The new narcissism
Each generation tends to look down on the next. But scientific data show alarming narcissism among today's college students — and it's their elders who largely are responsible for their self-infatuation.
Newly analyzing data from the American Freshman Survey — in which students have rated how they compare to peers since 1966 —psychologist Jean Twenge and colleagues found “a dramatic rise” over the last four decades in the number who rate themselves “above average” in academic and math ability, drive to achieve and self-confidence, reports the U.K.'s Daily Mail.
Much more likely to rate themselves as gifted writers, their writing test scores nevertheless fall far short of those of 1960s students.
Only about a third study for six or more hours a week, down from almost half in the late 1980s.
And what Ms. Twenge calls their “ambition inflation” — surely fed by “grade inflation” — fuels increasingly unrealistic expectations, which set many up to selfishly damage personal and work relationships and fall short of their goals.
Their entitled mindset has been instilled by today's parents and educators, who've created a culture that prizes self-esteem. It dumbs down academics and hands out ego-inflating “participation” awards at the expense of success fundamentals such as critical-thinking skills and hard work.
Today's coddled collegians are the predictable result of standards-bereft parents and educators who disregard objective merit and insulate students against one of life's best teachers — failure.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The Wolf agenda: Coddling unions
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- Greensburg Laurels & Lances
- Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
- The Wolf budget: Taxing & spending
- ObamaCare in court
- Unsolved McKeesport murders raise concerns
- Mon-Yough communities need evacuation plans for rail disasters
- Taxing consequences: The Shell effect
- The IRS scandal: A cover-up grows
- The Thursday wrap