Cited by 158Personality Traits and PsychologyDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionSocial Power and Status Dynamics

Is self-regard a sociometer or a hierometer? Self-esteem tracks status and inclusion, narcissism tracks status.

Open access
Mahadevan, Nikhila, Gregg, Aiden P., Sedikides, Constantine·2019·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

What adaptive function does self-regard serve? Sociometer theory predicts that it positively tracks social inclusion. A new theory, hierometer theory, predicts that it positively tracks social status. We tested both predictions with respect to two types of self-regard: self-esteem and narcissism. Study 1 (N = 940), featuring a cross-sectional design, found that both status and inclusion covaried positively with self-esteem, but that status alone covaried positively with narcissism. These links held independently of gender, age, and the Big Five personality traits. Study 2 (N = 627), a preregistered cross-sectional study, obtained similar results with alternative measures of self-esteem and narcissism. Studies 3-4 featured experimental designs in which status and inclusion were orthogonally manipulated. Study 3 (N = 104) found that both higher status and higher inclusion promoted higher self-esteem, whereas only higher status promoted higher narcissism. Study 4 (N = 259) obtained similar results with alternative measures of self-esteem and narcissism. The findings suggest that self-esteem operates as both sociometer and hierometer, positively tracking both status and inclusion, whereas narcissism operates primarily as a hierometer, positively tracking status. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pspp0000189

Cites

117 of 117 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 118 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mahadevan, N., Gregg, A. P., & Sedikides, C.
Affiliations
University of Southampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Mahadevan, Nikhila
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2019-03
Volume
116
Issue
3
Pages
444-466
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2796264952
Cited by
158
References
118
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2013: 2
FWCI
15.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
self-esteem, narcissism, sociometer theory, social status, social inclusion, self-regard
MeSH terms
Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Narcissism, Psychological Theory, Psychology, Social, Self Concept, Social Class, Psychological Distance, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review