Waving the Flag: National Symbolism,Social Identity,and Political Engagement*

This research examined the psychological underpinnings of concern for national symbols and ritualistic‐ceremonial activities or “symbolic involvement.” We propose and test a distinction between symbolic and “instrumental” involvement or concern for the functionality of national institutions and their capability to provide instrumental benefits to citizens. Items comprising the two constructs were found to be empirically distinct, evidenced by statistically reliable and orthogonal dimensions in exploratory factor analysis. Moreover, evidence based on divergent patterns of relations with various forms of national membership indicates that symbolic and instrumental involvement are rooted in distinct motivational concerns related to identity expression and object appraisal, respectively. These findings suggest that national symbolism evokes a psychological attachment to the nation as an abstracted social entity, but not as a concrete functional system.     

Narcissism and the Use of Personal Pronouns

In this study we explored the relationship between narcissism and the individual's use of personal pronouns during extemporaneous monologues. The subjects, 24 males and 24 females, were asked to talk for approximately 5 minutes on any topic they chose. Following the monologues the subjects were administered the Narcissistic Personality Inventory, the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, and the Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control Scale. The monologues were tape-recorded and later transcribed and analyzed for the subjects' use of personal pronouns. As hypothesized, individuals who scored higher on narcissism tended to use more first person singular pronouns and fewer first person plural pronouns. Discriminant validity for the relationship between narcissism and first person pronoun usage was exhibited in that narcissism did not show a relationship with subjects' use of second and third person pronouns, nor did the personality variables of extraversion, neuroticism, or locus of control exhibit any relationship with the subjects' personal pronoun usage.     

The Public and Private Use of Consensus-Raising Excuses

ABSTRACT Two experiments tested the proposition that people use consensus-raising excuses more in private than in public when the audience has information that could refute subjects' claims about others In Experiment 1, subjects received success or failure feedback and made public or private attributions to ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck In Experiment 2, subjects received positive or negative feedback and evaluated themselves and others on the trait Task difficulty attributions and evaluations of others are consensus-raising measures Consistent with our hypothesis, subjects receiving negative feedback in Experiment 1 claimed that the task was more difficult, and in Experiment 2 evaluated the other more negatively in private than in public.     

Denial and Confirmatory Search: Paradoxical Consequences of Medical Diagnosis1

An experiment was conducted to examine the effects of medical diagnostic-test results on illness appraisal and the recall of symptoms and behavior. Subjects were tested for a fictitious enzyme deficiency and were told either that the test result was positive (deficiency present) or that it was negative (deficiency absent). In addition, some of the subjects were told the test was accurate 95% of the time and others were told it was accurate 75% of the time. As predicted, subjects judged the enzyme deficiency as less serious and more prevalent when presented with positive test results. Subjects with positive test results also recalled more behaviors that had been labeled as risk factors. Although positive test subjects tended to report more deficiency-related symptoms, diagnosis did not affect the free recall of general symptoms. In addition, information concerning the reliability of the diagnostic test had no effect on judgments or recall but did affect information seeking. Subjects with positive test results were less likely to request a definitive follow-up test when their results were unreliable. The results are interpreted as evidence for independent confirmatory search and denial processes following medical diagnosis.