Kyle Richardson

Disparagement humor and prejudice: Contemporary theory and research

Abstract In this article we review contemporary research testing Martineau’s (1972) hypothesis that disparagement humor fosters or introduces prejudice against the disparaged out-group. Supporting Martineau’s hypothesis, research suggests that instigating disparagement humor might indeed foster prejudice against the targeted group; however, through mechanisms that do not implicate unique effects of humor as a medium for communicating disparagement. Contrary to Martineau’s hypothesis, it does not appear that exposure to disparagement humor promotes a negative disposition toward the targeted group. Rather than acting as an initiator of prejudice, disparagement humor functions as a releaser of existing prejudice. Lastly, following Martineau’s theoretical framework, we identify new questions about the social consequences of disparagement humor that require further theoretical development and empirical research.

Sexist humor as a trigger of state self-objectification in women

Abstract We conducted two experiments to test the possibility that sexist humor triggers a state of self-objectification in women. Our findings supported two hypotheses derived from self-objectification theory. In Experiment 1, we found that women (but not men) reported greater state self-objectification following exposure to sexist comedy clips than neutral comedy clips. Experiment 2 replicated this finding for women and further demonstrated that sexist humor causes women to engage in more body surveillance compared to neutral humor.

Revisiting the Interactive Effect of Narcissism and Self-Esteem on Responses to Ego Threat: Distinguishing Between Assertiveness and Intent to Harm

We addressed whether narcissism and self-esteem synergize to enhance assertive responses and deter aggressive responses to ego-threatening provocation. Participants ( N = 448) completed measures of narcissism and self-esteem, imagined ego-threatening provocation, and indicated their aggressive and assertive responses. Participants also completed individual difference measures of agreeableness, openness, status/dominance motivation, and endorsement of the notion that aggression begets power. Narcissism and self-esteem interacted to reduce aggressive responses but enhance assertive responses to ego-threat; moreover, this interaction related to enhanced agreeableness, openness, status/dominance motivation, and reduced endorsement of the belief that aggression begets power, and these relations accounted, in part, for relations between the interaction and aggressive and assertive responses. Broadly, the findings contribute to the contentious issue of how self-evaluation influences responses to ego-threat; specifically, we would suggest that this issue be conceptualized in terms of synergistic effects of narcissism and self-esteem and distinguish between assertive versus aggressive responding.

Narcissists Stand United: Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissists Agree That Others’ Narcissism Is Less Repulsive

Previous research suggests narcissists (vs. non-narcissists) may perceive grandiose narcissism as a less dislikeable trait in others. However, previous research has only addressed this phenomenon from the perspective of a grandiose narcissistic perceiver and not from the perspective of a vulnerable narcissistic perceiver, thus limiting understanding of whether the phenomenon unites or distinguishes between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism forms. The current study examined this phenomenon from the perspective of vulnerable and grandiose narcissistic perceivers. Participants indicated liking judgments of actors behaving in a way consistent with grandiose narcissism (narcissistically) or non-narcissistically and their attitudes toward the category “narcissists.” Although participants indicated less liking for the narcissistic (vs. non-narcissistic) actor, this relative disliking for narcissists was reduced as a function of perceiver grandiose and vulnerable narcissism; furthermore, perceiver grandiose and vulnerable narcissism each related to more positive attitudes toward “narcissists.”

The Causal Influence of Perceived Social Norms on Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration: Converging Cross-Sectional, Longitudinal, and Experimental Support for a Social Disinhibition Model

Across three studies, we develop a model of the direct and indirect paths through which the perceived prevalence (perceived descriptive norms [PDN]) of intimate partner violence (IPV) among peers may influence individuals’ likelihood of engaging in IPV. Study 1 replicated and extended previous cross-sectional research by demonstrating a positive longitudinal association between PDN and subsequent IPV perpetration. Study 2 further showed the influence of PDN on IPV perpetration to be mediated through its relation to perceived peer acceptance of IPV (perceived injunctive norms [PIN]), which in turn predicted personal IPV acceptance. Study 3 built on this model using an experimental paradigm to show that increasing PDN leads to corresponding increases in PIN and, in turn, personal IPV acceptance, which both predicted IPV perpetration. Furthermore, the effects of PIN on personal IPV acceptance and IPV propensity were strongest for dominance-oriented individuals. Results bear important implications for social norms–based interventions for IPV.

Narcissists’ Perceptions of Narcissistic Behavior

Do narcissists view their narcissistic reputations and behavior as a curse or a blessing? Herein, we reviewed studies that have addressed narcissists’ (a) awareness of their narcissistic reputation and behavior, (b) evaluations of their narcissistic traits and behavior, (c) perspective on their prototypical narcissistic action as strategic (i.e., a pattern of behavior designed to accomplish goals) vs. impulse-driven, and (d) evaluation of other narcissists. Our review suggested that narcissists are generally aware that they are more “narcissistic,” view their own prototypical narcissistic traits and behaviors as both rather beneficial and highly strategic, and are more tolerant of other people that behave narcissistically. Perhaps this constellation of findings suggests that “narcissism” possesses subjective logic and can be understood in terms of straightforward normative models of human behavior (e.g., people act “narcissistically” because they think “narcissistic” images lead to more favorable life outcomes). We conclude by discussing areas for future research in this vein.

“S/he’s Taken”

Narcissists’ threat reactivity can be differentiated into cognitive, emotional, and tactical-behavioral responses, and these dimensions of reactivity are presumed to vary as a function of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. The present research applied this conceptual model to situations involving a relationship threat from a rival. A college sample completed measures of vulnerable narcissism, pathological and non-pathological measures of grandiose narcissism, and then indicated anticipated cognitive, emotional, and tactical responses to situations involving high and low levels of rival threat. All narcissism forms generally converged on similar tactical responses – specifically, enhanced coercive and mate-value-enhancement tactics. Yet, both pathological and non-pathological expressions of grandiose narcissism diverged from vulnerable narcissism on cognitive and emotional outcomes, such that only vulnerable narcissism related to enhanced worrying and negative emotionality. Furthermore, all narcissism forms were more strongly related to coercive tactics against the rival following high (vs. low) rival threat.

Putting the brakes on prejudice rebound effects: An ironic effect of disparagement humor

ABSTRACT When people high in prejudice censor prejudice in one setting, they can experience a prejudice rebound effect—subsequently responding with more prejudice than otherwise. Disparagement humor fosters the release rather than suppression of prejudice. Thus, two experiments tested the hypothesis that exposure to disparagement humor attenuates rebound effects. Participants suppressed prejudice by writing fewer anti-gay thoughts about same-sex adoption (Experiment 1) or by reporting greater support for same-sex civil rights (Experiment 2) when expecting to share their responses with others (non-prejudice norm condition) but not if others first exchanged anti-gay jokes (prejudice norm condition). High-prejudice participants then exhibited prejudice rebound in the non-prejudice norm condition only. They rated a gay man more stereotypically (Experiment 1) and allocated greater budget cuts to a gay student organization (Experiment 2) in the non-prejudice norm condition.