Advertisements

New Psychological Studies: How The Wealthy Really Are Different From Everyone Else

"The rich don’t go with the flow"

The author F. Scott Fitzgerald is credited with saying: “The rich are different from you and me.” And Ernest Hemingway is supposed to have responded: “Yes, they have more money.” In fact, the actual words Fitzgerald used in his short story “The Rich Boy” (1926) are: “Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft, where we are hard, cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand.”

People have always suspected that the rich are somehow ‘different,’ not only in terms of what they possess, but in their personalities. However, there are not many scientific studies that can either confirm or refute this thesis – neither in the United States, nor in Europe. Now, a team of six German economists and psychologists has conducted a large-scale study: They interviewed 130 wealthy individuals and used the results to derive a psychological profile, which they compared with the population as a whole.

Big Five Test

Of the various models developed by psychological researchers to describe personality types, it is the Big Five model that has largely come to dominate over the past few decades. This latest wealth study used a condensed version of the Big Five test to distinguish between five core personality traits:

Conscientious: Describes people who are thorough, meticulous, diligent, efficient, well organized,  punctual, ambitious and persevering.

Neuroticism: Individuals with a high degree of Neuroticism tend to be nervous and frequently worry about everything and anything that could possibly go wrong. They tend to react impulsively and, overall, are not particularly psychologically stable.

Agreeableness: Individuals with high levels of Agreeableness have a pronounced desire for harmony; they have a tendency to back down too quickly and are frequently too trusting.

Extraversion: Individuals with high Extraversion are talkative, determined, enterprising, energetic, and courageous.

Openness to Experience: Individuals with high Openness to Experience are imaginative, creative, and curious.

When you compare the personality traits of the general population with those of the researchers’ wealthy interviewees, the following patterns emerge:

  • The rich are emotionally more stable, and therefore less neurotic
  • The rich are especially extraverted
  • The rich are more open to new experiences
  • The rich are less agreeable, which means they less likely to shy away from conflicts
  • The rich are more conscientious.

In addition to the Big Five test, the researchers also investigated two other personality traits: narcissism and internal locus of control. Their findings:

  • The rich are more narcissistic
  • The rich exhibit a stronger internal locus of control. This means that they are more likely to agree with statements such as “I determine how my life turns out” than they are with statements like “What you achieve in life is mainly a question of luck or fate.”

What Makes the Superrich Tick

The results of this latest wealth study are consistent with those of my doctoral dissertation on “The Wealth Elite,” which was based on interviews with 45 wealthy individuals. With only a few exceptions, most of the interviewees were self-made millionaires, and the ‘poorest’ were worth between 10 million and 30 million euros. Most, however, were worth significantly more, between 30 million and one billion euros, and some even more.

This study on the psychology of the superrich also came to the conclusion that the rich are psychologically very stable (i.e. not very neurotic). It also showed that they are particularly open to new experiences, more extraverted, more conscientious – but not necessarily agreeable.

In contrast to the recent survey of 130 wealthy individuals mentioned above, the study of the superrich involved in-depth interviews of between one and two hours each. In addition, the superrich interviewees not only completed a condensed version of the Big Five test, they took the detailed version with 50 questions.

One of the key findings was that the superrich are frequently nonconformists. They enjoy swimming against the prevailing current and have no problem contradicting prevailing opinion. Another result: the superrich are more likely than others to make decisions based on gut feeling. They tend to rely more on intuition than on detailed analysis.

And, most importantly, they have a completely different approach to dealing with defeats and setbacks than most people. Across the population at large, people like to take credit for their successes while looking to assign the blame to others for defeats and setbacks. In this, the superrich are quite different, as the interviews showed: They seek to identify the causes of setbacks in themselves, not in external circumstances or other people. This gives them a feeling of power: “If the fault lies with me, I can change it. I am in control of my own life.” There are many reasons why some people succeed in becoming rich and others don’t, but the specific combination of personality traits that both studies identified is certainly one of the reasons. Rich people become rich because they act differently from others. And they act differently because they think, make decisions and react differently than most people. Apparently, Fitzgerald was right: “The rich are different from you and me.”

I was awarded my first doctorate in history in 1986 and my second, this time in sociology, in 2016.

Source: New Psychological Studies: How The Wealthy Really Are Different From Everyone Else

Advertisements

Handshakes Could Be Banned At Work

1_Two-business-women-shaking-hands.jpg

Handshakes could be forbidden under new workplace rules to circumvent costly sexual harassment allegations, and every employer may ban all kinds of physical touch to avoid uncertainty about what sort of touching is suitable.

It comes off the back of the #MeToo movement, with bosses rethinking their strategies and heading to a more black and white attitude, and some employers may put a full embargo on physical touch, but is this going a tad too far, especially when shaking someone’s hand? But they might say just no contact at all because there is no grey area’s then.

And according to a recent poll of 2,000 adults on Totaljobs, three out of four were keen for a full physical contact prohibition when at work, and it was pointed out that gestures such as putting your hand on someone’s back or giving a reassuring embrace could all come under the umbrella of being too personal.

It will still plausibly be safe to shake hands at work, except if your employer forbids it, in which event you will have to obey the rules, but it’s not only how you comport yourself in the office which matters either. The workplace does extend outside the office as well, the perfect example is the Christmas night out and staff behaviour when going to functions.

But indeed, isn’t this getting to be a little absurd, next you’ll not be permitted to make hand contact when getting change from a cashier in shops, and a handshake is consensual, when somebody puts out their hand to shake it, you consent by shaking it back, but if they keep their hand by their side or behind their back and it’s grabbed and shook against their will, then this is clearly physical assault, which is already covered in the law, so obviously there’s no call for a handshake ban, which would be complete insanity.

If anything, handshaking is social, polite, appropriate and NORMAL.

Perhaps we should go and work in France where men and women, men and men and women and women kiss each other when meeting, an extension to shaking hands, I can’t see this being banned any day soon, but we shouldn’t say women because apparently that sexist, or men for that matter, but HUMAN has man in it, so don’t use that either.

Is there a point to being politically correct, especially when it dictates our everyday lives? And the cultural niceties of the past that assisted human interaction is being denounced, but for what outcome? Because in the end what it will bring us down to is an emotionless society that will be undoubtedly controlled by our socially correct leaders, and it’s about time these minority, sad individuals, who want to dictate to others how they run their lives, to in no uncertain terms to “sod off”.

So, welcome to the unfortunate death of social norms, and the courtesy of a band of senseless society inept imbeciles.

Source: Handshakes Could Be Banned At Work

%d bloggers like this:
Skip to toolbar