Aleksandra Cichocka

Collective Narcissism and its Social Consequences

This article introduces the concept of collective narcissism--an emotional investment in an unrealistic belief about the in groups greatness--aiming to explain how feelings about an ingroup shape a tendency to aggress against outgroups. The results of 5 studies indicate that collective, but not individual, narcissism predicts intergroup aggressiveness. Collective narcissism is related to high private and low public collective self-esteem and low implicit group esteem. It predicts perceived threat from outgroups, unwillingness to forgive outgroups, preference for military aggression over and above social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, and blind patriotism. The relationship between collective narcissism and aggressiveness is mediated by perceived threat from outgroups and perceived insult to the ingroup. In sum, the results indicate that collective narcissism is a form of high but ambivalent group esteem related to sensitivity to threats to the ingroups image and retaliatory aggression.

Social dominance in context and in individuals: Contextual moderation of robust effects of social dominance orientation in 15 languages and 20 countries.

We tested the internal reliability and predictive validity of a new 4-item Short Social Dominance Orientation (SSDO) scale among adults in 20 countries, using 15 languages (N = 2,130). Low scores indicate preferring group inclusion and equality to dominance. As expected, cross-nationally, the lower people were on SSDO, the more they endorsed more women in leadership positions, protecting minorities, and aid to the poor. Multilevel moderation models showed that each effect was stronger in nations where a relevant kind of group power differentiation was more salient. Distributions of SSDO were positively skewed, despite use of an extended response scale; results show rejecting group hierarchy is normative. The short scale is effective. Challenges regarding translations, use of short scales, and intersections between individual and collective levels in social dominance theory are discussed.

The Paradox of In-Group Love: Differentiating Collective Narcissism Advances Understanding of the Relationship Between In-Group and Out-Group Attitudes

OBJECTIVE The present studies test the hypothesis that the overlap between collective narcissism and positive in-group identification conceals the opposite relationships these variables have with out-group derogation. METHOD Five surveys were conducted in different cultural and national contexts, using different samples and different intergroup contexts (Study 1, Polish student sample, N = 85; Study 2, British student sample, N = 81; Study 3, Polish representative sample, N = 979; Study 3, Polish student sample, N = 267 and Study 5, British student sample, N = 241). RESULTS The results of suppression analyses systematically indicate that when the positive relationship between collective narcissism and in-group positivity is controlled for, the non-narcissistic in-group positivity predicts less out-group negativity, whereas collective narcissism predicts more out-group derogation. CONCLUSIONS The results advance our understanding of constructive and destructive forms of in-group positivity and their different consequences for intergroup attitudes.

Collective narcissism and anti-Semitism in Poland:

Two studies examined the relationship between collective narcissism—an emotional investment in an unrealistic belief about the greatness of an in-group (Golec de Zavala, Cichocka, Eidelson, & Jayawickreme, 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 (Polish siege beliefs; Bar-Tal & Antebi, 1992a, 1992b) and (b) a belief that the Jews are a particularly threatening out-group because they secretly aim to dominate the world (the conspiracy stereotype of Jews; Bergmann, 2008; Kofta & Sędek, 2005). These results confirm that collective narcissism predicts prejudice against social groups perceived as threatening. Collective narcissists’ sensitivity to intergroup threat is composed of beliefs about vulnerability of the in-group and hostility of the out-group.

Does self-love or self-hate predict conspiracy beliefs? Narcissism, self-esteem and the endorsement of conspiracy theories

Across three studies, we examined the role of self-evaluation in predicting conspiracy beliefs. Previous research linked the endorsement of conspiracy theories to low self-esteem. We propose that conspiracy theories should rather be appealing to individuals with exaggerated feelings of self-love, such as narcissists, due to their paranoid tendencies. In Study 1, general conspiracist beliefs were predicted by high individual narcissism but low self-esteem. Study 2 demonstrated that these effects were differentially mediated by paranoid thoughts, and independent of the effects of collective narcissism. Individual narcissism predicted generalized conspiracist beliefs, regardless of the conspiracy theories implicating in-group or out-group members, while collective narcissism predicted belief in out-group but not in-group conspiracies. Study 3 replicated the effects of individual narcissism and self-esteem on the endorsement of various specific conspiracy theories and demonstrated that the negative effect of self-esteem was largely accounted for by the general negativity toward humans associated with low self-esteem.

Stripped of illusions? Exploring system justification processes in capitalist and post-Communist societies*

Sociologists and political scientists have often observed that citizens of Central and Eastern Europe express high levels of disillusionment with their social, economic and political systems, in comparison with citizens of Western capitalist societies. In this review, we analyze system legitimation and delegitimation in post-Communist societies from a social psychological perspective. We draw on system justification theory, which seeks to understand how, when and why people do (and do not) defend, bolster and justify existing social systems. We review some of the major tenets and findings of the theory and compare research on system-justifying beliefs and ideologies in traditionally Capitalist and post-Communist countries to determine: (1) whether there are robust differences in the degree of system justification in post-Communist and Capitalist societies, and (2) the extent to which hypotheses derived from system justification theory receive support in the post-Communist context. To this end, we summarize research findings from over 20 countries and cite previously unpublished data from a public opinion survey conducted in Poland. Our analysis confirms that there are lower levels of system justification in post-Communist countries. At the same time, we find that system justification possesses similar social and psychological antecedents, manifestations and consequences in the two types of societies. We offer potential explanations for these somewhat complicated patterns of results and conclude by addressing implications for theory and research on system justification and system change (or transition).

The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories

What psychological factors drive the popularity of conspiracy theories, which explain important events as secret plots by powerful and malevolent groups? What are the psychological consequences of adopting these theories? We review the current research and find that it answers the first of these questions more thoroughly than the second. Belief in conspiracy theories appears to be driven by motives that can be characterized as epistemic (understanding one’s environment), existential (being safe and in control of one’s environment), and social (maintaining a positive image of the self and the social group). However, little research has investigated the consequences of conspiracy belief, and to date, this research does not indicate that conspiracy belief fulfills people’s motivations. Instead, for many people, conspiracy belief may be more appealing than satisfying. Further research is needed to determine for whom, and under what conditions, conspiracy theories may satisfy key psychological motives.

Collective Narcissism Moderates the Effect of In-group Image Threat on Intergroup Hostility

Results of 4 experiments demonstrated that under in-group image threat collective narcissism predicts retaliatory intergroup hostility. Under in-group criticism (vs. praise) collective narcissists expressed intention to harm the offending out-group but not other, nonoffending out-groups. This effect was specific to collective narcissism and was replicated in studies that accounted for the overlap between collective narcissism and individual narcissism, in-group positivity (in-group identification, blind and constructive patriotism), social dominance orientation, and right wing authoritarianism. The link between collective narcissism and retaliatory intergroup hostility under in-group image threat was found in the context of national identity and international relations and in the context of a social identity defined by university affiliation. Study 4 demonstrated that the relationship between collective narcissism and intergroup hostility was mediated by the perception of in-group criticism as personally threatening. The results advance our understanding of the mechanism driving the link between collective narcissism and intergroup hostility. They indicate that threatened egotism theory can be extended into the intergroup domain.

International support for the Arab uprisings: Understanding sympathetic collective action using theories of social dominance and social identity

Inspired by the popular Arab protests against oppressive regimes that began in 2010, people around the world protested in sympathy with the Arab peoples. The present research draws on two major theories of intergroup relations to develop an initial integrative model of sympathetic collective action. We incorporate social dominance theory’s (SDT) concept of (rejectionist) legitimizing myths with the solidarity and emotional mediation concept of the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) to understand motivations for sympathetic collective action among bystanders. Using data from 12 nations (N = 1,480), we tested three models: (a) SIMCA (i.e., solidarity, anger, and efficacy), (b) a social dominance theory model of collective action (i.e., social dominance orientation and ideologies concerning Arab competence), and (c) an integrated model of sympathetic collective action combining both theories. Results find the greatest support for an integrated model of collective action. Discussion focuses on theoretical pluralism and suggestions for future research.

Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism

ABSTRACT Integrating psychoanalytic ideas of group idealisation with social identity and categorisation theories, this article discusses the distinction between secure and defensive in-group positivity. Narcissistic in-group positivity captures a belief in in-group greatness that is contingent on external validation. It reflects defensive in-group positivity, insofar as it stems from the frustration of individual needs, and predicts increased sensitivity to threats as well as undesirable consequences for out-groups and the in-group. Secure in-group positivity—that is, in-group positivity without the narcissistic component—is a confidently held positive evaluation of one’s in-group that is independent of the recognition of the group in the eyes of others. It stems from the satisfaction of individual needs, is resilient to threats and has positive consequences for the in-group and out-groups. I review evidence for these two distinct ways people relate to their social groups and discuss theoretical and practical implications for understanding intra- and intergroup relations.