, as both were revealed to have very different relationships to sociotropic and autonomous personality styles after controlling for gender and for one another. Second, we also found evidence that others occupy a much larger role in entitlement than they do in narcissism; in fact, narcissism appears to involve minimal engagement with others. Those scoring high in psychological entitlement were high in both sociotropy and autonomy. The entitled person cares about what others think, and is dependent upon them as well; that is, those high on entitlement are attuned to the thoughts of others and desire to be close to them. Yet, they also seek autonomy, manifested most strongly in the need for control: the entitled person does not want to be beholden to others nor be told what to do by them. They also appear to expect much from themselves as reflected in the relationship to perfection and self-criticism, and the small but significant relationship to defensive separation from others shows that they hold others at arm’s length. Thus, we found the profile of an entitled individual to exhibit a puzzling combination of dependence upon others with the desire for independence. As strange as the combination is, both strongly speak to centrality of others in entitlement. We also found evidence that others play a minimal role in global narcissism. Scores on the NPI were negatively related to sociotropy, and separate analyses of its three components showed that this relationship stemmed mainly from narcissists’ lack of concern with pleasing others and for what others think of them. Interestingly, the narcissist does not have a need for autonomy. Unlike those high on entitlement, individuals high on narcissism strongly resist dependency, but do not resist support and advice from others. They may recognize the pragmatic importance of advice in ultimately serving the needs of the self, whereas those high in entitlement perceive it as an affront. Together, it appears that trait narcissism manifests a consistent focus on the self with little dependence on others, and little need to be separate from them. Differences in sociotropy–autonomy patterns raise questions about potential vulnerabilities. Entitlement reflects sensitivity to others, but a resistance to their control and advice – a difficult mix of dependent and independent needs. On the other hand, high narcissism does not reflect these conflicting needs and so in the long run, may be psychologically healthier. As high levels of sociotropy and autonomy have been shown to predict depression (Robins et al., 1994), our data suggest that entitlement may be associated with a greater vulnerability to depression than narcissism. Moreover, the ties between entitlement, sociotropy and autonomy found here also have implications for explaining the
53
association between rising entitlement, depression and loneliness discussed by Twenge (2006) in her book, Generation Me. However, more research is needed to establish such a link. More broadly, the findings also suggest that interpersonal relationships may be a fruitful area within which to further explore differences between entitlement and narcissism and to further explore the nature of psychological entitlement. As our data show that those high on entitlement are both dependent on others yet crave independence from them, the question now becomes what exactly is the role that others play in entitlement. How would one wish to be both dependent on and independent from others? Future work is needed to flush out the answers to this question. Although the findings revealed an interesting pattern, several limitations are noted. First, even though there were consistent and significant effects for both sociotropy and autonomy, the PES and NPI accounted for a relatively small proportion of the variance. Second, although reliability coefficients were >.7 on most of the scales, they were in the moderate range (.61–.69) on others; this may have contributed to both nonsignificant and weak effects found for some of the sociotropy and autonomy subscales. Despite these limitations, we would argue that the observed differences in interpersonal patterns for entitlement and narcissism are both consistent and thought-provoking and as such, offer a new direction for research. As these data are correlational, it will be important that future work provide further evidence exploring differences between trait entitlement and narcissism, so as to understand the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of each. References Ackerman, R., & Donnellan, M. (2013). Evaluating self-report measures of narcissistic entitlement. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. Advance online publication. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9352-7 [2013]. Ackerman, R., Whitt, E., Donnellan, M., Trzesniewski, K., Robins, R., & Kashy, D. A. (2011). What does the Narcissistic Personality Inventory really measure? Assessment, 18, 67–87. Beck, A. T. (1983). Cognitive therapy of depression: New perspectives. In P. J. Clayton & J. E. Barrett (Eds.), Treatment of depression: Old controversies and new approaches. New York: Raven Press. Campbell, W., Bonacci, A., Shelton, J., Exline, J., & Bushman, B. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(1), 29–495. Corry, N., Merritt, R., Mrug, S., & Pamp, B. (2008). The factor structure of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 593–600. Desmet, M., Vanheule, S., Meganck, R., & Verhaeghe, P. (2010). Reconstruction and validation of the personal style inventory in a Flemish clinical and student sample. Psychological Reports, 106(2), 394–404. Emmons, R. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 291–300. Kubarych, T., Deary, I., & Austin, E. (2004). The Narcissistic Personality Inventory: Factor structure in a non-clinical sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 857–872. Pryor, L., Miller, J., & Gaughan, E. (2008). A comparison of the Psychological Entitlement Scale and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory’s Entitlement Scale: Relations with general personality traits and personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(5), 517–520. Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890–902. Robins, C., Ladd, J., Welkowitz, J., Blaney, P., Diaz, R., & Kutcher, G. (1994). The Personal Style Inventory: Preliminary validation studies of new measures of sociotropy and autonomy. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16(4), 277–300. Sato, T., & McCann, D. (2007). Sociotropy–autonomy and interpersonal problems. Depression and Anxiety, 24, 153–162. Twenge, J. (2006). Generation me. New York: Free Press.