AmericanIndividualism

Running Head: AMERICAN INDIVIDUALISM 1
American Individualism:
When Motivation and Narcissism Dance A Fine Line
Alexis Daubner
Carthage College
29 April 2015

Abstract
The night sky quarters an innumerable amount of stars, just as the American culture
quarters a vast amount of unique individuals, most of which believe their shine is all their own.
The individualistic culture has always been a victim of scrutiny as well as a source of pride and
motivation. Although much controversy has been struck by this age-old debate, there are many
ideologies arising within this new age that support that the individualistic culture may be harmful
to the human psyche. Such analyses provide evidence that the American individualistic culture
may be harboring either a detrimental increase in narcissism (for those who succeed) or learned
helplessness and self-loathing (for those who don’t). Throughout this paper the essence of
motivation will be discussed and highlighted before applied to many professional’s supported
hypotheses on the topic of American individualism.

American Individualism:
When Motivation and Narcissism Dance A Fine Line
There is a force within every human being that can overrule any temptation. On some
occasions this force may even prove to overrule our necessities.. to consume, to sleep, even to
breathe. This force has undergone countless years of research, evaluation, and categorization; it
has been disassembled and rebuilt more times than can be measured, yet it is still one of the most
aloof and estranged concepts in the study of psychology. Motivation stems from the word
“motive”, which is defined as the “reason for a particular action” Similarly, this word’s latin root
means “to move” (Webster 2013). This triggers an interesting question: could the human
phenomenon of “being moved” trigger the neurological activity needed to be inspired or
motivated?
Throughout history, several psychologists and scientists alike have attempted to
categorize motivation in anywhere from two to five categories. The most vague categorization
splits between “goals related to work and those related to social interaction” (Kaiser & Ozer
1999, p.585). This finding is uniquely correlated with Freud’s psychoanalytic view of an
individuals need to “love and work” (Freud 1962, pg. 101). In this specific categorization,
intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are heavy at play. In the case of one excelling at work, the
individual must first set goals and then define strategies toward those goals. Depending on their
degree of intrinsic motivation this could prove to be a highly difficult or fairly easy task to
complete. On the other hand, extrinsic motivation may yield results for those that feel more
strongly toward an external locus of control yet stifle an individual who feels a lack of
independence or self-fortitude.

Bias plays an important part not only in worldly perception but in the establishment of
locus of control as well. “To be biased is to have a mental inclination to see the world and things
in it a particular way” (Schwalbe 2008, pg. 13). Bias has proven itself throughout history to be
not only a dangerous tool in political and social affairs but also on a smaller scale the
development of prejudices as well. Generally when one holds a bias that the world around them
governs their every move (external locus) and that they are ultimately victims to destiny, they
will become entrapped in their own form of learned helplessness.
“Bias is a problem when it is so rigid that it keeps us from considering new evidence and
new ideas. So the problem is not having biases, but being held captive by them” (Schwalbe 2008,
pg. 14). Being held captive by a bias is an excellent description of maintaining a very high
external locus of control. When one perceives that a bias they may have is also an ultimate truth
(for example that all women are pessimists, or that the color blue always instills gloominess),
that predetermined schema will force the individual to always perceive women as negative, or
the color blue as sad. This is loosely linked to the fundamental attribution error, being that one
may attribute one characteristic as an all-determining trait, not taking into account that there are
other variables involved. To expand upon this, if one believes that all women are pessimists they
will be much more likely to regard their interactions with the female gender to be negative and
counterproductive and will generally have very low motivation toward searching for the
“positive” ones.
The Heart of Individualism
Another form of bias that is largely applicable in the United States is the concept of
American Individualism. This cultural standpoint is vital to understanding the actions of some

United states residents that may seem counterproductive at times. “As Americans we learn that it
is good to be self-reliant, to achieve on our own, and to look out for ourselves” (Schwalbe 2008,
p. 6). In this way it seems as though the American culture is spreading a very thorough belief in
intrinsic motivation, with a strong internal locus of control.
Individualism has always been a large target for criticism within American culture; this
attribute has often been correlated with economic distancing, US government corruption, as well
as crime percentages. Richard Koch, a British author, singles out some of the largest criticisms
against individualism, including its “attendant selfishness, alienation, and divisiveness as the root
cause of the problem” (Koch 2014, pg. 2). Many theorists agree with this inclination and it has
been hypothesized that over time these correlations will only become stronger.
Martin Seligman highlights the possibility that individualism arose from “events that so
weakened our commitment to larger entities as to leave us naked before the ordinary assaults of
life… all that’s left to sit on is a small, frail folding chair: the self” (Seligman 1990, pg. 6). This
is an interesting view of individualism in general; rather than being the cause of negativity it is
the result of collective decomposition. Seligman goes on to support his theory with another
assertion that if growth is the responsibility of the individual, failure, therefore, can be only their
own. This is a somewhat frightening concept: if the American culture leaves little room for the
external locus of control, any and all disappointments or failures inevitably fall upon the
shoulders of the individual. This could result in feelings of inadequacy, self-esteem deficiencies,
or even psychological disorders.
The origins of individualism have been traced throughout American history and has very
frequently been attributed to the Westernized culture of the “lone cowboy”. Robin M. Williams,

however, addresses another perspective that may explain the growth of individualism in his
textbook, American Society. He introduces a somewhat anarchistic view in which Americans
have used their sense of autonomy to reject their state and rebel against the restraints of their
individual social groups and economic activity. He stresses that equality has a high correlation
with egoism, and that Americans “look after their own needs. [They] owe no man anything and
hardly expect anything from anybody” (Williams 1970, pg. 485). He suggested that “the ultimate
source of action, meaning, and responsibility is the individual” and several examples within the
American culture spotlight this suggestion. One example is that Americans rarely if ever exact
revenge on the kin of their assailants and are much more likely to hold individuals personally
responsible for their crimes. This is seen on news broadcasts and media coverage to this day; the
guilty individual is assumed to have been the cause of a situation and the victims of the crime to
be entirely innocent. It seems unfathomable in the American culture that a criminal on trial could
have their entire family punished for a crime that he/she had committed. This is also seen with
suicide attacks; the individualistic culture is much more likely to label the individual as selfish,
hasty, or overly dramatic rather than seeing them as a victim themselves.
William’s suggestions and research in 1970 established years of debate that are still
rampant to this day. Could it be truly harmful to the human psyche for an entire population to be
placing blame only on the individual? Does this blindside the culture from brainstorming other
possibilities or seeing victims and criminals for what they may be, the opposite of one another?
Several examples exist that support Williams’ understanding of the individualistic culture; many
of which would surely shock and confuse members of other cultures that see things from a
collectivist perspective.

Dimensions of National Culture
Geert Hofstede spent four years travelling through several countries, examining their
national cultures and establishing what is known today as the four dimensions. These dimensions
are very applicable to the American individualistic culture and can be applied to explain several
aspects of individualism that have become somewhat harmful to the human psyche. The first
dimension is known as the power distance (Hoftsede 1980, pg. 45-47), and this is reflected in the
values of the less powerful and most powerful members of society. Applying this concept to the
United States Hofstede witnessed a relatively low perceived power distance, however, a very
high realistic power distance. That is, although many employees in a company perceive that they
have equal rights and opportunity and could rise to be as powerful as their ordinates (following
the individualistic culture), very few individuals held almost all of the power within the
organization and were entitled to privileges that their subordinates could only dream of but most
likely never obtain. Therefore, the United States rated rather neutral in this dimension. However,
it should be noted that this ‘hologram’ of potential success could have very negative
consequences on the human psyche, creating a sense of false hope and continual disappointment
that may lead to very low self-regard.
The second dimension Hofstede labeled was the uncertainty avoidance (Hoftsede 1980,
pg. 45-48); this revolves around a nation’s tendency to avoid ambiguous situations and respond
to uncertainty with anxiety and fear. The American culture seems to experience more weak
uncertainty avoidance, being that there is more willingness to undertake uncertain events. This
could be seen as a positive aspect of the national culture, however, this sense of security could
also be based on the individualistic belief that authorities and services exist to serve the

individual, that each individual can benefit from their own work and sheer luck, and that if rules
cannot be kept, we should change them. Ultimately, this leads to the question of uniformity and
whether this sense of personal entitlement and gain from uncertainty is truly benefitting the
human psyche or just placing unnecessary stress on the system’s resources and discrediting
cooperation and authority. Another example of this dimension can be seen in this culture’s
ignorant sense of individual security or uninvolvement in political and economic affairs. If an
individual within the American culture were asked whether they felt victimized by the terrorist
attacks or recent terrorist wars in previous years they would most likely respond by claiming that
they never felt that they were in danger because they themselves were never called upon or
victimized. They also may proclaim that the war was waged miles upon miles away, and that a
war on American soil would be an impossibility. This sense of false security and lack of personal
involvement may become a detriment in future generations.
The third dimension is individualism-collectivism (Hoftsede 1980, pg. 46-49) and not
much needs to be said in light of the American culture in this category. As already stated, the
United States scores unnaturally high toward the individualistic viewpoint, lacking important
skills collectivism endorses such as moral involvement in organizations, expertise and hard work
to benefit the whole, and the power of “we” within cooperation and collaboration.
The fourth and final dimension is masculinity (Hoftsede 1980, pg. 47-50), ranging from
feminine to masculine. in this particular category the United States scores relatively neutral with
a slight lean toward masculinity. On the female side, the American culture sympathizes with the
unfortunate (Social Security and other welfare programs), allows for some fluidity in sex roles
and supports the value of quality of life. On the other hand, the American culture is also very

masculine through its glorification of material goods, admiration of successful achievers, the
importance of performance and a strong belief in independence.
Overall, the American culture ranked rather neutral in many of the aforementioned
categories, however, there is a large discrepancy between individual perception and reality.
These dimensions have shown that the individualistic culture has built an ignorant framework in
which success, gender fluidity, and personal security are all perceived as reality when in many
respects it may be impossible or lacking.
Autonomy in Groups
Although several assertions have been made regarding the negative consequences of a
strong individualistic culture, much can be said as well about the positive consequences or
neutralization of the American culture “melting” individualism and collectivism together.
Charles Fischer introduces an interesting component of American culture that may counteract
with the original individualistic belief (Fischer 2008, pg. 370). Fischer claims that the American
culture benefits from voluntarism- which includes the voluntary action involved in joining social
groups or matrimonies. This form of pseudo-collectivism allows for cooperation, charitability,
and social interaction that is vital to any human being’s livelihood. The important concept behind
this voluntarism is that despite the fact that certain individuals may be joining a faith, community
organization, matrimony or any other form of institution they emphasize that they are doing so
willingly. Surveys given to Americans supported (Fischer 2008, pg. 366) that Americans were
the most likely to follow orders given to them from their boss even if they conflicted with the
individual’s morales or better judgement. This seems to contradict the original form of

individualism regarding self-affirmation, control, and responsibility. However, when choosing
the occupation the employee willingly signed themselves into, a social contract with that
employer, they are voluntarily agreeing to the action they may disagree with, but this in itself is
still an individual choice. The individual remains apparent toward the fact that at any point they
may walk away from the occupation and voluntarily join a new employment group. This
affirmation applies to several social institutions, another good example being faith. America has
the highest percentage of individuals who choose to change religious denominations throughout
their lives; this is most likely a result of this individualistic/voluntarism underlying the American
culture (Statistics on Religion in America 2014).
Another aspect of individualism that may actually be a positive component is the
understanding that Americans generally choose to diligently follow individualistic mentalities
but only in certain spheres. For example, a very high percentage of the American population
would agree highly and even endorse the laissez-faire economic model in which every cog in the
machine works and fends for themselves. This is seen in many American ideologies such as
“pulling yourself up from the bootstraps”, and the “rags to riches” ideology (Weiss 1969, pg. 2).
However, in social or domestic spheres many Americans stem away from the individualistic
culture in lieu of cooperation, understanding, and compromise in order to gain social acceptance
or earn public favor. A good example of this phenomenon can be seen in the preference toward
extroverted individuals over introverts; if the American culture was thoroughly individualistic
there would be no benefit to networking or collaboration outside of selfish self-enhancement.
This theory applies to education as well; although many school systems in America support
individual achievement and GPA rankings, education also stresses group coordination and

collaborative abilities. School systems also show particular attention toward individuals who
steer clear of social interaction, and support the notion of conformity in some subjects (e.g.,
working together as a team to build a particular object or solve a problem). These views apply
much more toward the collectivist attributes of eastern countries rather than the stereotypical
Westernized beliefs.
Narcissism
Applying this concept of intentional bond forming as a way of personal gain,
psychologists and scientists alike have been able to measure another characteristic that is
believed to be a result of American individualism. Narcissism is almost always shed in a
negative light, categorized as “an extremely positive and over-exaggerated view of one’s self
especially concerning one’s power, importance, and attractiveness” (Twenge et. al 2008, pg. 76).
The individualistic ideology supports personal agency, inflated confidence, and a level of
extraversion/action that inevitably leads to a positive attitude and personal success. These
individualistic traits, however, have also been highly correlated with narcissism and have been
suspected to cause many inappropriate behaviors such as using others for self gain and other
attention seeking behaviors. A study underwent by Twenge and associates in 2008 showed a
30% increase in narcissism scores from 1979-1982 using student scores on the Narcissistic
Personality Inventory (NPI) between 1979 and 2006 (Twenge et. al 2008, pg. 78). Some other
correlated characteristics that were collected include an increase in materialism by 74%, an
increased level of wealth expectancy by 81%, and a professional job expectancy increase from
41% to 64%. This evidence highly supports the hypothesis that narcissism has become an
increasing problem in the United States, particularly in younger generations.

Martin Seligman would be quick to accept this data and apply it to his “defining quality
of the West”; he believes that “the explosion of wealth: fueled invention, and all the enterprise
that has led to cheap necessities and fairly cheap luxuries” has only empowered the sense of
individualism within the American culture (Seligman 2013, pg. 2). These same defining factors
have also lead the individualistic culture into a sense of entitlement and expectation. These
correlate not only with narcissistic characteristics but also with the data collected by Twenge and
associates. Therefore, evidence can be seen that generationally as the market has become more
materialistic and the consumers more entitled, individualism has allowed narcissism to grow and
thrive.
Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose
A surprising new theory in the field of motivation categorizes the human condition as a
lifelong strive toward three specific things:autonomy, mastery, and purpose. (Pink 2009, pg.
83-159). These particular drives may be the root of the individualistic mindset today, perhaps
becoming the onset to several generations of narcissism ahead. The first is autonomy, or the urge
to direct our own lives. This drive is particularly related to the concept of internal locus of
control. When an individual feels as though they have lost control of their own lives negative
behaviors usually ensue such as depression, loss of self-worth or learned helplessness. However,
if an individual is particularly fair at this drive they may feel as though the whole world relies on
them, and that they do not need connections or help from others because at the end of the day it
is only themselves they can rely on. This mentality is particularly sensitive in the American
culture as it often results in one of two things: either sequential success results in an over inflated

ego and distancing of others or sequential failures result in a complete disassembly of the
individual’s self competence.
The second is mastery, or the desire to become more and more proficient at something
that is relevant to the individual. This is also another theory that applies to a high level of internal
locus of control. The individualistic culture believes that if one can perform a task just as well as
an acclaimed “expert” in the field, then they themselves will be saving finances and will feel
more autonomous for their success. An example of this would be a male refusing to call a
plumber or mechanic when he could instead learn to repair the object himself through literature
and self-help videos, therefore undergoing his own form of mastery achievement over time.
Another example could be the American ideology of spotlighting athletes; an individual can only
hope over years of dedication and achievement that they may achieve the same mastery status as
some of the athletes they see idolized throughout media. A study undergone at Bishop’s
University utilized both the Narcissistic Personality Inventory as well as the Eysenck Personality
Questionnaire to test 112 students varying in sport engagement. Their results supported that
athletes tested much higher on the scales for narcissism (some even blatantly admitting their
characteristic) than nonathletes. This establishes an interesting question; does the idolization of
athletes within the American culture, particularly ones that are shown to be highly narcissistic in
media coverage, play a part in human motivation and therefore an increase in narcissism in the
United States?
The third motivational drive is purpose, or the desire to yield potential and service toward
something larger than the individual. This relates to the sense of group collectivism in an
individualistic way. That is, an individual may adjoin themselves with an establishment or cause

simply to benefit themselves or prove their own self-worth. On the other hand, they may join the
larger cause because they feel entitled to the freedom of their time, and know that if they are no
longer satisfied with that larger entity they can always cast it off in favor of another. Therefore,
even when an individualistic person seems to be altruistic there is always a question of ulterior
motive or self-reliance. All three of these motivational drives link directly to the beliefs instilled
by American individualism and can be applied to support several of the negative qualities that
have been spotlighted both in narcissism and lack of motivation. Both of these attributes have
arisen due to individualism becoming a cultural standpoint rather than a personal choice.
Next Steps and Future Considerations
When considering the next steps for spotlighting narcissism in the American culture and
either reversing or altering the effects it may have on the human psyche, executing a variety of
measures to support this revealing will be of vast importance. First, the American culture must
be made aware of this growing problem by creating nationally recognized campaigns for
narcissism awareness and social understanding. The rampant media coverage will allow a
national recognition of the negative consequences that may arise from narcissism as a result of
increased individualism. Second, groups and organizations must be established that enforce
collaboration, whole achievement, and cooperation; these ideals will differ greatly from the
competitive, individualistic culture that has become such a deep-set understanding in the United
States. Finally, positive reinforcement must be established that applaudes group success; these
reinforcement methods should become regularly accepted in places of work, education, and
religious affairs. Obviously, altering an entire nation’s sense of self and culture is a seemingly

impossible task, however, if small measures are taken toward a society that recognizes both
collectivist and individualistic culture, over time a positive result will be seen.
Conclusion
The individualistic culture has been highlighted as having a particularly negative impact
on the human psyche for a variety of reasons. Over time a bias has formed within this culture
that allots for unusually high levels of autonomy which have led to increasing levels of
narcissism within individual personalities. These narcissistic traits have been shown through high
levels of selfishness, personal attribution, and disregard for the ‘whole’ when in contest with the
‘self’. Many psychologists have hypothesized that the self has become a fragile entity due to an
increased amount of responsibility and internal locus of control. This is a dangerous finding
because it unveils that the American culture may be very susceptible to narcissism (for those
who succeed) or learned helplessness and self-loathing (for those who don’t).
Intrinsic motivation is a very powerful tool and many theorists have proclaimed that
centralizing that power can lead to personal success, however, they all argue that a sense of
balance must be reached between one’s self and their environment. Throughout this paper
several theorists were mentioned with a variety of ideas regarding the individualistic culture;
some believe that it can be harnessed for greatness, others find it highly contradictory and
harmful to human motivation. Despite this controversy, a surplus of evidence was given that
supports that the rising narcissism rates in the United States will have a detrimental and negative
impact on its civilians. The question therein lies: How can we encourage our fellow Americans
to see through a wider, more holistic lens? How can a sea of stars that believes that each one’s

shine is greater than the next, fall together in the belief that if they all shine equally, the sky will
illuminate more beautifully than ever before?

References
Bellah, R. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House.
Elman, W., & McKelvie, S. (2003, January 1). Athletic Insight - Narcissism in Football Players:
Stereotype or Reality? Retrieved March 31, 2015, from
http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol5Iss1/Narcissism.htm
Fischer, C. (2008, June 1). Paradoxes of American Individualism. Retrieved March 11, 2015,
from http://sociology.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/faculty/fischer/Fischer_Paradoxes of
Individualism_2008.pdf
Freud, S. (1962). Civilization and its discontents (pp. 100-107). New York: W.W. Norton.
Funder, D. (1997) The Personality Puzzle, (3-25).
Gangestad, S., Snyder, S. (1985). Self Monitoring: Appraisal and Reappraisal. Psychological
Bulletin 2000.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, Leadership, and Organization: Do American Theories
Apply Abroad? European Institute for Advance Studies in Management, (42-63).
Key Findings and Statistics on Religion in America. (2014). Retrieved April 7, 2015, from
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports#
Koch, R. (2014, January 23). Is Individualism Good or Bad? Retrieved March 11, 2015, from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-koch/is-individualism-good-or-_b_4056305.html
Motivation. The School Community Journal, 21(2). Retrieved from
http://www.adi.org/journal/2011fw/trumbullrothstein-fischfall2011.pdf

Motivation. 2011. In Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved March 3, 2015, from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hacker
Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us (pp. 83-159). Edinburgh:
Canongate.
Seligman, M. (1990). How To Change Your Mind and Your Life: Learned Optimism, 1-42.
Seligman, M. (2002). Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential to Realize
Your Potential for Lasting Fullfillment: Authentic Happiness, 3-56.
Schwalbe, M. (2008). Pieces of the Conversation. The Sociologically Examined Life, 1 (1), 6-14.
Trumbull, E., & Rothstein-Fisch, C. (2011). The Intersection of Culture and Achievement
Twenge, J. M., Konrath, S., Foster, J. D., Keith Campbell, W., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Egos
inflating over time: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic personality
inventory. Journal of personality,76(4), 875- 902.
Weiss, R. (1969) From Horatio Alger to Norman Vincent Peale. The American Myth of
Success, (2-56)
Williams, R. (1970). American Society, 3rd ed. New York: Knopf.

AmericanIndividualism

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to AmericanIndividualism

Similar to AmericanIndividualism (14)

AmericanIndividualism