Date: 02 Mar 2014
Psychological Entitlement and Ambivalent Sexism: Understanding the Role of Entitlement in Predicting Two Forms of Sexism
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Recent research has shown that narcissistic men in the United States express more ambivalent sexism than their non-narcissistic counterparts. The present study sought to extend these findings by hypothesizing that psychological entitlement would be a predictor of ambivalent sexism but that that this relationship may vary by gender. Given entitlement’s associations with hostility and aggression and the previously established link between narcissism and sexism in men, we hypothesized that entitlement would predict hostile sexism in men. Given that entitlement is characterized by a pervasive sense of deservingness for special treatment and goods, we expected that entitled women would endorse attitudes of benevolent sexism. These hypotheses were tested using two cross-sectional samples in the U.S.—a sample of undergraduates from a private university in the Midwest (N = 333) and a web-based sample of adults across the U.S. (N = 437). Results from regression analyses confirmed that psychological entitlement is a robust predictor of ambivalent sexism, above and beyond known predictors of sexism such as low openness and relevant covariates such as impression management. In addition, entitlement was a consistent predictor of benevolent sexism in women, but not in men, and a consistent predictor of hostile sexism in men, but not in women. These relationships were largely robust, persisting even when relevant covariates (e.g., socially desirable responding, trait openness) were controlled statistically, although in one sample the link between entitlement and hostile sexism in men was reduced to non-significance when benevolent sexism was controlled for statistically. Implications of these findings are discussed.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.
John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory: Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.
Miles, J., & Shevlin, M. (2001). Applying regression and correlation: A guide for students and researchers. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 119–125. doi:10.1002/1097-4679(198201)38:1<119::AID-JCLP2270380118>3.0.CO;2-I.CrossRef
Schnieders, T. C., & Gore, J. S. (2011). We don’t want your kind here: When people high in narcissism show prejudice against immigrants. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 5, 175–193. doi:10.1037/h0099265.
- Psychological Entitlement and Ambivalent Sexism: Understanding the Role of Entitlement in Predicting Two Forms of Sexism
Volume 70, Issue 5-6 , pp 209-220
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Ambivalent sexism
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, 44106-7123, USA
- 2. Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr., San Diego, CA, 92182, USA