Let’s start the week off right with a fun article on mental illness.
Researchers recently identified a new personality construct that describes the tendency to see oneself as a victim.
Study authors Rahav Gabay and team describe how the social world is satiated with interpersonal transgressions that are often unpleasant and seemingly unwarranted, such as being interrupted when speaking. While some people can easily brush off these moments of hurt, others tend to ruminate over them and persistently paint themselves as a victim. The authors present this feeling of being the victim as a novel personality construct that influences how people make sense of the world around them.
The researchers call it the Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood (TIV), which they define as “an ongoing feeling that the self is a victim, which is generalized across many kinds of relationships.”
An initial three studies established the TIV as a consistent and stable trait that involves four dimensions: moral elitism, a lack of empathy, the need for recognition, and rumination. A follow-up study further found that this tendency for victimhood is linked to anxious attachment — an attachment style characterized by feeling insecure in one’s relationships — suggesting that the personality trait may be rooted in early relationships with caregivers.
Also called leftism. Or SJWism. Whichever you prefer.
It goes on:
Next, two studies offered insight into the cognitive profile of those with TIV. The studies had participants consider scenarios that involved another person treating them unpleasantly — either by having subjects read a vignette describing a partner giving them poor feedback (Study 3) or by having subjects play a game that ended with their opponent taking a larger share of the winnings (Study 4). Interestingly, the two studies found that those who scored higher on the measure of TIV were more likely to desire revenge against the person who wronged them.
In Study 4, this desire for revenge also translated into behavior — those high in TIV were more likely to remove money from their opponent when given the chance, despite being told that this decision wouldn’t increase their own winnings. Participants high in TIV also reported experiencing more intense negative emotions and a higher entitlement to immoral behavior. Mediation analysis offered insight into how this revenge process unfolds. “The higher participants’ TIV, the more they experienced negative emotions and felt entitled to behave immorally. However, only the experience of negative emotions predicted behavioral revenge,” the authors report.
Gabay and colleagues express that their studies indicate that the Tendency for Interpersonal Victimhood is a stable personality trait that is linked to particular behavioral, cognitive, and emotional characteristics. “Deeply rooted in the relations with primary caregivers,” the researchers describe, “this tendency affects how individuals feel, think, and behave in what they perceive as hurtful situations throughout their lives.”
Which is also nearly word-for-word SJW/ardent leftist. It just seems that the further mentally ill with TIV you are, the more of a dedicated SJW you are.
I especially enjoy the connection with caregivers. It has been noted in the past that many of the most insane leftist types usually have pretty significant parental issues (absent, abandoned, abuse, etc). The correlation makes sense from a logical standpoint.
The importance of family and parents is instinctively well understood by most on the right. Now we understand why: Without it, you get more TIV lunatics.
The study ends with:
The authors suggest that it would be particularly interesting for future studies to explore what happens when people high in TIV are in positions of power. The researchers wonder whether leaders with this persistent tendency to see themselves as a victim might feel more inclined to behave “in a vindictive way.”
The answer is yes. We don’t need a study to figure that out.
This study isn’t the only of it’s kind, either. There are plenty of compilation studies linking massive increases in anxiety, depression, and general mental illness with leftist belief systems.
For example, this widely-known study:
It has been claimed that left-wingers or liberals (US sense) tend to more often suffer from mental illness than right-wingers or conservatives. This potential link was investigated using the General Social Survey cumulative cross-sectional dataset (1972-2018). A search of the available variables resulted in 5 items measuring one’s own mental illness (e.g., ”Do you have any emotional or mental disability?”). All of these items were weakly associated with left-wing political ideology as measured by self-report, with especially high rates seen for the “extremely liberal” group. These results mostly held up in regressions that adjusted for age, sex, and race. For the variable with the most data (n=11,338), the difference in the mental illness measure between “extremely liberal” and “extremely conservative” was 0.39d. Temporal analysis showed that the relationship between mental illness, happiness, and political ideology has existed in the GSS data since the 1970s and still existed in the 2010s. Within-study meta-analysis of all the results found that extreme liberals had a 150% increased rate of mental illness compared to moderates. The finding of increased mental illness among left-wingers is congruent with numerous findings based on related constructs, such as positive relationships between conservatism, religiousness and health in general
Or this compilation:
Perhaps the most renowned and in-depth psychological analysis of Leftism to date comes via the 130-year-old works of one of the World’s most misunderstood and misappropriated philosophers: Friedrich Nietzsche. Although Nietzsche does not explicitly name the Leftists, the ‘Slave Moralist’ archetype — as described throughout the entirety of Nietzsche’s bibliography from ‘Beyond Good and Evil’ onwards — bears all of the identifiable hallmarks of Leftism. From moral framework to psychology, to physical type; every characteristic that Nietzsche attributes to the Slave Moralist is analogous to the archetypal Leftist, both of our current age and throughout history.
Validating the observations of Antonio Vallejo-Nájera, the study found that women, in general, have much poorer mental health than men, with Leftist women having the greatest number of mental health problems, by far.
Leftists also reported lower average happiness levels.
“The results confirm the general pattern from before, namely that there is a strongly elevated risk for mental illness among the extreme liberals (+150%), a small increase among the liberals and slightly liberals (+29 to 32%), and somewhat lower rates among conservatives and extreme conservatives (-17 to 24%). Breaking the pattern, slightly conservatives had a marginally increased rate (+6%). A variant of this analysis was also carried out by including the happiness metrics reverse-coded. This produced materially the same pattern, but was weaker since the happiness items had a weaker relationship with political ideology than the mental illness variables.”
Does supporting ‘Leftist’ policies cause an individual to become mentally ill? Probably not. Do these policies appeal to those who have a greater propensity for mental illness? Evidently so. Are there external factors at work that may simultaneously damage an individual’s mental health while also driving them towards Leftist ideology? Undoubtedly so.
Or this Gallup report:
Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent, according to data from the last four November Gallup Health and Healthcare polls. Fifty-eight percent of Republicans report having excellent mental health, compared to 43% of independents and 38% of Democrats. This relationship between party identification and reports of excellent mental health persists even within categories of income, age, gender, church attendance, and education.
The basic data — based on an aggregated sample of more than 4,000 interviews conducted since 2004 — are straightforward.
One could be quick to assume that these differences are based on the underlying demographic and socioeconomic patterns related to party identification in America today. A recent Gallup report (see “Strong Relationship Between Income and Mental Health” in Related Items) reviewed these mental health data more generally, and found that men, those with higher incomes, those with higher education levels, and whites are more likely than others to report excellent mental health. Some of these patterns describe characteristics of Republicans, of course.
But an analysis of the relationship between party identification and self-reported excellent mental health within various categories of age, gender, church attendance, income, education, and other variables shows that the basic pattern persists regardless of these characteristics. In other words, party identification appears to have an independent effect on mental health even when each of these is controlled for.
Gallup also conducted a separate multivariate analysis that looked at the impact of a list of variables — including party identification — on self-reported mental health. This analysis showed that even when the impact of these other variables is controlled for statistically, there is an independent and highly significant impact of being a Republican on mental health.
This has been well known for many years. But nonetheless I am excited that there is finally a medical term for leftism: TIV.
We’ll have to make use of this in the future.