Humblebragging: A Distinct—and Ineffective—Self-Presentation Strategy

Ovul  Sezer; Francesca  Gino; Michael I. Norton

Article | Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Humblebragging: A Distinct—and Ineffective—Self-Presentation Strategy

by Ovul Sezer, Francesca Gino and Michael I. Norton

Abstract

Self-presentation is a fundamental aspect of social life, with myriad critical outcomes dependent on others’ impressions. We identify and offer the first empirical investigation of a prevalent, yet understudied, self-presentation strategy: humblebragging. Across nine studies, including a week-long diary study and a field experiment, we identify humblebragging—bragging masked by a complaint or humility—as a common, conceptually distinct, and ineffective form of self-presentation. We first document the ubiquity of humblebragging across several domains, from everyday life to social media. We then show that both forms of humblebragging—complaint-based or humility-based—are less effective than straightforward bragging, as they reduce liking, perceived competence, compliance with requests, and financial generosity. Despite being more common, complaint-based humblebrags are less effective than humility-based humblebrags and are even less effective than simply complaining. We show that people choose to deploy humblebrags particularly when motivated both to elicit sympathy and impress others. Despite the belief that combining bragging with complaining or humility confers the benefits of each strategy, we find that humblebragging confers the benefits of neither, instead backfiring because it is seen as insincere.

Keywords: Humblebragging; impression management; Self-presentation; interpersonal perception; competence; liking; sincerity; Behavior; Perception; Interpersonal Communication; Personal Characteristics;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Sezer, Ovul, Francesca Gino, and Michael I. Norton. "Humblebragging: A Distinct—and Ineffective—Self-Presentation Strategy." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 114, no. 1 (January 2018): 52–74.

Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

Communicating Resource Scarcity

Grant E. Donnelly, Anne Wilson, A.V. Whillans and Michael I. Norton

The development and maintenance of interpersonal relationships require investments of both money and time—resources that are often limited in supply, but in great demand. Indeed, consumers are regularly asked to dedicate their money and time to social engagements, and need to manage these resources efficiently. Therefore, consumers often choose to cite insufficient time or money as an excuse for rejecting social invitations. But how does using the excuse of financial versus time scarcity influence interpersonal relationships? Across eight experiments, we demonstrate that using financial scarcity as an excuse (e.g., “I don’t have money”) increases perceptions of interpersonal closeness and helping behavior compared to using time scarcity as an excuse (e.g., “I don’t have time”). This effect is explained by the fact that time is perceived as a more personally controllable resource than money, resulting in consumers who cite financial (vs. temporal) constraints as being perceived as more trustworthy. However, excuse-givers do not correctly predict this difference in interpersonal outcomes. These findings advance our theoretical understanding of how excuses revolving around resource constraints affect interpersonal perceptions and behaviors and provides practical insights for consumers desiring to minimize social repercussions when turning down social invitations.

Keywords: interpersonal relationships; time; Communication; Relationships; Money; Perception;

Citation:

Donnelly, Grant E., Anne Wilson, A.V. Whillans, and Michael I. Norton. "Communicating Resource Scarcity." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-066, January 2019. View Details

Cite View Details Read Now

Prior advice research has focused on why people rely on (or ignore) advice and its impact on judgment accuracy. We expand the consideration of advice-seeking outcomes by investigating the interpersonal consequences of advice seekers’ decisions. Across nine studies, we show that advisors interpersonally penalize seekers who disregard their advice, and that these reactions are especially strong among expert advisors. This penalty also drives advisor reactions to a widely-recommended advice-seeking strategy: soliciting multiple advisors to leverage the wisdom of crowds. Advisors denigrate and distance themselves from seekers who they learn consulted others, an effect mediated by perceptions that their own advice will be disregarded. Underlying these effects is an asymmetry between advisors’ and seekers’ beliefs about the purpose of the advice exchange: whereas advisors believe giving advice is more about narrowing the option set by providing direction, seekers believe soliciting advice is more about widening the option set by gathering information.

In 2018, Mellody Hobson, President of Ariel Investments, the largest minority-owned investment firm in the U.S., was considering how best to divide her time and use her position and personal characteristics to push for positive change at her firm and in society at large.

Faculty & Research

Humblebragging: A Distinct—and Ineffective—Self-Presentation Strategy

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors