Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy

ISSN: 1528-9168 (Print) 1940-9214 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hicp20

Adolescent Attachment and Entitlement in a World

of Wealth
Allison M. Rothman & Janice M. Steil
To cite this article: Allison M. Rothman & Janice M. Steil (2012) Adolescent Attachment and
Entitlement in a World of Wealth, Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 11:1,
53-65, DOI: 10.1080/15289168.2012.650002
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15289168.2012.650002

Published online: 09 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 258

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hicp20
Download by: [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries]

Date: 12 March 2016, At: 12:46

Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 11:5365, 2012

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1528-9168 print
DOI: 10.1080/15289168.2012.650002

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

Adolescent Attachment and Entitlement in a World

of Wealth
Allison M. Rothman
Janice M. Steil
This study examined parental and peer attachments and their relationship to entitlement attitudes and
subjective well-being among a sample of affluent adolescents. We sought to integrate the perspectives of both clinical and social psychology in examining entitlement attitudes, ranging from healthy
to narcissistic. This was accomplished by using a new method of assessing entitlement from the
social psychological perspective and comparing entitlement attitudes to attachment. Attachment was
measured in terms of trust, communication, and alienation in relationships with parents and peers.
Stereotypes of the affluent were explored. Findings showed that adolescents reporting higher levels of
alienation from, and lower levels of trust in, primary attachment figures, also indicated higher levels
of narcissistic entitlement. By contrast, less alienation from parents and peers, and greater well-being was associated with healthier entitlement. Attachment was shown to be a better predictor of
entitlement attitudes than perceived level of wealth. Thus the stereotype that entitlement, particularly
narcissistic entitlement, is linked to the wealthy was unsupported.

The sense of entitlement has long been a construct with negative connotations, strongly linked
with notions of excessive unhealthy narcissism. Along similar lines, wealthy adolescents have
often been subjected to negative assaults on their reputations, including descriptions of themselves as spoiled, superficial, and, most notably, narcissistic and entitled, such that they are
excessively concerned with their own rights without regard for the rights and feelings of others. Scholarly work on entitlement, however, suggests a more comprehensive construct than
was previously presented. Kreigman (1983), for example, suggests that people manifest three
types of entitlement attitudes, including restricted, appropriate, and excessive entitlement. The
two extremes, whether restricted or excessive, have been linked to problems with self-esteem
(Nadkarni, Steil, Malone, & Sagrestano, 2008). At the restricted extreme, individuals feel
worthless and have difficulty acting with healthy defiance (Kriegman, 1983). At the excessive
Allison M. Rothman is a clinical psychologist with a private practice in New York City. She is also a psychologist
with the City of New York Police Department, an Adjunct Clinical Supervisor at Pace University, and a founding member
of the Advisory Council, Derner Institute of Advanced Psychological Studies, Adelphi University.
Janice M. Steil is a professor at the Derner Institute of Advanced Psychological Studies at Adelphi University, Garden
City, New York. Her primary research interests focus on adult close relationships with a particular interest in power,
intimacy, and the sense of entitlement.
Correspondence should be addressed to Allison M. Rothman, The Derner Institute of Advanced Psychological
Studies, Adelphi University, 100 West 12th Street, #4R, New York, NY 10011. E-mail: Allison.Rothman@gmail.com

54

ROTHMAN AND STEIL

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

extreme, individuals are narcissistic and manipulative, expecting special treatment without reason (Emmons, 1987). Appropriate levels of entitlement, by contrast, have been the focus of
study by social psychologists who see entitlement as a necessary precondition to being an emotionally healthy person able to attain and safeguard legitimate rights (McGann & Steil, 2005).
To date, there has been little empirical focus on integrating the clinical and social psychological
perspectives of entitlement (Nadkarni et al., 2008).

ETIOLOGY
Entitlement is defined colloquially as having a right to something (Major, 1994). Nadkarni et al.
(2008) and Fessenden (1998) focus on two types of meaning identified for entitle by the Oxford
English Dictionary, 2nd edition (Simpson & Weiner, 1989). The first relates to a designation,
as in giving someone a title or status, and characterizing a person based on a quality he or she
possesses. The second comes from a right to ownership, to be given a title or designation, or
to a specified manner of treatment (Simpson & Weiner, 1989). People are thus given rightful
claims which conform to judicial laws, social rules, social conventions, or standards (Simpson
& Weiner, 1989). One can be entitled to things owned or possessed by another, certain ways of
being treated by others, special rights and advantages, or benefits (Simpson & Weiner, 1989).
Overall, entitlement refers to a set of attitudes about what people feel they may have a right to
and can expect from others (Steil, McGann, & Kahn, 2001).
Clinical Perspectives
Clinical psychologists often measure entitlement as a pathological variable within the narcissistic
personality style (Raskin & Hall, 1979; Raskin & Terry, 1988). In contrast to social psychologists, clinical theorists locate the etiology of entitlement in early family interactions, including a
lack of parental attunement (Meyer, 1991), parental rejection (Kernberg, 1976), or overgratifying
parents (Millon, 1982). Along similar lines, narcissistic personalities, as summarized by Modell
(1983), are based on relative failures of self-object differentiation and point to a developmental
disorder. In addition, Modell (1983) agrees with Kohut (1977) that many aspects of narcissistic
personalities can be understood as a defensive response to developmental trauma. The developmental trauma, in this case, is often problematic mirroring in childhood. Kohut (1977) described
narcissistic personalities as the result of failures in parental empathy. Winnicott (1960) described
them as a result of disturbances in the holding environment. Freud wrote that pathologic levels of
entitlement were related to a sense of being owed privileges and referred to it as an attitude that
is acquired due to painful early childhood experiences (1916). Restricted entitlement, described
as feeling worthless and overly deferential, is linked clinically to difficult early developmental
experiences that resulted in shame or fear (Levin, 1970).
Despite the view of narcissism and narcissistic entitlement as resulting from developmental
difficulties, Kohut (1977) indicated that there was an increase in the number of narcissistic
personalities as a result of psychotropic social factors. Modell posited that there is a profound
relationship between society and character formation. He described the development of character
as biphasic (1983, p. 117), with the first phase based on early development and the second
phase based on societal reinforcing or reorganizing of the personality. He noted that this second

ADOLESCENT ATTACHMENT AND ENTITLEMENT

55

phase occurs in adolescence, when the individual begins to interact directly and knowingly with
the social environment. The social environment, similar to the early childhood developmental
environment, confronts the adolescent with failures in its protective functioning. Thus the
adolescent disillusioned with the social environment draws on similar narcissistic coping
strategies first employed as a result of infantile and childhood miss-attunements.

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

Social Perspectives
Social psychological perspectives on the origins of entitlement emphasize differences in status
assigned to social groups, in addition to disparities in rights and responsibilities associated with
social roles (Steil, 1994). Thus, entitlement is seen as varying across cultures, as well as groups
within cultures, in ways that parallel socialized or learned views of rights and obligations. Such
divergences among levels of entitlement are seen as a means of understanding the persistence
of social inequalities. A frequently investigated example of this is with gender and gendered
behaviors, indicating a lower sense of entitlement in women compared to men (Nadkarni et al.,
2008). When people are socialized to their status within a group and their groups status within
the society at large, they become complicit in this ranking system.
While social inequalities have often been researched in terms of entitlement, the sense of
entitlement has been largely inferred as the explanatory factor, rather than directly assessed.
Thus, behavioral levels of entitlement have been inferred through gender differences in pay allocations and pay expectations, as well as perceptions of job and relationship satisfaction (Crosby,
1982; Major, 1994). This tendency, particularly among social psychologists, to research theories
of entitlement without actually assessing the construct is due to a lack of empirical measures.
Currently, there is no published measure that assesses entitlement as ranging from a necessary
and healthy trait to one that may be seen as pathological. However, in one of the few empirical
tests not focused on gender, Steil and Newman (2008) assessed the level of self-assurance/selfreliance (healthy entitlement) and narcissistic (unhealthy) entitlement in a sample of two groups
of university women, faculty, and staff, utilizing a new measure of entitlement. Consistent with
theoretical perspectives, a greater sense of entitlement was associated with higher socioeconomic
status, higher education, and greater income. This study, differentiating between university faculty and staff, identifies another example of entitlement being assigned to groups within cultures,
with faculty reporting a greater sense of entitlement than staff. The Entitlement Attitudes Scale
used in the Steil and Newman (2008) study was also the measure used in this study. This scale
identifies two factors which differentiate between healthy and unhealthy entitlement and are
respectively labeled self-reliance and self-assurance (SRSA) and narcissism and self-promotion
(NESP). SRSA, a healthy form of entitlement, is important when trying to get ones needs met,
while NESP is associated with self-centeredness.
Attachment
Similar to clinical perspectives on entitlement, attachment theorists look to early family interactions as an explanation of later relational functioning. Attachment theorists seem to suggest
that unhealthy styles of entitlement may occur if strong attachment relationships are not formed
in infancy. According to Coleman (2003), secure attachment to the primary caregiver has
been linked with high levels of social competence, peer acceptance, and popularity (p 352).

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

56

ROTHMAN AND STEIL

Conversely, insecure attachment seems to operate as a precursor to peer rejection as well

as negative interactive emotions and behaviors including hostility, anger, aggression, lack of
assertiveness, withdrawal, low self-confidence, and the tendency to frustrate easily. Feeling
alienated from ones parents is seen as a major contributor to reductions in the quality of attachment and can thus be used as a method of assessing attachment (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987;
Armsden, McCauley, Greenberg, Burke, & Mitchell, 1990). Verschueren and Marcoen (1999)
demonstrated that kindergarteners who were securely attached to both parents exhibited higher
self-esteem and evaluated themselves more positively in an indirect puppet interview than children with insecure attachments to both parents. These findings seem remarkably similar to the
attributes described by social psychological representations of healthy entitlement and SRSA,
which include measures of self-assurance and self-reliance (Nadkarni et al., 2008).
Although entitlement and attachment have traditionally been examined from different perspectives, recent research suggests the two constructs may share a similar underlying structure
(Brennan & Shaver, 1998; Smolewska & Dion, 2005). One such example of this sharing comes
from Kingshott, Bailey, and Wolfe (2004), who suggest that there is a fundamental set of
entitlement working models, in many ways similar to the internal working models described
by attachment theorists. These models are formed from early experiences and are based on ones
sense of entitlement to care and regard. Belief structures are formed early on in life about how
one can expect his or her needs to be met throughout life. According to Kingshott et al. (2004),
people learn their place in the world relative to others who counts and who does not, who
is entitled to care and who is not, and what the conditions are, if any, for earning the right to
be cared for (p. 193). The work of these authors indicates a preliminary connection between
unhealthy and healthy styles of entitlement and attachment.
The literature in this area, for the most part, is largely theoretical and has not empirically
assessed the relationship between entitlement and attachment. This study aims to bridge the perspectives of these two areas and is unique in empirically assessing the relationship between sense
of entitlement and attachment in a sample of wealthy adolescents.

Entitlement and Affluent Adolescents

Also related but not fully explored is the popular notion that the wealthy are socialized to higher
levels of entitlement than the less wealthy. Previous research appears to support the idea that
entitlement, with particular focus on narcissistic, unhealthy entitlement, is indelibly linked to the
wealthy population (Steil & Newman, 2008). Luthar (2003), in a descriptive comparison between
the affluent and the poor, notes that both groups are characterized negatively. She writes that the
poor are often viewed as being dishonest, apathetic, promiscuous, uninterested in education, and
personally responsible for their plight (Lott, 2002), while the rich are seen as unethical, entitled,
arrogant, superficial, narcissistic, and entirely responsible for their own unhappiness (Pittman,
1985; Pollak & Schaffer, 1985; Shafran, 1992; Warner, 1991; Weitzman, 2000). Underlying these
assumed differences in the amounts of entitlement between the upper and lower classes is the concept that level of wealth in adults is related to sense of entitlement, specifically a greater sense of
narcissistic, unhealthy entitlement in the affluent. As a sample, affluent adolescents were chosen
because of the popular conception of them as excessively entitled (Luthar, 2003). According to
Luthar (2003), adolescents are often viewed as overly entitled and the affluent even more so.

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

ADOLESCENT ATTACHMENT AND ENTITLEMENT

57

Levy-Warren (1998) argued that the self-involvement of teenagers is critical to growth, including the separation and individuation process. She noted that healthy narcissistic development
during adolescence requires self-focus. Where the circumstances of an adolescents life make
such self-focus difficult, narcissistic development may be impaired (1998, p. 89). Although not
directly discussing entitlement, her writing indicates that a disturbance in healthy narcissism can
occur when adolescents are preoccupied with issues in the family. Healthy relationships with
parents are therefore likely critical in an adolescents move outward into the social world.
Entitlement is a particularly unexplored area in the research on adolescents. Similar to adults,
self-assertion and self-reliance in teenagers may allow them to obtain what they need from therapists, while narcissistically entitled teens may trigger unexplored countertransference reactions
in their clinicians, which may hinder healthy and reparative attachment experiences in treatment.
If clinicians enter the therapeutic dyad with a preconceived notion that affluent teenagers are narcissistically entitled, in an unhealthy manner, and these ideas are not personally challenged or
available for challenge by the research community, then both parties may leave treatment feeling
discomfited and unsuccessful.
Entitlement and Outcomes
Clinical theorists generally focus on narcissism as underlying a defensively excessive level
of entitlement. On the other hand, self-esteem is seen as essential to adequate functioning
while healthy entitlement is relatively ignored. For social psychologists, the two extremes of
entitlement, restricted and excessive, signify difficulties in self-esteem. Similar to clinical representations, social psychologists see those with excessive entitlement as ones who expect special
treatment or favors without reason, tend to act manipulatively, and disregard both social approval
and social convention (Emmons, 1987). In contrast, those with restricted entitlement tend to act
with deference, avoid expressing disagreement, and feel that they are of little value (Kriegman,
1983; Meyer, 1991). Social psychologists view an appropriate sense of entitlement as necessary
to promoting ones sense of well-being. Healthy entitlement generally allows one to assert oneself in a healthy manner, to positively respond to rewards for ones accomplishments, and to
safeguard oneself from unfair treatment (Kerr, 1985; Levin, 1970).
Both clinical and social psychological representations of entitlement agree that unhealthy
levels of entitlement are indicators of poorer subjective well-being (Emmons, 1987; Kreigman,
1983; McGann & Steil, 2005; Nadkarni et al., 2008). In contrast, healthy entitlement, as characterized by self-assurance and self-reliance, is particularly perceived in U.S. culture as an
indicator of subjective well-being (Kreigman, 1983; McGann & Steil, 2005; Nadkarni et al.,
2008). Subjective well-being can be identified through ones happiness, satisfaction with life,
and lack of psychological symptoms such as depression and anxiety.

HYPOTHESES
Entitlement and Attachment
Although the relationship between entitlement and attachment has not been directly assessed, previous research indicates that both originate in early family interactions (Freud, 1916; Kernberg,

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

58

ROTHMAN AND STEIL

1976; Levin, 1970; Meyer, 1991; Millon, 1982). Work done by Verschueren and Marcoen (1999),
among others (Brennan & Shaver, 1998; Coleman, 2003; Smolewska & Dion, 2005), suggests
that insecure attachment and alienation from parents is likely related to unhealthy, narcissistic
entitlement. By contrast, secure attachment, including students feelings of trust in their parents, should be positively correlated with healthy outcomes, many of which are similar to those
ascribed to healthy entitlement (Coleman, 2003; Verschueren & Marcoen, 1999).
Given this research, 1) adolescents feelings of alienation from parents are hypothesized as
being positively associated with unhealthy narcissistic entitlement and 2) negatively associated
with healthy entitlement. In contrast, 3) adolescents feelings of trust in parents are hypothesized
as being negatively associated with unhealthy narcissistic entitlement and 4) positively associated
with healthy entitlement.

Entitlement, Attachment and Subjective Well-Being

Both clinical and social psychological representations of entitlement agree that narcissistic levels
of entitlement are indicators of poorer well-being (Emmons, 1987; Kreigman, 1983; McGann
& Steil, 2005; Nadkarni et al., 2008). Similar associations have been found between insecure
attachment, or alienation from parents and peers, and poorer well-being. In contrast, healthy
entitlement, as characterized by self-assurance and self-reliance, is particularly perceived in U.S.
culture as an indicator of greater well-being (Kreigman, 1983; McGann & Steil, 2005; Nadkarni
et al., 2008). Along similar lines, secure attachment, or communication with and trust in parents
and peers, is associated with better well-being.
This study attempts to empirically assess the relationship of entitlement and attachment to
subjective well-being, including subjective happiness, satisfaction with life, and symptom formation. Therefore, 5) subjective well-being, as assessed by the Subjective Happiness Scale and
the Satisfaction with Life Scale, is hypothesized as being negatively correlated with narcissistic
entitlement and 6) positively correlated with healthy entitlement. In addition, symptom formation is hypothesized as being positively correlated with narcissistic entitlement and negatively
correlated with healthy entitlement.
Along similar lines, 7) subjective well-being is hypothesized as being negatively correlated
with alienation from parents and peers, and 8) positively correlated with trust and communication
with parents and peers. In addition, symptom formation, such as symptoms of depression and
anxiety, is hypothesized as being positively correlated with alienation and negatively correlated
with trust and communication.

Entitlement and Wealth

In popular literature there is a general assertion that the wealthy are socially primed to an excessive, narcissistic sense of entitlement (Luthar, 2003; Pittman, 1985; Pollak & Schaffer, 1985;
Shafran, 1992; Warner, 1991; Weitzman, 2000). In contrast to these assertions, this research proposes that 9) quality of attachment is a better predictor of entitlement than adolescents perceived
level of wealth. Therefore, adolescents reported level of wealth will be unrelated to healthy and
excessive, narcissistic styles of entitlement.

ADOLESCENT ATTACHMENT AND ENTITLEMENT

59

METHOD

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

Participants
Participants were 23 eleventh- and twelfth-grade adolescents, between 15 and 17 years of
age, attending a private high school in New York City. Inclusion of adolescents in this study
was based on parental and school consent and student assent. Data collection occurred after
school on a single day, and adolescents were told that their participation was entirely voluntary.
On completion of data collection, questionnaires were scored with only participant numbers as
identifiers.
Adolescents answered questions regarding demographics, relationships, and personal attitudes. In exchange for their participation, adolescents were given pizza and had an opportunity to
discuss the college application process and overall college experience. Of 130 adolescents, 18%
voluntarily participated after school hours. The majority of adolescents (69.6%) were Caucasian,
followed by African Americans (13.0%). A slight majority of adolescents were female (56.5%
vs. 43.5% male). Almost 70% of the students parents were currently married (69.6%). The
most frequent religious affiliation was Judaism (39.1%), followed by Protestantism (13%) and
Catholicism (8.7%), among others. Adolescents perceived their family net worth to range from
less than $500,000 (31.8%) to between $10 and 15 million (4.5%), with an average of $500,000 to
$1 million (40.9%). Adolescents perceived their familys income to average $50,000 to $150,000
(36.4%), with a range of less than $50,000 (4.5%) to greater than $450,000 (22.7%). By contrast, the highest national median income ever recorded by the U.S. Census was $40,816 (1999).
Sixteen out of the 23 participants reported receiving an allowance, with an average of $34 per
week. When asked about weekly spending, adolescents reported spending an average of $60 per
week. Tuition for these adolescents was $26,750, in addition to other fees. Fewer than 30% of
adolescents at these schools receive financial aid.

Procedure
Adolescents arrived at their study lounge after school and completed six questionnaires assessing attachment style, entitlement attitudes, and subjective well-being. Adolescents first gave their
assent to participate in the study and completed a demographic questionnaire assessing age, gender, parents marital status, perceived family income and perceived family net worth, religious
affiliation, and perceived importance of religion. The school and parents gave their consent prior
to student participation.
Participants next completed the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA) (Armsden &
Greenberg, 1987), which assesses perceptions of positive and negative affective/cognitive dimensions of relationships with parents and friends. Particular emphasis is placed on how well these
figures serve as sources of psychological security. With regard to parents, 28 items along three
dimensions are assessed: degree of mutual trust (10 items); quality of communication (10 items);
and extent of anger and alienation (8 items), each representing unique constructs. Peer relationships are also assessed along the same three dimensions, trust (10 items), communication
(8 items), and alienation (7 items). For the purposes of this study, the scales for all three dimensions were analyzed separately for both parents and peers. In this study alphas for parental trust,

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

60

ROTHMAN AND STEIL

communication, and alienation were .89, .87, and .77, respectively. Alphas for peer trust, communication, and alienation were .89, .83, and .74, respectively. The IPPA has been used successfully
in several studies with adolescents as young as 12. Results indicate that parental attachment
scores are correlated with clinical diagnoses of depression, parent rating of the adolescents
depressive symptoms, and to patients self-reported level of depression (Armsden, McCauley,
Greenberg, Burke, & Mitchell, 1990). IPPA scores have also correlated with a number of personality variables, including positiveness, stability of self-esteem, life-satisfaction, and affective
status (i.e., depression, anxiety, resentment/alienation, covert anger, and loneliness) (Armsden &
Greenberg, 1987).
Adolescents then completed the Entitlement Attitudes Scale (EAS) (Nadkarni et al., 2008).
This 17-item measure comprises two qualitatively different factors. The first, labeled self-reliance
and self-assurance (SRSA), is associated with feelings of self-confidence and assertiveness. The
second, labeled narcissism and self-promotion, is associated with self-centered, demanding attitudes (NESP). Using a Likert scale, adolescents responded from 1 (never) to 7 (always) to
statements such as, When I ask people to do things for me I feel like I am imposing, I hesitate to assert my preferences or opinions over someone elses, I expect to be catered to, and
Looking out for my own welfare is my main responsibility. Alphas for this study were .71 and
.69, respectively, for each factor. Results from prior studies indicated that both factors, but especially SRSA, are strongly related to assertiveness (Nadkarni et al., 2008). Greater SRSA also
predicted higher levels of decision making in, for example, relationships, greater relationship
intimacy, and lower levels of depression in black and white women, and a decreased tendency for
self-silencing in relationships for both women and men (McGann, 2000; Nadkarni et al., 2008;
Vinograde, 2001). In contrast, NESP was negatively related to intimacy for both men and women,
negatively related to feelings of control, positively associated with higher levels of depression in
women (McGann, 2000; Vinograde, 2001) and predicted higher levels of self-pay (Nadkarni
et al., 2008).
Adolescents were assessed on subjective well-being using three scales, one to evaluate subjective happiness, another assessed satisfaction with life, and the final one measured symptom
formation. The first was the four-item Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), where respondents
rated their happiness on a 7-point scale (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999). This scale has been validated in 14 studies, with a total of 2,732 participants, including but not limited to college and high
school adolescents (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999; Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1997; Lyubomirsky
& Ross, 1999; Lyubomirsky & Tucker, 1998). Test-retest correlations have suggested good to
excellent reliability (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999). Cronbachs alpha for this sample was .84.
The second is the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS), which assesses life satisfaction with
items such as In most ways my life is close to my ideal, and So far I have gotten the important
things I want in life (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). It includes five items with
which respondents agree or disagree using a 7-point scale. Cronbachs alpha was .79 for this
sample.
Adolescents were then assessed on their symptom formation using the 53-item Brief
Symptom Inventory (BSI) (Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983). This assessment measures symptoms
along 10 dimensions including somatization, obsessive-compulsiveness, interpersonal sensitivity,
depression, anxiety, hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, psychoticism, and a four-item
catch-all category labeled additional items. The nine primary symptom dimensions of the BSI
have evolved through a combination of clinical/rational and empirical/analytic procedures.
Subsequently, each has been subjected wherever possible to empirical verification (Derogatis

ADOLESCENT ATTACHMENT AND ENTITLEMENT

61

& Cleary, 1977). A total score, including all 10 dimensions, was used for this study to assess
overall symptom formation (alpha of all 53 items = .97; alpha of 10 dimensions = .78). After
data collection, a correlation matrix was used to analyze results.

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

RESULTS
The adolescents in this study reported themselves as somewhat to very happy (M = 4.74 out
of 7-point scale). They reported a little bit of symptomotology (M = .93 out of 4-point scale)
and were on average likely to slightly agree with the statement that In most ways my life is
close to my ideal (M = 4.66 out of 7-point scale). In general, they viewed their relationships
with parents as sometimes communicative but not very often trusting and often alienating (M = 2.38, M = 1.84, M = 3.72, respectively, out of a 5-point scale). Consistent with
findings from adult populations, adolescents perceived themselves as sometimes to always
self-reliant and self-assured and were just short of the midpoint, which represents somewhat
narcissistically entitled (M = 4.48, M = 3.41, respectively, out of 7-point scale). These adolescents perceived themselves similarly to previously studied populations in terms of subjective
well-being, entitlement, and attachment.
Entitlement and Attachment
As hypothesized, 1) lower levels of alienation from their primary attachment figures was associated with less unhealthy, narcissistic entitlement (r(23) = .43, p < .05) and 2) greater healthy or
self-reliant entitlement (r(23) = .62, p < .01). In addition, and only partially as expected, 3)
higher levels of trust in primary attachment figures was associated with less unhealthy, narcissistic entitlement (r(23) = .50, p < .05) but not necessarily associated with higher levels of
healthy, self-reliant entitlement (r(23) = .25, p = .26). Thus for the most part, adolescents with
insecure attachments are more narcissistically entitled, while their more securely attached peers
show greater healthy entitlement.
In terms of attachment to peers, the findings are notable because those who reported greater
levels of trust among peers also reported less narcissistic entitlement (r(23) = .42, p < .05),
and reduced peer alienation was indicative of greater healthy entitlement (r(23) = .62, p <
.01). However, similar to parental attachment, greater trust did not necessitate greater healthy
entitlement (p = .11). In addition, and contrary to parental attachment, reduced peer alienation
was not necessarily associated with reduced narcissistic entitlement (p = .26).
Entitlement and Subjective Well-Being
Contrary to hypotheses, 5) narcissistic entitlement was not related at statistically significant levels
with any measure of subjective well-being, including satisfaction with life, subjective happiness,
and symptom formation (r(23) = .23, p = .28, r(23) = .10, p = .65, and r(23) = .07, p = .74,
respectively). Neither measure of entitlement was associated with satisfaction with life (r(23)
= .23, p > .28 NESP, r(23) = .27, p > .21 SRSA). However, 6) adolescents who reported a
healthier sense of entitlement, as measured by SRSA, reported greater happiness (r(23) = .43,
p < .05) and less symptom formation (r(23) = .51, p < .05).

62

ROTHMAN AND STEIL

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

Attachment and Subjective Well-Being

Consistent with previous literature (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987), this study found significant associations between poor attachment and low subjective well-being. Specifically, 7) high
parental and peer alienation was associated with lower levels of satisfaction with life (r(23) =
.78, p < .001; r(23) = .53, p < .01, respectively), lower subjective happiness (r(23) = .55,
p < .001; r(23) = .68, p < .001, respectively), and greater symptom formation (r(23) = .61,
p < .01; r(23) = .71, p < .001, respectively). In addition, 8) higher levels of parental trust and
communication were indicative of greater satisfaction with life (r(23) = .54, p < .01; r(23) =
.59, p < .001, respectively) and peer trust (r(23) = .43, p < .05).
Entitlement and Wealth
As hypothesized, 9) students reported narcissistic entitlement was unrelated to all measures of
perceived level of wealth (all ps > .1). However, healthy entitlement was negatively correlated
with adolescents reported level of family net worth and family yearly earnings (r(23) = .54,
p < .001, and r(23) = .63, p < .001), respectively).

CONCLUSIONS
This research was unique in integrating the perspectives of both clinical and social psychologists
in examining the relationship among attachment, entitlement, and well-being among a sample of
affluent adolescents. Through the use of an empirical measure assessing a range of entitlement
attitudes, this study approached the construct of entitlement not solely as pathology but also
along a dimension of mental health. Although causality was not assessed, a readily apparent
relationship emerged between attachment and entitlement attitudes. The attitudes, relationships,
and well-being of affluent adolescents were further explored. Studying this population, an often
overlooked or unavailable subset, is a rare endeavor distinctive of this research.
As a sample, affluent adolescents were chosen because of the popular conception of them
as excessively entitled. Adolescents are often viewed as overly entitled, and the affluent even
more so (Luthar, 2003). Therapists are often faced with the needs of adolescents, and affluent
adolescents are more likely to be able to afford therapeutic intervention than their less affluent counterparts. However, as a result of their affluence, they are commonly freed from the
usual channels of research and can often bypass researchers. Thus, their needs are comparatively unknown to the psychological research community while clinical psychologists see them
relatively frequently. Therefore, it is critical for clinicians to further their understanding of this
population, and issues of entitlement and attachment are at the forefront of what can and should
be understood, especially as they relate to the well-being of their patients.
However, a number of limitations exist within this study. Specifically, the sample was recruited
from a private high school that was known to have a high tuition; however, no direct measure
was available to assess student family wealth. Despite this limitation, the sample appears to be
affluent, based on tuition needs, minimal likelihood of support through financial aid, and reported
family net worth. These adolescents are expected to continue their academic studies at prestigious
universities and are thus active in numerous after school activities. This commitment to various

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

ADOLESCENT ATTACHMENT AND ENTITLEMENT

63

activities was likely a factor limiting their ability to participate and may account for the relatively
low (18%) response rate, another significant limiting factor in this study. However, this research
centered on an age group that often goes unstudied and, as part of an affluent community, these
adolescents are sheltered from outside observers and rarely open to participating in research,
making this study unusual in its ability to gain access to such a sample.
The pattern of relationships was strong and largely consistent with the hypotheses.
Adolescents with more difficulties in their relationships with parents and peers reported increased
levels of unhealthy styles of entitlement. By contrast, those adolescents who reported less alienation from parents also reported more healthy entitlement. Healthier entitlement and healthier
attachment also meant greater happiness and reduced symptom formation. It appears then from
these findings that greater alienation and reduced trust are associated with narcissistic, unhealthy
entitlement. Less alienation, by contrast, is associated with greater subjective well-being and
healthy entitlement. This is consistent with the clinical perspective of attachment theorists, who
suggest that unhealthy styles of entitlement may occur if strong attachment relationships are not
formed in infancy (Coleman, 2003) and that healthy styles of entitlement are more likely to occur
in the context of positive early attachment (Verschueren & Marcoen, 1999). It is also consistent
with Levy-Warrens (1998) statements that a healthy level of self-involvement may be impaired
if adolescents are preoccupied with difficulties, such as poor trust or poor communication, in his
or her family.
Contrary to hypotheses, narcissistic entitlement was unrelated to all measures of subjective
well-being. This is however consistent with a previous study (Nadkarni et al., 2008), which failed
to find a negative relationship between narcissistic entitlement and self-esteem. While we can
only speculate as to why this may be, perhaps it is unlikely that someone high in narcissistic
entitlement would willingly indicate difficulties in either self-esteem or subjective well-being,
because this may highlight vulnerabilities in their self-perception. Further research could explore
these possibilities by assessing these relationships using indirect or implicit measures. It is also
possible that narcissistic, unhealthy entitlement, overlaps with some aspects of self-involvement
that are not only adequate, but necessary for adolescent development (Levy-Warren, 1998).
While greater trust was associated with less narcissistic entitlement, trust was unrelated to
healthy entitlement. Thus, adolescents who have less trusting relationships with their parents
likely defend against this psychological injury with added narcissistic entitlement. However, it
had been hypothesized that healthy entitlement would be positively related to levels of parental
trust. Indeed, the direction of the relationship is consistent with the hypothesis, but not strong
enough to reach statistical significance. This may be partially due to the small sample size. The
sample overall, however, viewed their relationships with their parents as not very often trusting.
This is consistent with aspects of adolescence in which young adults are struggling with issues
of independence and separation, and these may be a factor as well.
This study attempted to examine the stereotype of the affluent as narcissistically entitled. The
data from this study indicate that level of wealth is unrelated to either problematic attachment
or level of narcissistic, unhealthy entitlement. Thus the stereotypical idea that entitlement, with
particular focus on narcissistic entitlement, is indelibly linked to the wealthy is an idea that is
unsupported. Adolescents quality of attachment is therefore a better predictor of entitlement than
adolescents perceived level of wealth. Contrary to the hypothesis, however, healthy entitlement
was negatively correlated with adolescents perceived level of wealth. This is a finding that
deserves further investigation. We were limited in our access to family financial data. What are

64

ROTHMAN AND STEIL

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

the implications then of adolescents self reports of family net worth and family yearly earnings? It is unclear how accurate these teenagers were in their self-reporting of family income and
net worth. Also, what are the factors of wealth, even in the context of positive parental attachment, that provide a challenge to the development of healthy entitlement? These issues should
be explored in future research. We have initiated the process of disentangling the complexities
of wealth and subjective well being among affluent adolescents, showing a lack of support for a
long-held stereotype, and assisting clinicians to better understand this segment of the population.

REFERENCES
Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and
their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16(5), 427454.
Armsden, G. C., McCauley, E., Greenberg, M. T., Burke, P. M., & Mitchell, J. R. (1990). Parent and peer attachment in
early adolescent depression. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18(6), 683697.
Brennan, K. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Attachment styles and personality disorders: Their connections to each other and
to parental divorce, parental death, and perceptions of parental caregiving. Journal-of-Personality, 66(5), 835878.
Coleman, P. K. (2003). Perceptions of parent-child attachment, social self-efficacy, and peer relationships in middle
childhood. Infant and Child Development, 12(4), 351369.
Crosby, F. (1982). Relative deprivation and working women. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 49(1), 7175.
Derogatis, L. R., & Cleary, P. A. (1977). Confirmation of the dimensional structure of the SCL-90: A study in construct
validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33(4), 981989.
Derogatis, L. R., & Melisaratos, N. (1983). The brief symptom inventory: An introductory report. Psychological
Medicine, 13(3), 595605.
Emmons, R. A. (1987). Narcissism: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1117.
Fessenden, S. (1998). An investigation of the differences between deserving and being entitled to. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 58(7-B), 3965.
Freud, S. (1916). Some character types met with in psychoanalytic work. Standard Edition, 14 (pp. 311333). London,
England: Hogarth Press.
Kernberg, O. (1976). Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. New York, NY: Jason Aronson.
Kerr, N. (1985). Behavioral manifestations of misguided entitlement. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 23(1), 515.
Kingshott, B. F., Bailey, K., & Wolfe, S. E. (2004). Police culture, ethics and entitlement theory. Criminal justice studies:
A critical journal of crime, law and society, 17(2), 187202.
Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration of the self . New York, NY: International Universities Press.
Kreigman, G. (1983). Entitlement attitudes: Psychosocial and therapeutic implications. Journal of the American Academy
of Psychoanalysis, 11(2), 265281.
Levin, S. (1970). On the psychoanalysis of attitudes of entitlement. Bulletin of the Philadelphia Association for
Psychoanalysis, 20, 110.
Levy-Warren, M. (1998). Adolescent narcissism. In P. Beren (Ed.), Narcissistic disorders in children and adolescents
(pp. 85110). Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson Inc.
Lott, B. (2002). Cognitive and behavioral distancing from the poor. American Psychologist, 57, 100110.
Luthar, Suniya S. (2003). The culture of affluence: Psychological costs of material wealth. Child Development, 74(6),
15811593.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct
validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137155.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1997). Hedonic consequences of social comparison: A contrast of happy and unhappy
people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 11411157.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1999). Changes in attractiveness of elected, rejected, and precluded alternatives:
A comparison of happy and unhappy individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 9881007.

Downloaded by [Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries] at 12:46 12 March 2016

ADOLESCENT ATTACHMENT AND ENTITLEMENT

65

Lyubomirsky, S., & Tucker, K. L. (1998). Implications of individual differences in subjective happiness for perceiving,
interpreting, and thinking about life events. Motivation and Emotion, 22(2), 155186.
Major, B. (1994). From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy appraisals,
and group membership. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 293355). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
McGann, V. (2000). Entitlement and depression: An exploration of differences between the sexes and among women.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(04B), 2211.
McGann, V., & Steil, J. M. (2005). The sense of entitlement: Its relationship to the achievement of gender equality and
womens and girls psychological well-being. In J. Worell & C. Goodenheart (Ed.), The handbook of women and girls:
Psychological well-being through the lifespan. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Meyer, W. (1991). A case of restricted entitlement. Clinical Social Work Journal, 19(3), 223235.
Millon, T. (1982). Justice, gender and the family. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Modell, A. (1983). Comments on the rise of narcissism. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), The future of psychoanalysis (pp. 111121).
New York, NY: International Universities Press, Inc.
Nadkarni, L., Steil, J. M., Malone, J., & Sagrestano, L. (2008). The sense of entitlement: The development of a self-report
scale. Manuscript under revision.
Pittman, F. S. (1985). Children of the rich. Family Process, 24, 461472.
Pollack, J. M., & Schaffer, S. (1985). The mental health clinician in the affluent public school setting. Clinical Social
Work Journal, 13, 341355.
Raskin, R., & Hall, C. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45, 590.
Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal components analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory and further
evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 890902.
Shafran, R. B. (1992). Children of affluent parents. In J. D. OBrien & D. J. Pilowsky (Eds.), Psychotherapies with
children and adolescents: Adapting the psychodynamic process (pp. 269288). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric
Association.
Simpson, J. A., & Weiner, E. (1989). Oxford English dictionary (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Smolewska, K., & Dion, K. L. (2005). Narcissism and adult attachment: A multivariate approach. Self and Identity, 4(1),
5968.
Steil, J. M. (1994). Equality and entitlement in marriage. In M. Lerner & G. Mikula (Eds.), Entitlement and the affectional
bond (pp. 229258). New York, NY: Plenum.
Steil, J. M., McGann, V., & Kahn, A. (2001). Entitlement. Encyclopedia of women and gender, 1.
Steil, J. M., & Newman, A. (2008). Entitlement and work sharing: A study of university faculty and staff. The 12th
Biannual Conference of the International Society of Justice and Research, Adelaide, Australia.
Verschueren, K., & Marcoen, A. (1999). Representation of self and socioemotional competence in kindergartners:
Differential and combined effects of attachment to mother and to father. Child Development, 70, 183201.
Vinograde, D. (2001). Black and white heterosexual womens marital and same-sex best friend relationships, and the
contributions of entitlement, relationship equality and relationship intimacy to well-being. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 61(9-B), 5010.
Warner, S. L. (1991). Psychoanalytic understanding and treatment of the very rich. Journal of the American Academy of
Psychoanalysis, 19, 578594.
Weitzman, S. (2000). Not to people like us: Hidden abuse in upscale marriages. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Winnicott, D. (1960). The theory of the parent-infant relationship. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 41, 585595.