While the psychological consequences of experiencing objectification are well-documented, its impact on early career decision-making remains largely unexplored. To address this gap, we investigated whether being objectified steers college students away from challenging jobs. Across six studies ( N = 1,584), we found consistent evidence that experiencing objectification leads students to “opt out” and avoid challenging jobs. Correlational data showed that students’ experiences of being objectified were associated with their challenge avoidance in intended (Pilot Study) and actual (Study 1) career decisions. In Study 2, we experimentally manipulated objectification and found that participants in the objectification condition showed greater avoidance of challenging jobs. Study 3 showed that this relationship was mediated by reduced perceived control. Studies 4a and 4b further validated this mediating role by using a causal chain design. Our findings shed light on the social cognitive factors that influence career decision-making.
Rewards can be given publicly or privately. In four studies (plus three supplemental ones), we found that, while individuals generally prefer private rewards, people relatively higher in grandiose narcissism also like public rewards. Specifically, people higher (vs. lower) in narcissism were more motivated by public rewards in their workplaces, more likely to prefer public versions of the same rewards, and more likely to accept a job with a better title rather than higher pay. This greater desire for public rewards was associated with a heightened desire for status, a lesser concern about others’ envy, and with both the admiration and rivalry components of narcissism. This research suggests that narcissistic status pursuit may lead people higher in narcissism to like public rewards that others are not as fond of, suggesting, for example, that title inflation in the workplace might be more motivating to employees higher rather than lower in narcissism.
Prior research suggests that psychological entitlement differentially predicts women’s benevolent sexism and men’s hostile sexism. However, few studies examine these associations longitudinally, and none have tested whether sexism similarly predicts psychological entitlement over time. Our pre-registered study used random intercept cross-lagged panel modelling to test reciprocal longitudinal associations between psychological entitlement and sexism using 14 waves of a large nationwide panel sample ( N = 72,039; women = 62.8%). For women, within-person increases in psychological entitlement predicted within-person increases in both benevolent and hostile sexism. For men, within-person increases in psychological entitlement predicted within-person increases in hostile sexism but not benevolent sexism over time. Critically, these associations were bidirectional among both women and men. The results highlight the potential psychological allure of benevolent and hostile sexism for women and men and illustrate that endorsing sexism may contribute to the status insecurities that sexism promises to resolve.
Racial/ethnic minority group members vary in the extent to which they are chronically suspicious of the motives behind White people’s positive behavior toward minorities. Chronic suspicion has been shown to shape racial/ethnic minorities’ perception, cognition, emotion, and physiology following positive overtures from White people in laboratory experiments. However, little is known about the long-term consequences of chronic suspicion of Whites’s motives. Here, we examine the consequences of chronic suspicion for low-income and/or first-generation Latino/a college students over their first 3 years of college. Students who entered college with higher levels of chronic suspicion experienced college more negatively, including more experiences of discrimination and a lack of perceived university inclusiveness. These experiences, in turn, predicted declines in mental and reported physical health by the end of students’ third year of college. This research provides longitudinal evidence of the long-term negative effects of chronic suspicion on college students’ mental and physical well-being.
Although partner similarity in demographics, personal values, and personality has been well studied, little is known about partner similarity in aesthetic dispositions. Music preferences offer a particularly promising lens for examining this question because they function as powerful social signals that individuals seem to consider when forming relationships, for example, by showcasing their favorite music on dating apps. Across three studies and a mini meta-analysis, we assessed the profile similarity in couples’ music preferences ( N couples = 309, primarily young adults) using both genre-based and artist-based methods, and compared these similarities with those observed for personal values and Big Five personality traits. Couples consistently demonstrated greater similarity in music preferences than pseudo-couples, and these effects exceeded those observed for values and personality traits. In addition, some analyses indicated small to modest positive associations between music preference similarity and relationship outcomes. These findings provide an initial demonstration of partner similarity in music preferences and its potential implications for relationship quality.
