The comprehensive arrogance scale

Abstract

[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI--COLUMBIA AT REQUEST OF AUTHOR.] I developed a novel measure of arrogance based on the conceptual framework for research proposed by Cowan et al. (2019). This framework conceptualizes arrogance as having a tripartite structure consisting of different types of arrogance: individual arrogance, comparative arrogance, and antagonistic arrogance. These three different types of arrogance are proposed to consist of six different components. Individual arrogance involves distorted information and limitations in one's abilities, overestimation of one's information and abilities, and resistance to new information about one's limits; comparative arrogance involves failure to consider the perspective of others and the belief or assumption of self-superiority; and antagonistic arrogance involves denigrating and devaluing others. I designed a 60-item scale based on these six components (the Comprehensive Arrogance Scale: CAS). In Study 1a, I tested the factor structure of this scale with a student sample. I reduced the total number of items to 24, and found that the scale does not support the proposed tripartite structure, but instead shows a two-factor structure. This two-factor structure consists of components I have labeled �Self-Superiority" and �Social-Superiority." Study 1a also provided initial validity tests of this new scale. In Study 1b, test-retest reliability was established. Study 2 examined arrogance in relation to self-esteem and found this new measure of arrogance provides incremental validity predicting preserving feelings of superiority above and beyond self-esteem. For Study 3, I examined the behavioral outcomes associated with arrogance, and tested the ability of the arrogance scale to predict these outcomes differentially from intellectual arrogance, intellectual humility, self-esteem, and narcissism. I found mixed support of my hypotheses. Specifically, those high in the CAS took less advantage of reading helpful resources regardless of perceived difficulty of the activity, and this pattern was in part mediated by feelings of superiority. I did not find support for the hypotheses that individuals high in CAS would practice less, nor did I find evidence for any of the hypothesized moderations. The current studies present the first empirical test of a novel framework of arrogance and provide a foundation for future research into the CAS and arrogance.