Jump to content

Crab mentality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Crabs in a Bucket)
"Crabs in a Bucket" redirects here. For the film, see Last Call (2021 film). For the Nines album, see Crabs in a Bucket (album).

Live crabs in a bucket
Look up crab mentality in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Crab mentality, also known as crab theory,[1][2] crabs in a bucket[a] mentality, or the crab-bucket effect, is a mentality of which people will try to prevent others from gaining a favourable position in something, even if it has no effect on those trying to stop them. It is usually summarized with the phrase "If I can't have it, neither can you".[3]

The metaphor is derived from anecdotal claims about the behavior of crabs contained in a open bucket: if a crab starts to climb out,[4] it will be pulled back in by the others, ensuring the group's collective demise.[5][6][7]

The analogous theory in human behavior is that members of a group will attempt to reduce the self-confidence of any member who achieves success beyond others, out of envy, jealousy, resentment, spite, conspiracy, or competitive feelings, in order to halt their progress.[8][9][10][11]

Self-evaluation maintenance theory

[edit]
Main article: Self-evaluation maintenance theory

Tesser's self-evaluation maintenance theory (SEM)[12] suggests that individuals engage in self-evaluation not only through introspection but also through comparison to others, especially those within their close social circles. When someone close to an individual excels in areas they value, they may feel threatened and act in ways that downplay their achievements.[13] This mechanism can partly explain why individuals may attempt to pull down those who achieve more than themselves as a way to protect their own self-esteem and social standing. Emotions such as envy may be generated when individuals feel threatened during self-evaluation.[14] This can lead to a desire to diminish the well-being of others, particularly when their success highlights the individual's own failures or inadequacies.[15]

Relative deprivation theory

[edit]
Main article: Relative deprivation

Relative deprivation theory proposes that feelings of dissatisfaction and injustice arise when people compare their situation unfavorably with others' situations.[16] This sense of inequality, rooted in subjective perceptions rather than objective measures, can deeply influence social behavior,[17] including the phenomenon of crab mentality. When individuals see their peers achieving success or receiving the recognition they feel is undeserved or unattainable for themselves, it can trigger actions aimed at undermining these peers' accomplishments.[18] The concept emerged from a study of American soldiers by Stouffer. Soldiers in units with more promotions were paradoxically less satisfied, feeling left out if not promoted themselves, despite better odds of advancement.[19] This reflects how relative deprivation fuels dissatisfaction by comparing one's situation to others. By "dragging" others down to a similar level, individuals might feel a sense of satisfaction. Thus, crab mentality can be viewed as a response to perceived social inequality, where pulling others down becomes a strategy to cope with feelings of inadequacy or injustice.

Zero-sum bias

[edit]
Main article: Zero-sum thinking

Zero-sum bias, where individuals perceive that they can only gain at the expense of others, may contribute to crab mentality.[20] This bias is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of success and resource distribution, leading to the incorrect belief that success and resources are limited and one person's gain is necessarily another's loss.[20] Such a worldview fosters competitive rather than collaborative social interactions, encouraging behaviors that aim at hindering others' achievements to protect one's perceived share of limited resources,[21] like crabs in a bucket. In Daniel V. Meegan's study, researchers found that students expected lower grades for peers after seeing many high grades already awarded, despite being in a system where high grades are unlimited.[20] This illustrates how people often view success as a limited resource. Thus, when they see their peers successfully "climbing out of the bucket", they may try to hinder their progress to ensure their own chances of success remain unchanged.

It's crucial to differentiate crab mentality from strategic competition, where actions are calculated for self-interest and personal gain.[22] People's rational behaviors are aimed directly at benefiting themselves.[22] Since it is driven by cognitive biases and emotions,[23] crab mentality is often a reactive, non-rational behavior that seeks to level the playing field by pulling others down, even though there are no direct benefits to the individual.

Note

[edit]
  1. ^ Instead of bucket - barrel, basket, or pot are all also commonly used.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Mae Lentz, Ella (2006). "The Crab Theory Revisited". YouTube. Archived from the original on 2020-11-27. Retrieved November 4, 2020.
  2. ^ Henry, Elizabeth. "FAQ: Crab Theory". LibGuides.
  3. ^ L. Douglas Wilder (October 1, 2015). Son of Virginia: A Life in America's Political Arena. Lyons Press. p. 185. ISBN 978-1-4930-1952-6.
  4. ^ Low Robin Boon Peng (2016). Good Intentions Are Not Enough: Why We Fail At Helping Others. World Scientific. p. 104. ISBN 978-981-320-059-3.
  5. ^ Sudipta Sarangi (April 1, 2013). "Capturing Indian 'Crab' Behaviour". The Hindu. Retrieved December 1, 2015.
  6. ^ Miller, Carliss D. (January 2015). "A Phenomenological Analysis of the Crabs in the Barrel Syndrome". Academy of Management Proceedings. 2015 (1): 13710. doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2015.13710abstract.
  7. ^ Adams, Frank Patrick (December 2019). Does the Crab Theory Hold Water? Investigating Intragroup Discriminatory Attitudes within the Deaf Community (PDF) (PhD). Gallaudet University. OCLC 1226710162. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-10-17. Retrieved 2020-07-28.
  8. ^ Manuel B. Dy (March 3, 1994). Values in Philippine Culture and Education. Council for Research in Values and Philosophy. p. 40. ISBN 978-1-56518-041-3.
  9. ^ Herbert A. Leibowitz (December 31, 1994). Parnassus: Twenty Years of Poetry in Review. University of Michigan Press. p. 262. ISBN 978-0-472-06577-6.
  10. ^ Albert Shanker (June 19, 1994). "Where We Stand: The Crab Bucket Syndrome". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 20, 2020. Retrieved December 1, 2015.
  11. ^ David, E. J. R. (2013). Brown Skin, White Minds: Filipino / American Postcolonial Psychology. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. p. 119. ISBN 978-1-62396-209-8.
  12. ^ Tesser, Abraham (1988-01-01), "Toward a Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model of Social Behavior", in Berkowitz, Leonard (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 21, vol. 21, Academic Press, pp. 181–227, doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60227-0, ISBN 978-0-12-015221-6, retrieved 2024-03-17
  13. ^ Beach, Steven R. H.; Tesser, Abraham (1995), Kernis, Michael H. (ed.), "Self-Esteem and the Extended Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model", Efficacy, Agency, and Self-Esteem, Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 145–170, doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-1280-0_8, ISBN 978-1-4899-1280-0, retrieved 2024-03-19
  14. ^ Xiang, Yanhui; Zhao, Jiaxu; Li, Qingyin; Zhang, Wenrui; Dong, Xia; Zhao, Jingjing (2019). "Effect of Core Self-Evaluation on Mental Health Symptoms Among Chinese College Students: The Mediating Roles of Benign and Malicious Envy". Psychiatric Annals. 49 (6): 277–284. doi:10.3928/00485713-20190508-01. ISSN 0048-5713.
  15. ^ Smith, Richard H.; Kim, Sung Hee (2007). "Comprehending envy". Psychological Bulletin. 133 (1): 46–64. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.46. ISSN 1939-1455. PMID 17201570.
  16. ^ Walker, Iain; Pettigrew, Thomas F. (1984). "Relative deprivation theory: An overview and conceptual critique". British Journal of Social Psychology. 23 (4): 301–310. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1984.tb00645.x. ISSN 0144-6665.
  17. ^ Webber, Craig (2007). "Revaluating relative deprivation theory". Theoretical Criminology. 11 (1): 97–120. doi:10.1177/1362480607072737. ISSN 1362-4806.
  18. ^ Festinger, Leon (1954). "A Theory of Social Comparison Processes". Human Relations. 7 (2): 117–140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202. ISSN 0018-7267.
  19. ^ "Samuel A. Stouffer and The American Soldier (Ryan J., 2010) | PDF | Sociology | Social Science". Scribd. Retrieved 2024-03-19.
  20. ^ a b c Meegan, Daniel V. (2010). "Zero-Sum Bias: Perceived Competition Despite Unlimited Resources". Frontiers in Psychology. 1: 191. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00191. ISSN 1664-1078. PMC 3153800. PMID 21833251.
  21. ^ Wilkins, Clara L.; Wellman, Joseph D.; Babbitt, Laura G.; Toosi, Negin R.; Schad, Katherine D. (2015). "You can win but I can't lose: Bias against high-status groups increases their zero-sum beliefs about discrimination". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 57: 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.10.008. ISSN 0022-1031.
  22. ^ a b Miller, Dale T. (1999). "The norm of self-interest". American Psychologist. 54 (12): 1053–1060. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.12.1053. ISSN 1935-990X. PMID 15332526.
  23. ^ Kahneman, Daniel; Tversky, Amos (2013), "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk", World Scientific Handbook in Financial Economics Series, vol. 4, World Scientific, pp. 99–127, doi:10.1142/9789814417358_0006, ISBN 978-981-4417-34-1, retrieved 2024-03-19

Further reading

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crab_mentality&oldid=1250785646"
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy