How do teenagers perceive their intelligence? Narcissism, intellect, well-being and gender as correlates of self-assessed intelligence among adolescents

How do teenagers perceive their intelligence? Narcissism, intellect, well-being and gender as correlates of self-assessed intelligence among adolescents. Marcin Zajenkowski. Personality and Individual Differences, March 17 2020, 109978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109978

Abstract: Self-assessed intelligence (SAI) and its correlates have been extensively studied in adults. However, our understanding of how younger people perceive intelligence is limited. The current study aimed to fill this gap by investigating how SAI is associated with objective intelligence, gender, personality traits, and well-being in a sample (N = 428) of high-school students. The results revealed that SAI was not correlated with objectively measured intelligence (Raven's test); however, it was associated with other constructs. First, there were gender differences, i.e. boys' self-estimates of their intelligence were higher than that of girls. Furthermore, SAI was strongly related to grandiose narcissism and moderately related to the personality trait intellect. Additionally, high SAI was associated with high levels of well-being. Finally, SAI accounted for the link between narcissism and well-being as well as that between intellect and well-being. The lack of correlation between SAI and IQ score is consistent with previous findings suggesting that the conception of intelligence in adolescence differs from academic definitions of cognitive ability. On the other hand, the strong association between SAI and narcissism suggests that the concept of intelligence might primarily be a manifestation of boldness and a narcissistic attitude in adolescence.

4. Discussion

The current study examined how self-assessed intelligence is associated with objective intelligence, gender, personality traits, and well-being in a group of high-school students. The results indicated that most of the SAI-related effects observed previously in adults can also be found in adolescents. However, the most important difference was a lack of correlation between self-assessed and objectively assessed intelligence, given that prior meta-analytic investigation has shown these two constructs to moderately overlap in adult populations (Freund & Kasten, 2012). Moreover, previous studies have also found a positive relation between objective cognitive abilities and self-assessed abilities in children and adolescents (Chamorro-Premuzic et al., 2010; Gold & Kuhn, 2017; Spinath et al., 2006). However, as mentioned above, in these latter studies the participants were asked to self-rate more narrow abilities rather than general intelligence. Additionally, the study by Gold and Kuhn (2017) included a slightly older sample than the one tested here. It should also be acknowledged that in the present research a non-verbal IQ test measuring fluid intelligence was used. According to the aforementioned findings, a mature conception of intelligence as abstract thinking and problem solving with both verbal and non-verbal material is formed later, e.g. around college time (Chen et al., 1988; Nicholls et al., 1986). It is possible then, that our participants' understanding of intelligence differed from adult conceptions of intelligence. Consequently, they may not have considered the skills required to succeed in Raven's test to be key characteristics of intelligence.

Despite the null correlation with objective intelligence, SAI displayed a pattern of associations with other variables. Specifically, boys self-rated their intelligence higher than girls self-rated theirs, whereas there was no gender difference in objective intelligence. Adult males similarly self-rate their intelligence higher than females self-rate theirs, despite negligible gender differences in objective general intelligence (Szymanowicz & Furnham, 2011). This effect has been described as the “male hubris, female humility” effect (Furnham, 2001). Specifically, it has been proposed that people view intelligence as male-normative and that gender differences in perceived intelligence may stem from the differential socialization of males (encouraged to be bold) and females (encouraged to be submissive) (Furnham, 2001). Studies investigating estimations by individuals' family members support this view. Typically, male family members (grandfathers, fathers, and brothers) are perceived to have higher general intelligence than that of their female counterparts (e.g. Furnham & Rawles, 1995). Moreover, parents tend to rate their sons' IQ as being higher than that of their daughters (Furnham & Gasson, 1998; Furnham, Reeves, & Budhani, 2002). The current results suggest that this effect occurs relatively early and might already be observed among 16-year olds. However, further research is required to establish the exact developmental stage at which gender differences in perceived intelligence are formed. For instance, in a study by Furnham and Budhani (2002) involving only a slightly younger sample (mean age 15.40 years, SD = 0.95) than the one used here, there were no gender differences in self-assessed general intelligence even though male self-estimations were higher than females' on more narrow abilities, i.e. spatial and mathematical ones.

In the present sample, SAI was associated with two personality traits: narcissism and intellect. Furthermore, narcissism explained the highest amount of variance in SAI. This result is in line with recent findings showing narcissism to be the strongest correlate of SAI among personality traits (Howard & Cogswell, 2018; Zajenkowski et al., 2019). The finding is interesting given that narcissism is essentially unrelated to objective IQ (Zajenkowski et al., 2019). Grandiose narcissism is a trait primarily defined by egocentrism, pronounced feelings of importance and entitlement (Campbell & Foster, 2007). People with high grandiose narcissism desire agentic attributes, such as dominance, sense of control, and social status (Campbell & Foster, 2007). Because intelligence is a key asset for the attainment of such attributes, narcissistic individuals are highly concerned with their intelligence (Zajenkowski et al., 2019). It has been shown that positive self-views in the domain of intelligence help them to maintain positive feelings (Zajenkowski et al., 2019). Additionally, narcissistic individuals view intelligence as a crucial factor that influences mainly interpersonal success, i.e. popularity among peers, social status, and relationship satisfaction (Zajenkowski et al., 2019). Thus, intelligence appears to be an important resource in gaining other people's admiration. The current results extend previous findings by showing that the concept of intelligence is an important building block of the narcissistic self-concept in young people. Even though the concept of intelligence is not fully formed in adolescence, it is already linked with a narcissistic attitude. This finding suggests that in people's minds the two phenomena, i.e. thinking positively about one's intelligence and narcissistic grandiosity, go together and that their coexistence occurs at a relatively early developmental stage.

In the present study, SAI was also positively associated with the trait intellect, which is consistent with other research on adults (e.g. Zajenkowski & Matthews, 2019). However, in contrast with previous studies (DeYoung, Quilty, Peterson, & Gray, 2014; Zajenkowski et al., 2019), intellect was unrelated to objective intelligence. According to DeYoung and colleagues (2014), intellect is part of a broader trait of openness/intellect and reflects intellectual engagement with semantic and abstract information, enjoyment of cognitive activity, and one's perceived cognitive abilities. Thus, to some extent intellect overlaps with self-assessed abilities. However, it also contains a more specific element related to intellectual curiosity. Zajenkowski et al. (2019) suggested that this element might differentiate narcissism from intellect in their relations with SAI. This view was supported by the finding that individuals with high intellect report high motivation and concentration on IQ tests, whereas highly narcissistic people do not genuinely engage with demanding cognitive tests (Zajenkowski et al., 2019). Thus, intellect seems to partially reflect a non-narcissistic attitude towards SAI that might be linked with cognitive engagement.

Another important finding of the current study concerns the positive link between SAI and well-being. The authors of a recent meta-analysis of SAI correlates have suggested that SAI could be regarded as a specific form of self-efficacy (Howard & Cogswell, 2018). Because modern jobs and work success rely on cognitive competence, intelligence has become a highly valued characteristic in society and one's self-worth is becoming increasingly dependent on one's intellectual abilities. This line of reasoning may also be relevant to the school environment, where the evaluation of cognitive performance is an essential part of the education system. Thus, SAI appears to play a central role in modern society and because of that may have an influence on self-esteem and well-being. Certainly, the present study indicates that the concept of intelligence is an important source of life satisfaction among high-school students. Additionally, SAI also accounted for the associations between narcissism and well-being and between intellect and well-being. The mechanisms underlying both findings might be different. Specifically, intellect, high intelligence might facilitate cognitive engagement and because of that be a source of pleasant feelings. In case of narcissism, it has been shown that grandiose narcissists pursue agentic goals such as high social status and believe that intelligence is a key attribute in attaining such goals (Zajenkowski et al., 2019). Therefore, intelligence inflated self-views enable grandiose narcissists to experience positive feelings. It is possible that high cognitive ability is linked to the sense of agency and social position already among adolescent narcissists and because of that, it increases their well-being. This hypothesis could be further examine by investigating how narcissistic students are perceived by their peers. Specifically, it would be interesting to explore whether one's popularity depends on how other students evaluate his/her intelligence.

The present study is not free of limitations. First, it used only one measure of objective intelligence. Future research should therefore include a wider range of IQ tests capturing other aspects of cognitive ability (e.g. verbal) to deepen our knowledge of adolescents' insight into their intelligence. In a similar vein, the measurement of SAI could be extended to include more narrow abilities. Previous studies on SAI using a multiple intelligence measures approach have produced interesting and more nuanced findings on adolescents (Furnham & Budhani, 2002). Finally, the current study had more female than male participants; future samples should be more balanced in terms of gender.