cognition and emotion (in press)

8/9/2019 Cognition and Emotion (in press)

1/9

BRIEF REPORT

Towards understanding pleasure at the misfortunesof others: The impact of self-evaluation threat

on schadenfreude

Wilco W. van DijkLeiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

Jaap W. OuwerkerkVU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Yoka M. WesselingUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Guido M. van KoningsbruggenUtrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

In two experiments we demonstrated that a self-evaluation threat intensifies schadenfreude.Moreover, we showed that a self-evaluation threat predicts schadenfreude in both threat-relatedand threat-unrelated domains and when controlling for feelings of envy and dislike towards thetarget and evaluations of the misfortune in terms of deservingness. These findings indicate that

anothers misfortune may be pleasing because it satisfies peoples concern for a positive self-view anda sense of self-worth.

Keywords: Emotion; Schadenfreude; Self-enhancement; Self-evaluation; Social comparison.

Although schadenfreude (pleasure at the mis-fortunes of others) carries a negative connotation,people sometimes cannot resist a little smile

when another person suffers a setback. Based onthe many displays of schadenfreude in maga-zines, television shows, web logs, and interper-

sonal communication (e.g., in gossip), it seems

almost inherent to social being. Previous researchhas provided important insights into the condi-tions that elicit this emotion. For instance, it hasbeen shown that schadenfreude is more readilyevoked when a misfortune befalls an envied(Smith et al., 1996; Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk,

Goslinga, Nieweg, & Gallucci, 2006) or disliked

Correspondence should be addressed to: Wilco W. van Dijk, Department of Social and Organizational Psychology, LeidenUniversity, PO Box 9555, NL-2300 RB Leiden, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]

We thank Myrke Nieweg for assistance in collecting the data. We thank two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on anearlier version of this article.

COGNITION AND EMOTION

0000, 00 (00), 19

1# 2010 Psychology Press, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa businesshttp://www.psypress.com/cogemotion DOI:10.1080/02699931.2010.487365

DownloadedBy:

[Universi

tyofUtrecht]At:18:2316June2010


2/9

person (Hareli & Weiner, 2002; Van Dijk et al.,

2006) or when a misfortune is perceived asdeserved (Feather & Sherman, 2002; Van Dijk,Ouwerkerk, Goslinga, & Nieweg, 2005). Weextend this previous work by providing empiricalsupport for the notion that a self-evaluationthreat intensifies pleasure at the misfortunes ofothers.

Self-evaluation threat and schadenfreude

According to appraisal theorists, emotions aregenerated by cognitive evaluations (appraisals) ofevents and each distinct emotion is elicited by adistinctive pattern of appraisals (Roseman &Smith, 2001). Moreover, it is argued that eventsthat satisfy ones concerns (or promise to do so)

yield positive emotions, whereas events that harmor threaten these concerns elicit negative emo-tions. Consistent with this conceptualisation ofemotions, we argue that one of the reasons whypeople experience schadenfreude is that anothersmisfortune satisfies their concern to view them-selves positively. That is, anothers misfortune canbe pleasurable because it provides people with anopportunity to protect, maintain, or enhance their

self-evaluation.Peoples motivation to feel good about them-

selves is seen by many psychologists as animportant human concern (e.g., Baumeister,1994; Sedikides & Strube, 1997; Taylor & Brown,1988; Tesser, 1988). One way people can feelgood about themselves is to compare their own lotto that of less-fortunate others. Indeed, researchshows that when a self-enhancement motive isactivated, people engage more readily in down-

ward social comparisons to bolster their feelings ofself-worth (Collins, 1996; Sedikides & Strube,

1997; Taylor & Brown, 1988). Furthermore,Wills (1981) argued that, because of their greaterneed for self-enhancement, individuals who ex-perience a self-evaluation threat are more likely tomake downward comparisons, and findings ofseveral studies corroborate this view (Aspinwall &

Taylor, 1993; Gibbons, 1986).Combining these insights from appraisal the-

ory and research on social comparison processes,

we argue that anothers misfortune can be pleasing

because the self-enhancing aspect of a morefavourable comparison position enables people tofeel good about themselves. Hence, our first aim

was to demonstrate that individuals who experi-ence a self-evaluation threat, and therefore have agreater need to restore their self-worth, feel moreschadenfreude following anothers misfortunethan those whose self is not threatened.

Recent research on group-based schadenfreudehas also provided an indication for the hypothe-sised relation between self-evaluation threat andschadenfreude. This research showed that feelingsof in-group inferiority predicted schadenfreudetowards a successful out-group that had failed(Leach & Spears, 2008; Leach, Spears,Branscombe, & Doosje, 2003). However, threatsto ones social identity cannot be merely equated

with threats to the individual self, and general-ising results from an intergroup to an interperso-nal level of analysis should be done with caution.For instance, previous studies have shown thatintergroup interactions are generally morecompetitive than interindividual interactions(Wildschut, Pinter, Vevea, Insko, & Schopler,2003). Therefore, in the current research we

aimed to provide the first direct support for theimpact of a threat to the individual self onschadenfreude.

In the before-mentioned studies on group-based schadenfreude an out-groups misfortuneoccurred in the same domain as the in-group sinferiority (i.e., sports or university contests). Oursecond aim was to demonstrate that people usethe self-bolstering properties provided by an-others misfortune, even if this misfortune occursin a domain unrelated to the self-evaluationthreat. This would be in line with Allports

(1943), p. 466) notion of fluid compensation,that is, mental health and happiness . . . does notdepend upon the satisfaction of this drive or thatdrive, it depends rather upon the person findingsome area of success somewhere and Steeles(1988) self-affirmation model, in which it isargued that people can adapt to self-threatsthrough actions that affirm their general self-integrity even when these adaptations do nothing

VAN DIJK ET AL.

2 COGNITION AND EMOTION, 0000, 00 (00)

DownloadedBy:

[Universi



3/9

to resolve the provoking threat itself. The fluidity

of compensation and self-affirmation processessuggests the existence of a flexible-self system forprotecting, maintaining, or enhancing self-worth,rather than for resolving specific self-evaluationthreats (see also, Beauregard & Dunning, 1998;

Tesser, 2000).

Present research

The present research aimed to extend previousstudies on schadenfreude by demonstrating that aself-evaluation threat: (a) intensifies schaden-freude; and (b) increases schadenfreude in both

threat-related and threat-unrelated domains. Forthis purpose, we conducted two experiments in

which participants were confronted with a self-evaluation threat by providing them with negativefeedback on a self-relevant task. Subsequently, athreat-related (Experiment 1) or threat-unrelated(Experiment 2) misfortune happened to anotherperson and participants reactions towards thismisfortune were assessed and compared to acondition in which they received either positivefeedback (Experiment 1) or no feedback (Experi-ment 2). As envy (Smith et al., 1996; Van Dijk et

al., 2006) and dislike (Hareli & Weiner, 2002)towards a target and deservingness of the misfor-tune (Feather & Sherman, 2002; Van Dijk et al.,2005) has been shown to affect schadenfreude,these variables were controlled for, enabling a morestringent test of the impact of a self-evaluationthreat on schadenfreude.

EXPERIMENT 1

Method

Participants, design, and procedure. Participantswere 130 undergraduates (76 women, 54 men), who were randomly assigned to one of the twoSelf-evaluation Threat conditions (negative feed-back, positive feedback). Participants were toldthat they would take part in two unrelated studies.In the first study, self-evaluation threat wasmanipulated, whereas in the second one schaden-freude was initiated.

Self-evaluation threat manipulation and

manipulation check. To manipulate self-evalua-tion threat, participants were provided with eithernegative or positive feedback on a self-relevanttask using a task developed by Ouwerkerk, deGilder, and de Vries (2000). It was explained thatthey had to complete a task that assessed theirInconsistent Rules Processing Ability. To in-crease the relevance of this task, participants wereled to believe that performance on the task hadbeen shown to correlate strongly with the capacityfor analytic thinking and intellectual abilities ingeneral. After completing this task, participantsreceived either negative or positive feedbackon their performance. In the negative-feedback(positive-feedback) condition participants wereled to believe they had scored among the worst(best) 10% of the student population. Hereafter,they completed the manipulation check andresponded to the following items: I am satisfiedabout my performance and I believe that,in comparison with others, my performance wasactually not that bad (M04.83, SD01.87;r0.87).

Target and misfortune information. As in pre-

vious research (Van Dijk et al., 2005, 2006), wepresented participants with two written inter-

views. In the first interview, either a male orfemale target person was described as a high-potential in terms of achievement and likelihoodto get a good job. Before participants read thesecond interview they completed measures thatassessed their feelings towards the target. Next,participants read an interview with the studentssupervisor that allegedly was conducted threemonths after the interview with the student.From this interview participants learned that the

student recently had suffered a setback, as thesupervisor remarked that the student had given avery poor presentation of his or her thesis, andhad to rewrite major parts of it. Consequently, thestudent was about to suffer a serious delay in hisor her studies. We then assessed participantsreactions to this misfortune. Upon completingthese questions, they were fully debriefed andthanked for their participation.

SELF-EVALUATION THREAT AND SCHADENFREUDE

COGNITION AND EMOTION, 0000, 00 (00) 3

DownloadedBy:

[Universi



4/9

Reactions towards target and misfortune. When

not specified otherwise, we assessed all variablesby statements, and asked participants to specifytheir (dis-)agreement with each given statement(10strongly disagree; 70strongly agree). Partici-pants reactions towards the target involved fourstatements to assess envy (e.g., I am jealousof . . .1; I feel less good when I compare myresults with those of. . .; M03.26, SD01.23;Cronbachs a0.77); four statements assesseddislike (e.g., I hate . . .; I dislike . . .; M03.03,SD01.34; a0.84).

The assessment of participants reactions to-

wards the misfortune involved five statementsmeasuring schadenfreude (e.g., I enjoy what hap-pened to . . .; I couldnt resist a little smile; I feelschadenfreude2; M02.94, SD01.39; a0.88);three statements measuring sympathy (e.g., Icommiserate with . . . about what happened;

M03.82, SD01.15; a0.72); and two state-ments that assessed misfortune deservingness(e.g., Ifind what happened to . . . is deserved; M03.19,SD01.35; r0.80).

Results and discussion

Manipulation check. An analysis of variance(ANOVA) with Self-evaluation Threat (nega-tive feedback, positive feedback), targets Genderand participants Gender as independent vari-ables and performance evaluation as dependent

variable yielded a significant main effect of Self-evaluation Threat only, F(1, 126)0100.43, pB.001, hp

20.44. As intended, participants eval-

uated their performance less positively afternegative feedback (M03.51, SD01.61) thanafter positive feedback (M06.03, SD01.16).No other main or interaction effects wereobtained, FsB1, ps.46. This indicates thatour manipulation of self-evaluation threat wassuccessful and independent of both targets

gender and participants gender. Furthermore,

additional analyses showed that participantsreactions in terms of envy, dislike, and deserv-ingness of the misfortune were independentfrom our self-evaluation threat manipulation,FsB1.

Schadenfreude and sympathy. An ANOVA withSelf-evaluation Threat, targets Gender, and par-ticipants Gender as independent variables andschadenfreude as dependent variable yielded theexpected main effect of Self-evaluation Threatonly, F(1, 122)04.08, pB.05, hp

20.03.3 Parti-

cipants experienced more schadenfreude towardsthe misfortune of the student after negativefeedback (M03.19, SD01.50) than after posi-tive feedback (M02.71, SD01.26). No othermain or interaction effects were found, FsB1.09,

ps.29. Next, we simultaneously entered envy,dislike, and deservingness as covariates in theanalysis, enabling us to test the additional ex-planatory value of our self-evaluation threatmanipulation. Results showed a positive relationbetween dislike and schadenfreude, F(1, 119)051.59, pB.001, hp

20.30, and between deserving-

ness and schadenfreude, F(1, 119)0

3.92, p0

.05,hp20.03. Results revealed no significant relation

between envy and schadenfreude (F01.17, ns).More importantly, the expected main effect ofSelf-evaluation Threat was still significant whencontrolling for these covariates, F(1, 119)05.73,

pB.05, hp20.05.4

Similar analyses on sympathy yielded amarginally significant three-way interaction be-tween Self-evaluation Threat, targets Gender,and participants Gender, F(1, 122)03.39, pB.07. Inspection of the means indicated that afterpositive feedback female participants had moresympathy with female targets than male partici-pants. These different findings for sympathy and

1 Depending upon conditions the name Marleen or Mark was used in the statements.2We used the term leedvermaak, which is the Dutch word for schadenfreude.3 As previous research (Van Dijk et al., 2005, 2006) showed significant effects of participant s gender and/or targets gender on

schadenfreude and sympathy these factors were included in the analyses.4 Additional analyses of covariance, in which the covariates were entered independently rather than simultaneously, showed the

same pattern of results.

VAN DIJK ET AL.


DownloadedBy:

[Universi



5/9

schadenfreude together with their moderately

negative correlation (r0(.34, pB.001) supportsthe notion that schadenfreude and (lack of)sympathy are distinct emotional reactions to themisfortunes of others (Heider, 1958).

There might be several aspects of our researchthat prevented finding a significant relationbetween envy and schadenfreude. For instance,contrary to earlier studies supporting a relationbetween envy and schadenfreude, we did notsystematically vary the achievements of the targetof schadenfreude, thereby possibly reducing the

variation in envy reactions towards the target.Furthermore, the cause of the self-evaluationthreat was the negative feedback participantsreceived on a self-relevant task. As the achieve-ments of the target were not the main source ofthreat, this target may have elicited less strongfeelings of envious hostility, which are typicallypart of envy proper. Moreover, it might be thecase that schadenfreude has a stronger relation-ship with more malicious forms of envy than withmore benign ones. Our assessment of envy inrelatively benign terms (e.g., hostility was notincluded in our measure) might also have pre-

vented finding a relation between envy and

schadenfreude.In this first experiment self-evaluation threat

was manipulated by providing participants witheither negative or positive feedback on a self-relevant task. However, whereas negative feed-back poses a threat to ones self-evaluation,positive feedback may not only result in asituation in which such threat is absent, but canalso provide an opportunity for self-enhancement.Consequently, it might be premature to concludeon the basis of our findings that a self-evaluationthreat intensifies schadenfreude*the effects of

the manipulation may also have been caused byself-enhancement following positive feedback.We addressed this issue in our second experimentby contrasting a negative-feedback with a no-feedback condition.

Furthermore, in the first experiment an-others misfortune occurred in a domainthat was related to the manipulation of self-evaluation threat. That is, feedback was

provided on a task that was allegedly related

to analytic thinking and intellectual abilities ingeneral and the misfortune occurred in thedomain of academic achievements. To test

whether self-evaluation threat also intensifiesschadenfreude in a threat-unrelated domain,

we confronted participants in Experiment 2 with a misfortune that was unrelated to ourself-evaluation threat manipulation.

EXPERIMENT 2

Method

Participants, design, and procedure. Participants were 75 undergraduates (39 women, 36 men),who were randomly assigned to one of the twoSelf-evaluation Threat conditions (negative feed-back, no feedback). The experimental procedure

was similar to that of Experiment 1.

Self-evaluation threat manipulation andmanipulation check. To manipulate self-evaluation threat we used the same task as inExperiment 1. In the negative-feedback condi-tion, feedback indicated that the participant had ascore among the worst 10% of the studentpopulation. In the no-feedback condition, parti-cipants did not receive any feedback after theycompleted the task, but immediately continued

with the second, supposedly unrelated, study. Theeffectiveness of the manipulation was assessedusing the same two statements as in Experiment 1(M04.34, SD01.78; r0.86).

Target and misfortune information. After com-pleting the first part of the study, participants

were asked to read a news article in which anarrator tells about a misfortune suffered by astudent that allegedly had appeared in a nationalstudents magazine. The core of the articledescribes a student who rented an expensive carto make an entrance at a student party. Afterarriving, while trying to park his rented car, hedrove it into the canal. Consequently, the car had



DownloadedBy:

[Universi



6/9

to be towed out of the canal by the fire brigade

and appeared severely damaged.5

Reactions towards target and misfortune. Afterparticipants learned about the misfortune, scha-denfreude (M03.72, SD01.38; five statements,a0.85), sympathy (M03.40, SD01.37; threestatements, a0.76), dislike (M04.81, SD01.54; two statements, r0.68), and misfortunedeservingness (M05.03, SD01.43; two state-ments, r0.64) were assessed in similar ways asin Experiment 1.6

Results and discussion Manipulation check. An ANOVA with Self-evaluation Threat (negative feedback, no feed-back) and participants Gender as independent

variables and performance evaluation as depen-dent variable yielded a significant main effect ofSelf-evaluation Threat only, F(1, 71)024.55,

pB .001, hp20.26. As intended, participants

evaluated their performance less positively afternegative feedback (M03.47, SD01.81) thanafter no feedback (M05.23, SD01.24). Noother main or interaction effects were found,

FsB1.38, ps.24. This indicates that our ma-nipulation of self-evaluation threat was successfuland independent of participants gender. Further-more, additional analyses showed that partici-pants reactions in terms of dislike anddeservingness of the misfortune were independentfrom our self-evaluation threat manipulation,FsB2.46, ps.12.

Schadenfreude and sympathy. An ANOVA withSelf-evaluation Threat and participants Gender asindependent variables and schadenfreude as de-

pendent variable yielded the expected main effectof Self-evaluation Threat only, F(1, 71)04.04,

pB .05, hp20.05. Participants took more pleasure

in the targets misfortune after negative feedback(M04.04, SD01.29) than after no feedback

(M03.40, SD01.18). No other main or inter-

action effects were found, FsB2.31, ps .13.Next, we simultaneously entered dislike and mis-fortune deservingness as covariates in the analysis.Results showed that schadenfreude was signifi-cantly associated with more perceived deserving-ness of the misfortune, F(1, 69)015.97, pB.001,hp20.19, whereas schadenfreude was not signifi-

cantly associated with dislike toward the target,F01.87, ns. As dislike was assessed after mis-fortune information was provided, this informa-tion might have influenced dislike towards thetarget, thereby obscuring the expected relationship

between (pre-misfortune) dislike and schaden-freude. More importantly, the expected maineffect of Self-evaluation Threat was still signifi-cant when controlling for these covariates, F(1,69)04.33, pB .05, hp

20.06 (see Footnote 4).

Similar analyses on sympathy yielded a mar-ginally significant main effect of Gender only,F(1, 71)03.67, p0.059, hp

20.05. Female parti-

cipants tended to experience more sympathytowards the target (M03.68, SD01.23) thanmale participants (M03.08, SD01.23). Noother main or interaction effects were found,

FsB1.86, ps .17. These findings, togetherwith the fact that sympathy was not significantlycorrelated with schadenfreude (r0(.11, ns),further support the notion that schadenfreudeand sympathy are distinct emotional reactionstowards the plight of others.

Since in our second experiment we contrasted acondition in which negative feedback was pro-

vided with a no-feedback condition, it seemsunlikely that the results of our first experiment

were caused by an opportunity for self-enhance-ment provided by positive feedback. Hence, these

results demonstrate that a self-evaluation threatposed by negative feedback intensifies schaden-freude. Moreover, they show that self-evaluationthreat also intensifies schadenfreude in a threat-unrelated domain.

5 Since Experiment 1 did not yield a significant effect of the targets gender on schadenfreude and in order to limit the numberof factors in our analyses, all participants were presented with a male target.

6 Envy towards the target was not assessed.

VAN DIJK ET AL.


DownloadedBy:

[Universi



7/9

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Results of two studies show that self-evaluationthreat intensifies schadenfreude in both threat-related and threat-unrelated domains and whencontrolling for envy and dislike towards the targetand deservingness of the misfortune.

Our findings provide the first empiricaldemonstration that a threat to the individual selfintensifies schadenfreude and support our con-tention that the misfortunes of others can satisfypeoples concern for a positive self-view. In arecent study (Van Dijk, Wesseling, Ouwerkerk, &

Van Koningsbruggen, 2010) we demonstratedthat autobiographical accounts of occasions in

which people felt schadenfreude were associated with a boost in self-esteem. This corroboratesthe notion that the misfortunes of others can bepleasing because they offer an opportunityto protect, maintain, or enhance ones self-evaluation.

A second aim of the present research was todemonstrate that anothers misfortune could alsoserve a self-enhancement function when themisfortune occurs in a domain unrelated to the

self-evaluation threat. Our first experimentshowed that individuals experienced more scha-denfreude towards the academic failure of anotherperson when their self-evaluation was underminedin the threat-related domain of intellectual abil-ities. However, our second experiment demon-strated that after such a self-threat schadenfreude

was also intensified when another person suffereda misfortune in a threat-unrelated domain. Thefinding that a self-evaluation threat intensifiedschadenfreude in both threat-related and threat-unrelated domains is consistent with the work ofscholars who advocate the existence of a flexible-self system for protecting, maintaining, or enhan-cing self-worth (e.g., Allport, 1943; Beauregard &Dunning, 1998; Steele, 1988; Tesser, 2000).

It is important to note that we do not claimthat misfortunes in any domain will serve aself-enhancement function. Consistent with thebefore mentioned scholars, we suggest that theself-relevance of the domain is an important

determinant of the extent to which misfortunes

protect, maintain, or enhance self-evaluation.That is, we hypothesise that misfortunes of others will only bolster self-worth if they occur indomains that are appraised as relevant andimportant to the individual self. In our presentresearch it is likely that participants appraisedboth misfortunes as failures in a self-relevantdomain. In our first experiment the misfortuneconcerned an academic failure, a domain verylikely to be relevant and important to our(student) participants. In our second experimentthe misfortune (a mild car accident) might havebeen appraised as a painful embarrassment infront of peers, a situation also likely to be regardedas self-relevant and important. As, in our presentresearch, we neither assessed nor manipulated theself-relevance of the domain, this hypothesiscould be tested in future studies.

The present findings also showed that a self-evaluation threat intensified schadenfreude when

we controlled for envy and dislike towards thetarget and deservingness of the misfortune,thereby demonstrating that self-evaluation threatis an important additional predictor of schaden-freude. Moreover, our manipulation of a self-

evaluation threat did not have an effect on eitherdislike, envy, or deservingness, which excludes thepossibility that, at least in our studies, these

variables mediated the impact of self-evaluationthreat on schadenfreude. Future studies couldaddress the conditions under which these variablesdo or do not mediate the impact of self-threats onschadenfreude.

Experiment 1 showed that the more a target was disliked and the more a misfortune wasappraised as deserved the more schadenfreude

was elicited, thereby replicating earlier work on

schadenfreude (Feather & Sherman, 2002;Hareli & Weiner, 2002; Van Dijk et al.,2005, 2006). Experiment 1 did not show arelation between envy and schadenfreude, arelation that has been found in earlier research(Smith et al., 1996; Van Dijk et al., 2006). It isimportant to emphasise that we do not arguethat envy is not a determinant of schadenfreudeor that, under no circumstances, can it mediate



DownloadedBy:

[Universi



8/9

the impact of self-threats on schadenfreude. As

we discussed earlier, there might be severalaspects of our research that prevented findingthis relation. Future research could address thequestion of when and when not envy predictsschadenfreude (e.g., is malicious envy a strongerpredictor of schadenfreude than benign envy?).

This constitutes an important line of futurestudies, as currently scholars tend to differ intheir views on whether there is a relationbetween envy and schadenfreude (e.g., Smithet al., 1996; Van Dijk et al., 2006) or not (e.g.,Feather & Sherman, 2002; Hareli & Weiner,2002).

Closing remarks

Combining our research with previous work onschadenfreude suggests that schadenfreude is amulti-determined emotion. The current availableempirical evidence indicates that it can be evokedby dislike and envy towards the target, evaluationof the misfortune in terms of deservingness, and aself-evaluation threat. Which of these determi-nants will provide the most powerful explanationof schadenfreude will, in our view, be dependent

upon the specific context of the situation. There-fore, an important agenda for future research onschadenfreude should include a systematic inves-tigation of the exact conditions under which thedifferent determinants independently or interac-tively evoke the multi-faceted feeling of pleasureat the misfortunes of others.

Manuscript received 11 September 2009Revised manuscript received 30 March 2010

Manuscript accepted 8 April 2010First published online day Month year

REFERENCES

Allport, G. W. (1943). The ego in contemporarypsychology. Psychological Review, 50, 451478.

Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1993). The effects ofsocial comparison direction, threat, and self-esteemon affect, self-evaluation, and expected success.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64,

708

722.Baumeister, R. F. (1994). Self and identity: A socialpsychology perspective. In A. Tesser (Ed.), Advancedsocial psychology(pp. 5198). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Beauregard, K. S., & Dunning, D. (1998). Turning upthe contrast: Self-enhancement motives promptegocentric contrast effects in social judgments.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,606621.

Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impactof upward social comparison on self-evaluations.Psychological Bulletin, 119, 5169.

Feather, N. T., & Sherman, R. (2002). Envy, resent-ment, schadenfreude, and sympathy: Reactions to

deserved and undeserved achievement and subse-quent failure. Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin, 28, 953961.

Gibbons, F. X. (1986). Social comparison and depres-sion: Companys effect on misery. Journal of Person-ality and Social Psychology, 51, 140148.

Hareli, S., & Weiner, B. (2002). Dislike and envy asantecedents of pleasure at anothers misfortune.

Motivation and Emotion, 26, 257277.Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal

relations. New York: Wiley.Leach, C. W., & Spears, R. (2008). A vengefulness of

the impotent: The pain of in-group inferiority and

schadenfreude toward successful out-groups. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 13831396.Leach, C. W., Spears, R., Branscombe, N. R., &

Doosje, B. (2003). Malicious pleasure: Schadenfreudeat the suffering of another group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 932943.

Ouwerkerk, J. W., de Gilder, D., & de Vries, N. K.(2000). When the going gets tough, the tough getgoing: Social identification and individual effort inintergroup competition. Personality and SocialPsychology Bulletin, 26, 15501559.

Roseman, I. J., & Smith, C. A. (2001). Appraisaltheory, overview, assumptions, varieties, controver-sies. In K. S. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone

(Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods,research (pp. 319). Oxford, UK: Oxford UniversityPress.

Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1997). Self-evaluation:To thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure,to thine own self be true, and to thine own self bebetter. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experi-mental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 209269). New

York: Academic Press.

VAN DIJK ET AL.


DownloadedBy:

[Universi



9/9

Smith, R. H., Turner, T. J., Garonzik, R., Leach, C.

W., Urch-Druskat, V., & Weston, C. M. (1996).Envy and schadenfreude. Personality and Social Psy-chology Bulletin, 22, 158168.

Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. InL. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social

psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 181227). San Diego, CA:Academic Press.

Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mentalhealth. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193210.

Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation mainte-nance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology(Vol.21, pp. 181227). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Tesser, A. (2000). On the confluence of self-esteem

maintenance mechanisms. Personality and SocialPsychology Review, 4, 290299.

Van Dijk, W. W., Ouwerkerk, J. W., Goslinga, S., &

Nieweg, M. (2005). Deservingness and schaden-freude. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 933939.Van Dijk, W. W., Ouwerkerk, J. W., Goslinga, S.,

Nieweg, M., & Gallucci, M. (2006). When peoplefall from grace: Reconsidering the role of envy inschadenfreude. Emotion, 6, 156160.

Van Dijk, W. W., Wesseling, Y. M., Ouwerkerk, J. W.,& Van Koningsbruggen, G. M. (2010). The self-enhancing properties of anothers misfortune. Un-published manuscript, Leiden University, TheNetherlands.

Wildschut, T., Pinter, B., Vevea, J. L., Insko, C. A., &Schopler, J. (2003). Beyond the group mind: Aquantitative review of the interindividualintergroup

discontinuity effect. Psychological Bulletin, 129,698722.

Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principlesin social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90,245271.



DownloadedBy:

[Universi


cognition and emotion (in press)

Documents