Is modesty a subdomain of humility?

Davis, Don E.; McElroy, Stacey E.; Rice, Kenneth G.; Choe, Elise; Westbrook, Charles J.; Hook, Joshua N.; Tongeren, Daryl R. Van; DeBlaere, Cirleen; Hill, Peter C.; Placares, Vanessa; Worthington, Everett L.

doi:10.1080/17439760.2015.1117130

Cited by 25 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taken together, our results clarify the tightly linked relationship between state humility and modesty, and in particular the very high correlation between the BSHS and the HEXACO modesty subscale. These results align with recent research demonstrating a close association between the two constructs (Davis et al, 2015), while also finding additional evidence for differences in key theoretical areas, such as moderating attention to self and others' perception of humility. Although the two are highly correlated, they do diverge from one another in critical theoretically-meaningful ways.…”

Section: Discussion Of Study 2bsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Second, we propose that humility and modesty will show a complex and theoretically important pattern of convergence and divergence with our chosen criterion variables. Humility and modesty are closely related, but can demonstrate key differences in theoretically-relevant areas, such as moderating attention to the self (Davis et al, 2015). In light of the high correlation between the modesty subscale of the HEXACO and the BSHS, this study will both demonstrate incremental validity beyond the previous measures where appropriate, as well as illuminate how to theoretically disentangle these two constructs.…”

Section: Study 2b: Differentiating Humility and Modestymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Humility is theoretically related to both a comparatively greater investment in the benefit of others and less investment in currying others' approval to bolster one's ego (Chancellor & Lyubomirsky, 2013), whereas modesty is marked by its norm consciousness (Davis et al, 2015;Sedikides et al, 2008). As such, humility may be associated with a relatively lower likelihood of following norms when that deviance benefits the group; accordingly, we hypothesize that humility, not modesty, will predict positive deviance.…”

Section: Study 2b: Differentiating Humility and Modestymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

State humility: Measurement, conceptual validation, and intrapersonal processes

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humility is a core psychological process theoretically marked by low self-focus, secure identity, and balanced awareness of strengths and weaknesses. We began with a consensual definition of humility before theoretically unpacking it. First, using 25 samples and 2622 adults, we developed the Brief State Humility Scale, which demonstrates strong construct validity and good reliability, is sensitive to experimental manipulation, and is uncorrelated with social desirability. Second, using this measure, we replicated previously reported relationships involving interpersonal processes; revealed links between state humility and intrapersonal processes (e.g. affect, creativity, and personality); and demonstrated key theoretical differences between state humility and modesty. This framework highlights new avenues for humility research and suggests how humility plays a critical role in emotional experience.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Of Study 2bsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Study 2b: Differentiating Humility and Modestymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study 2b: Differentiating Humility and Modestymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

State humility: Measurement, conceptual validation, and intrapersonal processes

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Gregg et al (2008) found humble was emerged as one of the central characteristics of modest people. In addition, some researchers considered modesty an important subdomain of humility (Lee and Ashton, 2004; Davis et al, 2011, 2016). Taken together, these above researches suggest that there is considerable overlap between modesty and humility, the present study thus don’t distinguish clearly between the two concepts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have been extensive investigations into the measurement of modesty using Westerners samples, such as Whetstone’s Modesty Response Scale (MRS; cited by Cialdini et al, 1998; Kurman, 2002), Humility Scale (HS; Elliott, 2010), and Relational Modesty Scale (RMS; Davis et al, 2016). These modesty scales have logical subscales and satisfactory psychometric properties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Validation of the Chinese Modesty Scale (CMS)

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the development and method of validation of the Chinese Modesty Scale (CMS). Based on Wang’s dualistic model for value and instrumental modesty, our study employed a review of the literature, in-depth interviews, open-ended investigations, and feedback from experts. An initial 14-item scale for analyzing the issue of “Chinese modesty” was developed. Then we explored the dimensions and final items of this CMS using item analysis and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with sample 1 (n = 406). After that, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to replicate the factor structure obtained through EFA with a refined, independent, 12-item scale (n = 662). Results confirmed the dualistic model (for value and instrumental modesty) on which this scale was based. That is, we found that there are two kinds of “Chinese modesty”: value modesty and instrumental modesty. As a valid, reliable scale, the CMS can therefore be used to measure the “Chinese modesty” of/in different age groups.

show abstract

How to infuse an organizational culture with humility: A study of humble behaviors and practices

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to analyze the role of humility in organizational culture, in this work, companies that formally declared humility as a value on their home pages were chosen, as to understand the internalization of this value in their practices and behaviors. The research adopted a descriptive‐analytical design with a qualitative approach, and in addition to secondary data referring to the organizational profile, fourteen semi‐structured interviews were analyzed with the decision‐making elite of the seven chosen organizations, based on theoretical‐deductive categories of the construct identified in the organizational literature. The study identified that the value of humility is effectively present in behaviors and practices of these organizations, which develop a culture of humility in their daily lives. The main results indicate that the internalized value of humility is associated with (i) shared behaviors; (ii) clear self‐assessment of strengths and weaknesses; (iii) culture of innovation; (iv) awareness of their own limitations; (v) support for third‐party contributions and feedback practices (vi) employee learning; (vii) culture of praise. The results reinforced the main categories and constructs for a Humble Organizational Culture (HOC) Model, opening opportunities for future research that explore the elaboration of cultural maturity diagnoses and humility measurement instruments in the organizational field.

show abstract

Is modesty a subdomain of humility?

Cited by 25 publications

References 18 publications

State humility: Measurement, conceptual validation, and intrapersonal processes

State humility: Measurement, conceptual validation, and intrapersonal processes

Development and Validation of the Chinese Modesty Scale (CMS)

How to infuse an organizational culture with humility: A study of humble behaviors and practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About