Functional trade-offs in authentic pride and gender differences among U.S. undergraduates

Tracy and Robins ( Psychological Inquiry, 15 (2), 103–125, 2004 ) theorized that there are two facets of pride: authentic (e.g., “accomplished”) and hubristic (e.g., “arrogant”). While these facets are assumed to function simultaneously over time, it remains unclear whether they differ by gender, given that pride is associated with various social behaviors (Magee Journal of Happiness Studies, 16 (5), 1091–1115, 2015 ; Yeung & Shen Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40 (6), 605–624, 2019 ). In this study, we recruited 118 U.S. college students (54.2% female; 49.18% Non-Hispanic White; mean age = 19.12 years) who participated in a group discussion task and reported their levels of authentic and hubristic pride at three-time points. We used the Repeated-Measures Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (RM-APIM, Kenny et al., 2006 ) and calculated two change scores (e.g., T2 - T1) as outcomes for the dependent variables. We also graphed the topological state of each facet of pride simultaneously (Butner et al. Psychological Methods, 20 , 1–25, 2015 ). Our findings suggest that: (1) both facets significantly predicted their stability over time for both genders, and (2) females had a lower value of authentic pride but reached stability in authentic pride more quickly than males. These results suggest that females may be more quickly guided by what they perceive as socially expected behavior by themselves and others in authentic pride, even at lower values. In contrast, males may prioritize maintaining higher levels of authentic pride over quickly responding to social cues.