Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Further challenges to the "authentic"/"hubristi...

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Further challenges to the "authentic"/"hubristic" model of pride: conceptual clarifications and new evidence

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Further challenges to the "authentic"/"hubristic" model of pride: conceptual clarifications and new evidence. / Holbrook, Colin; Piazza, Jared; Fessler, Daniel.
In: Emotion, Vol. 14, No. 1, 02.2014, p. 38-42.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Holbrook, Colin ; Piazza, Jared ; Fessler, Daniel. / Further challenges to the "authentic"/"hubristic" model of pride : conceptual clarifications and new evidence. In: Emotion. 2014 ; Vol. 14, No. 1. pp. 38-42.

Bibtex

@article{5db76b31677a48d09c96fdbdcfdbd829,
title = "Further challenges to the {"}authentic{"}/{"}hubristic{"} model of pride: conceptual clarifications and new evidence",
abstract = "The Authentic and Hubristic Pride Scales (AHPS) are the methodological core of an influential perspective on pride. The Authentic Pride (AP) scale purportedly measures a distinct facet of pride rooted in attributing success to effort (but not ability), and related to prestige (but not dominance). The Hubristic Pride (HP) scale purportedly measures a complementary facet rooted in attributing success to ability (but not effort), and related to dominance (but not prestige). In the target article, we presented evidence against both profiles. Here, we first examine the counterarguments raised in defense of both the AHPS and the related appraisal-tendency model, then present a new study confirming that AP is elicited by attributions of success to natural ability, and HP is elicited by attributions of success to causes outside the self. It is thus clear that the HP scale measures not pride, but rather evaluations of the self as overclaiming credit or excessively displaying pride.",
author = "Colin Holbrook and Jared Piazza and Daniel Fessler",
year = "2014",
month = feb,
doi = "10.1037/a0035457",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "38--42",
journal = "Emotion",
issn = "1528-3542",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Further challenges to the "authentic"/"hubristic" model of pride

T2 - conceptual clarifications and new evidence

AU - Holbrook, Colin

AU - Piazza, Jared

AU - Fessler, Daniel

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - The Authentic and Hubristic Pride Scales (AHPS) are the methodological core of an influential perspective on pride. The Authentic Pride (AP) scale purportedly measures a distinct facet of pride rooted in attributing success to effort (but not ability), and related to prestige (but not dominance). The Hubristic Pride (HP) scale purportedly measures a complementary facet rooted in attributing success to ability (but not effort), and related to dominance (but not prestige). In the target article, we presented evidence against both profiles. Here, we first examine the counterarguments raised in defense of both the AHPS and the related appraisal-tendency model, then present a new study confirming that AP is elicited by attributions of success to natural ability, and HP is elicited by attributions of success to causes outside the self. It is thus clear that the HP scale measures not pride, but rather evaluations of the self as overclaiming credit or excessively displaying pride.

AB - The Authentic and Hubristic Pride Scales (AHPS) are the methodological core of an influential perspective on pride. The Authentic Pride (AP) scale purportedly measures a distinct facet of pride rooted in attributing success to effort (but not ability), and related to prestige (but not dominance). The Hubristic Pride (HP) scale purportedly measures a complementary facet rooted in attributing success to ability (but not effort), and related to dominance (but not prestige). In the target article, we presented evidence against both profiles. Here, we first examine the counterarguments raised in defense of both the AHPS and the related appraisal-tendency model, then present a new study confirming that AP is elicited by attributions of success to natural ability, and HP is elicited by attributions of success to causes outside the self. It is thus clear that the HP scale measures not pride, but rather evaluations of the self as overclaiming credit or excessively displaying pride.

U2 - 10.1037/a0035457

DO - 10.1037/a0035457

M3 - Journal article

VL - 14

SP - 38

EP - 42

JO - Emotion

JF - Emotion

SN - 1528-3542

IS - 1

ER -