The Aggrieved Entitlement Scale: A New Measure for an Old Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aggrieved entitlement (AE) refers to the defensiveness and hostility majority-group members feel toward the outgroup in response to a perceived threat of lost privileges. Over the last couple of years, AE has garnered a great deal of attention in the media as well as in the empirical literature because of its connection with extremism and violence against minority groups. Yet, to date, research quantifying and measuring the construct of AE is scant. In this paper, we aim to bridge this gap. Across two studies ( N 1 = 813; N 2 = 1,100) we explore the factor structure of the Aggrieved Entitlement Scale (AES) and examine its concurrent and divergent validity with related demographic, attitudinal, and personality factors. We found that the AES was positively correlated with racist attitudes, fear-based xenophobia, authoritarianism, sexism, transphobia, and sexual entitlement. We further found that it was negatively correlated with feminist attitudes, honesty-humility, and compassionate love. In both samples, scores were higher among men (vs. women) and heterosexual (vs. sexual minority) individuals. Finally, in contrast to our expectations, racial and ethnic minority participants scored higher in AE than White participants. Results from this work offer initial support for the use of the AES and call for more research into the topic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".