Research Projects for MA Students 2024 (Supervisor: Prof Kitty Dumont)

Project 1

Collective (Pluralistic) Illusions

Brief Description

In 2019, 52000 Americans were asked how they would personally define a successful life. They were presented with two statements and asked to select the one they consider most closely to their answer:  A. “A person is successful if they have followed their own interests and talents to become the best they can be at what they care about most” or B. “A person is successful if they are rich, have a high-profile career, or are well-known.” The findings were that 97% of participants chose A for themselves, but 92% thought most others would choose B. This is an example of collective illusions (also known as pluralistic ignorance). Collective illusion is a “group-level phenomenon, wherein individual belonging to a group mistakenly believe that other’s cognitions (attitudes, beliefs, feeling) and/or behaviours differ systematically from their own (i.e., a directional misperception), regardless of how the misperception arises” (Sragent & Newman, 2021, p. 166). Thus, collective illusions can lead to people conforming (through facilitation or inhibition) to social norms that do not exist. Collective illusions have been demonstrated for different domains such as alcohol use (Prentice & Miller, 1993; Rinker et al., 2017), sexual attitudes and behaviour (Reiber & Garcia, 2010; Wesche et al., 2016), political correctness (Van Boven, 2000), climate change perceptions (Geiger & Swim, 2016; Monin & Norton, 2003), paternity leave (Miyajima & Yamaguchi, 2017), masculinity (Munsch et al., 2018), and relationships (De Souza & Schmader, 2022).

The proposed research project should aim to study the social psychological factors that cause and the implications of collective illusions.

References and further Readings

De Souza, L., & Schmader, T. (2022). The misjudgment of men: Does pluralistic ignorance inhibit allyship? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(2), 265.

Geiger, N., & Swim, J. K. (2016). Climate of silence: Pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 47, 79-90.

J. O'Gorman, H. (1986). The discovery of pluralistic ignorance: An ironic lesson. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 22(4), 333-347.

Miller, D. T., & Nelson, L. D. (2002). Seeing approach motivation in the avoidance behavior of others: Implications for an understanding of pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1066.

Miyajima, T., & Yamaguchi, H. (2017). I want to but I won't: Pluralistic ignorance inhibits intentions to take paternity leave in Japan. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1508.

Monin, B., & Norton, M. I. (2003). Perceptions of a fluid consensus: Uniqueness bias, false consensus, false polarization, and pluralistic ignorance in a water conservation crisis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(5), 559-567.

Munsch, C. L., Weaver, J. R., Bosson, J. K., & O'Connor, L. T. (2018). Everybody but me: Pluralistic ignorance and the masculinity contest. Journal of Social Issues, 74(3), 551-578.

Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1993). Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use on campus: some consequences of misperceiving the social norm. Journal of personality and social psychology, 64(2), 243.

Reiber, C., & Garcia, J. R. (2010). Hooking up: Gender differences, evolution, and pluralistic ignorance. Evolutionary Psychology, 8(3), 147470491000800307.

Rinker, D. V., Young, C. M., Krieger, H., Lembo, J., & Neighbors, C. (2017). Evaluations and perceptions of others’ evaluations of negative alcohol-related consequences predict negative alcohol-related consequences among college drinkers. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 78(2), 249-257.

Rose, T. (2022). Collective Illusions. Hachette Book: New York.

Sargent, R. H., & Newman, L. S. (2021). Pluralistic ignorance research in psychology: A scoping review of topic and method variation and directions for future research. Review of General Psychology, 25(2), 163–184.

Van Boven, L. (2000). Pluralistic ignorance and political correctness: The case of affirmative action. Political Psychology, 21(2), 267–276.

Research Methodologies

Surveys and Social Psychological Experiments

Degree

Masters by Research

Supervisor

Prof Kitty Dumont (dumonkb@unisa.ac.za)

Space available

One MA candidate

Project 2

Humiliation and the Self-Concept

Brief Description

Vorster, Dumont and Waldzus (under review) proposed to define psychological humiliation as the experience of receiving an unsolicited message that implies being seen or perceived by one or more significant other(s) in a manner incompatible with one’s social self-concept. Based on a content of 2635 narratives capturing definitions of humiliation and accounts of humiliating situations from 1048 participants, it was found that humiliation entails specific self-discrepancies that do not only refer to the fundamental content dimensions of communion and/or agency but also affect different aspects of the self. Vorster, Dumont and Waldzus (under review) propose that this psychological definition of humiliation offers the potential for predicting factors contributing to an individual’s susceptibility to humiliation. Two main predictors were proposed: narcissism and the dominant social construction of the social world (i.e., Culture). For instance, it is reasonable to predict that individuals with an excessively inflated self-concept, either on a personal or group level (e.g., collective narcissism; see Golec de Zavala & Lantos, 2020), are more likely to experience humiliation. It is also reasonable to assume that people experience and resolve psychological humiliation differently depending on whether their self-worth is embedded in dignity cultures, where reputation is not bestowed by others but rather intrinsic, or in face and honour cultures, where reputation is heavily reliant on others and encompasses not only personal but also familial reputation. Lastly, the proposed definition of psychological humiliation does not imply (as in previous concepts) that psychological discrepancy results only from perceiving oneself as being judged as less competent or worthy. Self-discrepancies can also arise from perceiving oneself as being judged as more competent or worthy than one actually is. This proposal raises an intriguing empirical question: Are these positive self-discrepancies also experienced as aversive, and if so, are they similar to the more common experience of humiliation as negative self-discrepancy? Orson Welles’ movie Citizen Kane might offer some insight into the concept of humiliation resulting from positive self-discrepancy through the character of Susan, who nearly committed suicide due to her husband’s grandiose illusions about her talents as an opera singer. Susan, who was painfully aware of her vocal limitations and grew increasingly traumatised by the humiliation of having to perform in front of an audience, might have survived her suicide attempt. However, she never forgave her husband for refusing to see her for who she was.

According to some of the outlined arguments, the proposed research project should aim to study the interplay between the experience of humiliation and self-concept.

References and further Readings

Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2014). Communal and Agentic Content in Social Cognition. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 50, pp. 195-255). Academic Press. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800284-1.00004-7

Boldero, J., & Francis, J. (2000). The relation between self-discrepancies and emotion: The moderating roles of self-guide importance, location relevance, and social self-domain centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.38

Golec de Zavala, A., & Lantos, D. (2020). Collective narcissism and its social consequences: The bad and the ugly. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 273-278.Eisenberg, N. (2006). Prosocial Behavior. In G. G. Bear & K. M. Minke (Eds.), Children's needs III: Development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 313–324). National Association of School Psychologists.

Elshout, M., Nelissen, R. M. A., & van Beest, I. (2017). Conceptualising humiliation. Cognition and Emotion, 31(8), 1581–1594. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1249462

Fernández, S., Saguy, T., & Halperin, E. (2015). The paradox of humiliation: The acceptance of an unjust devaluation of the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(7), 976–988. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215586195

Hartling, L. M, Lindner, E., Spalthoff, U., & Britton, M. (2013). Humiliation: A nuclear bomb of Emotions? Psicologia Politica, 46, 55–76

Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect. Psychological review, 94(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319

Leidner, B., Sheikh, H., & Ginges, J. (2012). Affective dimensions of intergroup humiliation. PloS One, 7(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0046375

Veldhuis, T. M., Gordijn, E. H., Veenstra, R., & Lindenberg, S. (2014). Vicarious group-based rejection: Creating a potentially dangerous mix of humiliation, powerlessness, and anger. PloS One, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095421

Vorster, A., Dumont, K. B., & Waldzus, S. (2021). Just hearing about it makes me feel so humiliated: Emotional and motivational responses to vicarious group-based humiliation. International Review of Social Psychology, 34(1): 6, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.458

Vorster, A., Dumont, K. B., & Waldzus, S. (under review). Rethinking Humiliation: Self-Discrepancy as the Core of a Complex Psychological Experience. Currently with European Journal of Social Psychology

Research Methodologies

Surveys and Social Psychological Experiments

Degree

Masters by Research

Supervisor

Prof Kitty Dumont (dumonkb@unisa.ac.za) and Dr Anja Vorster from Auckland University of Technology (New Zealand)

Space available

One MA candidate

Project 3

Collective Narcissism and Zero-sum Beliefs

Brief Description

Cickocka and Cislak (2020) propose that current politics are driven by the need for recognition of the greatness (and exceptionalism) of one’s nation. South Africa is no exception, as the narrative (and/or myth) of South African exceptionalism has long been the foundation of an imagined national identity (Ndlovu, 2014). This need for a nation’s or political party’s appreciation is captured in the psychological concept of collective narcissism. Collective narcissism is a belief that one’s own group (the in-group) is exceptional but not sufficiently recognised by others (de Zavala et al., 2020). It is a form of “ingroup love” that requires “outgroup hate”. Collective narcissism can be a crucial driver of societal instability because it escalates contests for equal political representation between advantaged and disadvantaged groups (e.g., men and women) into intergroup conflicts (de Zavala & Keenan, 2023). It often elicits negative emotions towards the group's disadvantaged members and hostility towards the advantaged group, making it highly mobilising and oriented towards social justice based on zero-sum beliefs.

The proposed research project should aim to study the interplay between collective narcissism, negative emotions and social justice beliefs that assume a zero-sum world.

References and further Readings

Cichocka, A. (2016). Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism. European Review of Social Psychology, 27(1), 283-317.

Cichocka, A., & Cislak, A. (2020). Nationalism as collective narcissism. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 69-74.

de Zavala, A. G. (2011). Collective narcissism and intergroup hostility: The dark side of ‘in‐group love’. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 309-320.

de Zavala, A. G. (2022). Conditional Parochial Vicarious Ostracism: Gender Collective Narcissism Predicts Distress at the Exclusion of the Gender Ingroup in Women and Men. Sex Roles, 87(5-6), 267-288.

de Zavala, A. G., & Keenan, O. (2022). Collective narcissism and the clash of advantaged and disadvantaged groups. In The Psychology of Politically Unstable Societies (pp. 119-135). Routledge.

de Zavala, A., & Lantos, D. (2020). Collective narcissism and its social consequences: The bad and the ugly. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 273-278.

Ndlovu, M. (2014). 'Just a bunch of unbearable, useless individuals': a decolonial critique on minister Mbalula's rhetoric of South African exceptionalism. African Journal of Rhetoric, 6(1), 143-167.

Research Methodologies

Surveys and Social Psychological Experiments

Degree

Masters by Research

Supervisor

Prof Kitty Dumont (dumonkb@unisa.ac.za)

Space available

One MA candidate