Causes of individual humility: An overview

Personality characteristics, mindsets, states, or practices that foster humility

Growth mindset

Many studies have substantiated the benefits of intellectual or epistemic humility—the tendency of individuals to recognise their assumptions may be incorrect, to question their beliefs, and to embrace alternative perspectives. Fewer studies, however, have uncovered the conditions, circumstances, or characteristics of individuals that foster this intellectual humility. Nevertheless, research has unearthed a few key determinants of intellectual humility.

To illustrate, in 2018, Porter and Schumann revealed that a growth mindset of intelligence tends to promote intellectual humility. That is, some people assume that cognitive ability is modifiable—that individuals who immerse themselves in intellectual activities may, for example, become more intelligent over time. This assumption is called a growth mindset of intelligence. In contrast, other people assume that intelligence will not change over time, regardless of the efforts and activities of these individuals. This assumption is called a fixed mindset of intelligence.

To explore whether a growth mindset of intelligence fosters intellectual humility, in one study, about 1000 students, enrolled in a community college, were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. Half the participants read an article, ostensibly published in a respected outlet, that demonstrates how intelligence can be developed over time. The other participants read a different article that demonstrates how intelligence does not vary over time. After reading this article, participants completed a series of measures, one of which gauges intellectual humility. As hypothesised, if participants were prompted to believe that intelligence is modifiable rather than immutable, they were more likely to report an elevated level of intellectual humility. A growth mindset thus promoted humility.

Arguably, if people believe their intelligence can improve over time, they become motivated to extend their knowledge and skills. Consequently, they are more willing to recognise the limitations of their beliefs or capabilities and to embrace alternative perspectives—the hallmarks of humility.

For insights on how to foster a growth mindset, click here.

Awe

In addition to specific beliefs, specific emotions may also foster humility. One emotion in particular is likely to promote humility: awe. Stellar et al. (2018) proposed several reasons to explain why experiences of awe may foster humility in individuals. Specifically, individuals tend to feel awe in response to a remarkable event, object, or feel—such as the vast night sky—that transcend their existing understanding or appreciation of the world. So, feelings of awe remind people the world is more extensive or remarkable than expected, prompting the inclination to update their beliefs. Because of this inclination, individuals may become more receptive to alternative perspectives, a feature of humility.

Similarly, while immersed in a moment of awe and wonder at the size and scope of this world, individuals tend to feel small in comparison. Their concerns feel more trivial than usual. The feedback, criticisms, and challenges they receive do not feel as significant or weighty. While they experience awe, individuals may thus be more receptive to feedback or to information that underscores their limitations—another feature of humility.

Consistent with these premises, Stellar et al. (2018) did indeed reveal that awe promotes humility. In one study, half the participants watched a video that depicts the vast distance between the planets and stars, eliciting a sense of awe, wonder and interest. The other participants merely watched a video about how to build a fence, designed not to elicit strong emotions. After watching the video, all participants wrote about their strengths and weaknesses for two minutes. Participants who experienced awe were more inclined to write about more weaknesses than strengths, potentially emblematic of humility. Another study revealed that, after moments of awe, participants indicated they experienced greater humility as well.

Other self-transcendent emotions

Besides awe, other emotions and feelings can also foster humility. Specifically, according to Krumrei Mancuso et al. (2024), self-transcendent emotions in general may promote this humility in individuals. Self-transcendent emotions are feelings that direct the attention of individuals away from themselves—away from their personal needs or goals. Instead, these emotions underscore the magnificence, size, virtue, sanctity, or beauty of other people, objects, events, or experiences. For example, feelings of gratitude direct attention to the benevolence of other people or experiences. Feelings of admiration direct attention to the capabilities of other individuals, and so forth.

According to Krumrei Mancuso et al. (2024), these self-transcendent emotions should foster humility. Specifically, after people experience self-transcendent emotions, they should not be as preoccupied with their own capabilities, potentially fostering an openness to feedback about their limitations. These individuals may thus be more willing to acknowledge their limitations and question their beliefs. Similarly, after individuals experience these emotions they may be more inclined to respect and to embrace the perspectives of other people or settings.

To explore this possibility, Krumrei Mancuso et al. (2024) in one study, participants wrote about a time in which they experienced a specific emotion. Some of the participants wrote instructed to write about times in which they experienced a self-transcendent emotion, such as gratitude or awe. Other participants were instructed to write about times in which they experience another emotion, such as happiness or excitement. Next participants completed two measures of humility including

a measure of intellectual humility—or whether they recognise their knowledge may be flawed or their beliefs may be misguided,
a measure of general humility, such as “I feel that I do not deserve more respect than other people”.

After participant wrote about self-transcendent emotions, they were more likely to demonstrate humility. Specifically, gratitude was positively associated with intellectual humility; some of the other relationships were not as pronounced. As a subsequent study revealed, after participants wrote about a time in which they felt sacred, divine, spiritual, holy, blessed, they also experienced greater humility.

For insights on how to foster self-transcendence, click here.

Exposure to nature

Arguably, when people are exposed to nature, they may also experience greater humility. That is, nature often elicits feelings of self-transcendence or sanctity—and, therefore, may foster humility. To assess this possibility, in a third study, Krumrei Mancuso et al. (2024) introduced participants to walk in majestic state park, a mundane garden, or indoors. Within these environments, participants completed a battery of scales, designed to measure self-transcendent emotions, sanctity, general humility, and intellectual humility. As the study revealed, relative to people who walked indoors, people who walked in a majestic state park experienced more self-transcendent emotions, sanctity, and general humility.

Flow

Another self-transcendent emotion has also been shown to foster humility: flow. Flow is the state that people experience when they feel utterly absorbed in an interesting and challenging task. In a state of flow, people almost become entirely unaware of themselves, epitomising a self-transcendent emotion. Consequently, flow should also foster humility.

Kim et al. (2023) conducted a study to explore this premise. That is, participants wrote about a time in which they experienced flow, experienced awe, experienced amusement, or completed a household chore. Subsequently, they completed measures that assess

the degree to which individuals experienced flow, awe, and other emotions,
epistemic humility, such as “I am honest with myself when I assess my own faults and limitations”,
wise reasoning, such as “(During a conflict), I looked for different solutions as the situation evolved”.

As the findings revealed, the degree to which individuals experienced flow was positively associated with epistemic humility, whereas the degree to which individuals experienced awe was positively associated with awe. Epistemic humility and wise reasoning did not differ across the conditions, partly because the writing task did not always elicit the intended emotion.

In a subsequent study, rather than merely write about these emotions, participants were exposed to conditions that foster these feelings. To elicit flow, participants were granted an opportunity to use an app to compose a song. To elicit awe, participants watched a video that depicted sweeping landscapes. To elicit amusement, participants watched a funny clip. And, in the control condition, participants watched a dull video. The conditions that elicited flow and awe did indeed foster humility and elicit an openness to change.

For insights on how to foster flow, click here.

Perspective taking: Introduction

When individuals adopt the perspective of other people, they may also experience a sense of self-transcendence. Consistent with this possibility, after people are prompted to adopt the perspective of someone else, they naturally exhibit greater intellectual humility. Kotsogiannis et al. (2024) corroborated this possibility in a sample of 174 college students.

In this study, participants read about a relatable scenario, in which a person feels betrayed by friends or family. The participants were then randomly assigned to one or two conditions:

Half the participants imagined this scenario from their own perspective. They were also instructed to use first-person pronouns to transcribe their thoughts about this scenario, such as “I would feel…”,
The other participants imagined this scenario from the perspective of another person. They were also instructed to use third -person pronouns to transcribe their thoughts about this scenario, such as “She would feel…”.

Before and after completing this exercise, the participants answered questions that were designed to assess intellectual humility. Specifically, they completed the Multi-Dimensional Intellectual Humility Scale, validated by Alfano et al. (2017). Sample items were “I appreciate being corrected when I make a mistake” and “When someone corrects a mistake I made, I do not feel embarrassed”. As hypothesised, after individuals considered an event from the perspective of someone else, and not from their own perspective, their intellectual humility improved.

Arguably, when people adopt the perspective of someone else, they tend to experience a sense of distance from the events they are contemplating. The emotions these events might otherwise elicit, such as anxiety or resentment, tend to diminish because of this sense of distance or detachment. They can, therefore, consider beliefs they do not like—such as their limitations or misconceptions—more objectively and accurately (cf., Kross & Grossman, 2012).

For insights on how to foster perspective-taking, click here.

Perspective taking: A program designed to encourage perspective taking:

Similarly, as research shows, after individuals complete learning modules in which they are encouraged to consider the perspective of other people, they exhibit an increase in intellectual humility. For example, Welker et al. (2023) disseminated and evaluated a program, comprising five to eight modules, each lasting half an hour, that encourage individuals to adopt the perspective of diverse individuals. During this program, called Perspectives, individuals learn strategies, such as active listening or cultivating empathy, to improve their capacity to manage conflict with diverse people.

In one study, over 35 000 individuals who had enrolled in this program, usually as part of a university course, completed a short survey. Specifically

the survey included some items that were extracted from the General Intellectual Humility Scale and the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale—but only the subscale that measures the independence of intellect and ego
to illustrate, participants indicated the extent to which they agree or disagree with items such as “I accept that my beliefs may be wrong” and “When others disagree with my ideas, I feel like I’m being attacked” [reverse-scored].
however, not all participants completed the same items.

Overall, if participants enrolled in this course, their intellectual humility improved over time (Welker et al., 2023). This study did not include a control group, however.

To address this limitation, Welker et al. (2023 conducted a randomised control trial. In this study, 341 government officers completed the General Intellectual Humility Scale, comprising items like “I recognise the value in opinions that are different from my own”, at three times, separated by eight weeks. Between the first and second times, half the participants completed the Perspectives modules. The remaining participants were randomly allocated to a wait-list control. As the results showed,

intellectual humility improved over time, but only in participants who completed the Perspectives modules
this effect persisted at least eight weeks after the modules were completed,
political orientation did not significantly moderate these effects.

Curiosity

Some people experience a keen sense of curiously. Specifically, people who are curious tend to exhibit five tendencies (Kashdan, Disabato, et al., 2020; Kashdan, Stiksma, et al., 2018):

They experience joy when exploring novel information, called joyous exploration.
They strive to overcome shortfalls in their knowledge about a topic, called deprivation sensitivity.
They welcome, rather than shun, the fleeting discomfort that people experience when exposed to conflicting beliefs about a topic, called stress tolerance.
They are curious about the beliefs and feelings of other people, called social curiosity.
And they enjoy the thrill of contentious discussions and conversations, called thrill seeking.

Arguably, curiosity may foster intellectual humility. To illustrate, curiosity should elicit the motivation to learn from other people—such as learn information that could address an existing shortfall in knowledge. This motivation to learn from other people should encourage individuals both to seek perspectives that diverge from their preconceptions and thus to question their existing beliefs: the hallmarks of intellectual humility.

Few studies, however, have explored the association between curiosity and humility. Kashdan, McKnight, et al. (2025) published one exception. In a preliminary study, 1238 individuals, recruited from CloudResearch, completed a series of measures. Specifically, to assess intellectual humility, these individuals completed one subscale of the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale: Openness to Revising Viewpoints. In addition, participants completed questions that assess whether they are open to conversations with people who do not share their political affiliation. Finally, participants completed a measure that assessed five facets of curiosity, but adapted to political matters, such as

“I enjoy learning about political issues and perspectives that are unfamiliar to me” to gauge joyous exploration,
“I feel frustrated if I can’t figure out the solution to a political problem, so I work even harder to solve it” to assess deprivation sensitivity,
“I am uninterested in seeking out new political information if it will cause me discomfort” to measure stress tolerance [reverse-scored],
“When talking to someone who is excited about a political topic, I am curious to find out why” to gauge social curiosity, and
“I prefer friends who are excitingly unpredictable when it comes to their political views” to assess thrill seeking.

Curiosity was positively associated with both intellectual humility and openness to other political beliefs. All facets of curiosity were positively related to intellectual humility, with correlations ranging from .18 to .46 (Kashdan, McKnight, et al., 2025).

As subsequent studies revealed, when individuals received information that was strategically constructed to show that other members of their political party were receptive to diverse perspectives and intellectually humble, they were more inclined to develop curiosity (Kashdan, McKnight, et al., 2025). However, this study did not clarify whether this information also enhanced the intellectual humility of participants. Future research, therefore, is warranted to confirm that curiosity is indeed a determinant, rather than correlate or consequence of, humility.

Maladaptive perfectionism

Some individuals exhibit traits or characteristics that symbolise undue concern about themselves rather than self-transcendence. These traits or characteristics should thus limit humility.

For example, maladaptive perfectionism, or the inclination of some people to be unduly concerned about mistakes or shortfalls, may impede humility. That is, some individuals experience strong aversive emotions, such as shame, whenever they recognise flaws in their personality, shortcomings in their capabilities, or mistakes in their performances. This tendency is called maladaptive perfectionism. To moderate these aversive emotions, these individuals may divert attention from their limitations or fallibilities. Because these individuals do not acknowledge or concede their shortfalls, they exhibit diminished levels of humility.

Nevertheless, mindfulness, in which individuals observe their thoughts, emotions, and surroundings without judgment, could mitigate this effect of maladaptive perfectionism on humility. That is, when people experience this state of mindfulness, they feel a sense of distance or detachment from unpleasant emotions. So, in this state, the potential shame of mistakes or flaws may not divert the attention of these individuals from their limitations. These individuals can thus acknowledge some of these shortcomings, fostering humility.

To assess this possibility, Thornburg-Suresh and McElroy-Heltzel (2025), at the University of Iowa, conducted two studies. In the first study, 250 adults completed a survey that included

the honest-humility subscale of the HEXACO personality inventory (Lee & Ashton, 2004) that includes items such as “a tendency to be modest and unassuming”,
a measure of maladaptive personality, such as “I should be upset if I make a mistake”, and
the five-facet mindfulness questionnaire (Baer et al., 2008).

As hypothesised, maladaptive perfectionism was inversely associated with scores on the honest-humility subscale. However, when mindfulness was elevated, this association between maladaptive perfectionism and humility was not as pronounced. The second study, however, did not replicate this interaction effect. Taken together, these studies do suggest that maladaptive perfectionism may limit humility, but whether mindfulness overrides this impact of maladaptive perfectionism warrants further research.

Mindfulness

Some research implies that mindfulness, in which people observe their surroundings, thoughts, and feelings without judgment, may foster humility. To illustrate, some research has explored whether interventions that promote mindfulness also increase humility.

For example, in 2021, three academics from the Universitas Negeri Semarang in Indonesia, Rohmatus Naini, Mungin Eddy Wibowo, and Mulawarman Mulawarman, published a study that explored this possibility in 16 students. Half the students were exposed to five counselling sessions. The counsellors adopted a cognitive approach that primarily revolved around mindfulness. For example, during the sessions

the students undertook an exercise in which they observed the feelings they experience as they eat,
the participants also completed meditations in which they scanned their body mindfully as well as observed their breath over three minutes, and so forth.

Before and after the counselling sessions, all participants completed a measure of humility (Elliot, 2010). This measure assesses the degree to which individuals are open to conflicting opinions, evaluate themselves accurately, consider the perspectives of other people, and are not preoccupied with themselves. A sample item is “It is easy for me to accept the honest criticism of a friend”. The findings showed that humility improved over time, but only in the participants who received the counselling around mindfulness. Nevertheless, this study does not definitely verify that mindfulness fosters humility because

besides mindfulness, the counsellor also exposed the students to other insights or activities that may foster humility, such as gratitude, forgiveness, and self-compassion,
the number of participants who received the counselling was only eight—and hence possible outliers or moderators are hard to detect.

More recently, Or et al. (2024) published a similar study except the intervention was primarily confined to mindfulness rather than other qualities such as forgiveness and self-compassion. Specifically, 34 undergraduate students listened to a script, lasting five minutes, that was designed to promote a meditative state in which individuals experience mindfulness (Levett-Jones, 2018). Participants listened to this script for eight minutes, with their eyes closed, between six and eight times over two weeks. Before and after these two weeks, these individuals completed

the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (Carlson et al., 2005) to assess the degree to which they experience mindfulness,
the Cultural Humility Scale to gauge the extent to which they recognise their beliefs about cultures may be misguided and are motivated to learn about these cultures—a facet of humility.

As hypothesised, after two weeks of mindfulness practice, both the level of mindfulness and level of cultural humility increased (Or et al., 2024). This study indicates that mindfulness may foster cultural humility. Although informative, this study is limited because

the script revolved around kind images towards other people—and this kindness, rather than only mindfulness, could have fostered humility,
whether these findings could be generalised to other facets of humility warrants further study.

Other studies, however, have explored whether mindfulness alone may foster humility. In one study, conducted by Verdorfer (2016) while employed at the Technical University of Munich, 104 German adults first rated the degree to which they experience mindfulness and a motivation to lead. Specifically, these individuals completed the

Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (Walach et al. 2006) to assess mindfulness, in which a typical item is “I am open to the experience of the present moment”,
the German version of the motivation to lead instrument (Chan & Drasgow, 2001), in which a typical item is “I am only interested to lead a group if there are clear advantages for me”.

Next, these 104 participants forwarded an online questionnaire to someone in their lives, such as a relative, close friend, or co-worker. This relative, close friend, or co-worker then assessed the degree to which the participant demonstrates humility, answering questions like “This person is willing to learn from others”. As hypothesised, when people reported elevated levels of mindfulness, their relative, close friend, or co-worker were more likely to rate these individuals as humble. Furthermore, mindful individuals felt more inspired to lead, even if they do not attract a tangible reward. Again, however, this study does not definitely show that mindfulness promotes humility because

mindfulness was not manipulated—and thus humility could foster mindfulness rather than vice versa,
some other quality, such as resilience, might promote both mindfulness and humility.

In short, research does imply that mindfulness may foster humility, but further research is warranted to assess alternative explanations.

Other mindsets or states that foster humility

Many other mindsets or states may foster humility, such as self-affirmation, future self-continuity, meaning affirmation, and limited right-wing authoritarianism. Some other sections will substantiate these determinants of humility as well as explore how to cultivate these characteristics, practices, and circumstances.

Researchers have also suggested, but not verified, some other potential causes of humility. For example, Porter, Gardiner, et al. (2019) proposed that adversity may foster humility in specific circumstances. After people experience adverse events, such as failures, they may attempt to explain how these problems unfolded. To explain these events, they may recognise their assumptions were incorrect or their knowledge was limited (Whitcomb et al., 2017)—features of intellectual humility.

Yet, as Porter, Gardiner, et al. (2019) concede, adversity may not invariably translate to humility. Some beliefs, mindsets, skills, or traits, such as the assumption that competence is modifiable (Porter & Schumann, 2018), may facilitate this evolution of humility. To illustrate, if individuals believe that competence is modifiable, they may ascribe an unanticipated failure on an exam to the possibility they overestimated their knowledge—a bias they feel confident they can address in the future. In contrast, if individuals believe that competence is not modifiable, they may be reluctant to ascribe this unanticipated failure to the possibility they overestimated their knowledge, because they may feel doubtful of whether they can prevent this problem in subsequent exams. Instead, they may contend the exam was unfair or blame some other person or event, disrupting the development of humility.

Emotional determinants of humility

Emotional diversity: Introduction

Some individuals, in response to challenging events such as conflicts, exhibit significant wisdom. This wisdom comprises four distinct facets (Grossmann et al., 2010, 2013; Grossmann & Kross, 2014):

intellectual humility, typified by items like “For better understanding of the incident, it is important for me to have more information and knowledge about the circumstances of the incident”,
consideration of diverse perspectives, comprising items like “I am now better able to see the incident from the perspective of the other involved people and to understand their behaviour”,
self-transcendence, adopting the viewpoint of observers,
search for a compromise, epitomised by items like “When I reason about incidents like this one, I am generally ready to put aside my interests for the benefit of my relationship with the involved person”.

As Grossmann et al. (2019) proposed and revealed, people who experience an extensive range of emotions to a moderate extent, rather than merely a couple of emotions to a pronounced degree, are more likely to demonstrate intellectual humility in particular and wise reasoning in general. Grossmann et al. (2019) proposed several arguments to explain this possibility. In particular

each specific emotion offers insights into the relationship as well as the circumstance,
thus, if people experience many emotions to a similar extent, they recognise the circumstance is not straightforward and thus may deliberate carefully and respond more cautiously,
furthermore, each specific emotion, such as apprehension and doubt, may elicit distinct tendencies,
so, if people experience many emotions to a similar extent, their responses integrate multiple tendencies and thus are more nuanced rather than unsophisticated.

Emotional diversity: Evidence

Grossmann et al. (2019) conducted a sequence of studies that verify this possibility. In one study of 152 adults, participants recalled an unpleasant social event, such as a conflict, that transpired during the previous day. Next,

the participants indicated the degree to which they experienced six positive emotions and nine negative emotions, such as proud, tense, bored, and ashamed,
to quantify emotional diversity, these ratings were subjected to a formula, in which high scores indicate that individuals experienced multiple emotions to similar degrees rather than merely one or two emotions predominantly,
participants completed a measure of wise reasoning—a measure that also gauges intellectual humility.

As the findings reveal, emotional diversity was positively associated with all features of wise reasoning. Specifically, on days in which participants experienced this emotional diversity, these individuals also reported elevated levels of intellectual humility and adopted diverse perspectives (Grossmann et al., 2019).

As a subsequent study revealed, protocols that elicit this emotional diversity also promote wise reasoning. Grossmann et al. (2019) deployed three protocols to fulfill this goal. For example, to elicit this emotional diversity, after ruminating about an unpleasant social event,

some participants were invited to consider the nuances or subtleties they felt for 10 seconds
other participants were invited to contemplate the various distinct emotions they felt for 30 seconds,
finally, some participants scanned a list of 25 emotions and chose which feelings they experienced.

Relative to control conditions in which participants considered only one emotion or scanned a list of only 5 emotions, individuals who completed one of these protocols reported higher levels of wise reasoning. This study, however, did not differentiate the various facets of wise reasoning. Therefore, whether these protocols foster intellectual humility in particular warrants further research.

Experiences that foster humility

Characteristics of the classroom

Some experiences in classrooms or features of the class may promote humility. DeVries et al. (2025b), for example, examined whether the courses in which students are enrolled or the mode in which a class is delivered affects their intellectual humility. In this study, 1272 undergraduate students answered a series of questions, several times. Each time, the students answered questions about a separate course in which they were enrolled. Specifically, these participants

indicated the extent to which they exhibit the hallmarks of intellectual humility during this course, answering questions like “In this course, I acknowledged mistakes I made” or “I considered the perspectives and ideas of others”,
specified the course,
indicated whether the course entails lectures, labs, seminars, or discussions.

The intellectual humility of individuals students appeared to vary across the courses. In general, intellectual humility was high during STEMM classes, such as science, mathematics, or medicine, moderate during humanities classes, such as art history, and low during social science classes, such as psychology, education, business, and economics. However, when the mode in which a class was delivered was controlled, these differences across courses dissipated. Instead,

the data suggest that intellectual humility was highest during labs and lowest during lectures,
presumably, during labs, when students attempt various tasks and commit errors, these learning opportunities, if coupled with the belief they can improve, will tend to promote intellectual humility.

Exposure to articles that acknowledge uncertainty and complexity

Scientists and other specialists often need to communicate their insights and discoveries in many forums, such as blogs and articles. Typically, to accommodate diverse audiences, scientists will often simplify their messages. They may, for example, decide to exclude nuances, such as the situations in which their results or conclusions may be invalid. However, as research shows, when scientists decide to simplify their arguments, the audience is not as likely to

exhibits the hallmarks of intellectual humility,
trust the conclusions of this scientist.

Several reasons could explain this possibility. First, when exposed to articles that acknowledge nuances, contradictions, and uncertainty, people recognise that arguments that seem correct may be flawed. These individuals thus realise their beliefs might also be slightly flawed, fostering humility. Second, when respected scientists acknowledge uncertainty, readers will tend to assume that such behaviour is admired in society. These readers, therefore, may also be inclined to acknowledge uncertainty, epitomising intellectual humility.

To illustrate, in one study, conducted by Vaupotič et al. (2024) and published in Public Understanding of Science, 441 participants read a fictitious article about climate change and sustainable energy. Some participants read a version that implied the topic was certain and simple. Other participants however, read a version that acknowledged uncertainty in the scientific literature and underscored the complexity of this topic. For example, the article included phrases like

“…scientists are exploring possibilities…” rather than “scientists are providing knowledge on how…”,
“…models represent the world incompletely with many simplifications” rather than “models represent the world completely”,
“…the models are extremely complex and challenging” rather than “the models are straightforward and simple”,
“…the models can predict climate with a limited degree of certainty” rather than “the models can predict climate with certainty”.

After reading the article, participants completed a series of scales, such as

the Specific Intellectual Humility Scale, adapted to gauge humility about this topic, such as “It is quite likely that there are gaps in my understanding about the transition to renewable energy”,
a measure that assesses the degree to which participants perceive the author as competent, honest, moral, and credible (Hendriks et al., 2015),
a measure that gauges the willingness of participants to endorse changes that prioritise renewable energy, such as “I am in favour of building wind power plants in my neighbourhood” (Tobler et al., 2012).

As the data revealed, when participants were exposed to the article that acknowledged uncertainty in the scientific literature and underscored the complexity of this topic, they were more likely to exhibit intellectual humility as well as perceive the author as competent, honest, moral, and credible (Vaupotič et al., 2024). However, intellectual humility was not significantly related to whether participants endorsed changes that prioritise renewable energy.

Exposure to science fiction

Exposure to science fiction movies also seems to foster intellectual humility. For example, in one study, conducted by Wu and Zhang (2024), 229 university students read either a science fiction narrative or a similar but realistic narrative, accompanied with pictures, and then imagined the scenario this narrative portrayed as vividly as possible. The science fiction narrative depicted a community who were seeking another planet before an impending asteroid destroys Earth. The realistic narrative depicted a community who were seeking refuge from a wildfire. After reading the narrative, participants answered

six questions, distilled from previous measures of intellectual humility (Porter & Schumann, 2018; Wright et al., 2018), such as “Reading the content made me realize the limits of my personal knowledge and experiences”,
further questions derived from previous measures of self-transcendence (Castelo et al., 2021; Jiang et al., 2018), such as “I feel that my individual life is part of a greater whole”.

After controlling age, gender, and previous experience watching science fiction, exposure to science fiction increased both intellectual humility and self-transcendence. Intellectual humility mediated the association between exposure to science fiction and self-transcendence. Another study of 237 participants replicated this pattern of findings but with other science fiction and realistic narratives (Wu & Zhang, 2024). Presumably, science fiction often underscores possibilities and principles individuals had not contemplated before, demonstrating their existing beliefs may be limited.

Experiences overseas

Living in a foreign nation could, in principle, enable people to appreciate the perspective of other individuals and cultures better, potentially fostering intellectual humility. Because of this possibility, Li (2025), from Sichuan International Studies University in China, examined whether such foreign experiences do indeed foster intellectual humility. To illustrate, in the first study, 184 participants, all studying or working at a Chinese university, were asked to specify whether they have lived overseas, the number of countries they have visited, and the duration they have spent overseas. Next, these individuals completed the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scal e. Participants who had lived overseas did report greater intellectual humility on all subscales of this measure. The number of nations visited, but not the duration overseas, was also positively related to humility. Two additional studies, but with different measures, showed that people who had lived in many nations were more likely to report intellectual humility.

The fourth study, however, was designed to ascertain whether memories of these foreign experiences foster humility. In this study, about half the participants were invited to recall a day they spent in a foreign nation—describing their experiences and emotions. The other participants were invited to recall a day they spent in their home country. Memories of a day in a foreign nation promoted intellectual humility.

Arguably, when individuals visit and live in multiple nations, their experiences are more likely to challenge their pre-existing beliefs. They may, therefore, recognise their knowledge and beliefs may be limited or misguided, manifesting as intellectual humility. Even when they reminisce about these experiences, memories of these doubts about their beliefs may promote humility.

Exposure to information about humility: Introduction

One of the simplest techniques to promote humility, especially intellectual humility, is merely to disseminate information about the benefits of this attribute or behaviour. To illustrate, in the fifth study that Porter, Schumann et al. (2020) published in the journal Learning and Individual Differences,

participants read one article, ostensibly published in USA Today,
specifically, half the participants read an article that outlined the benefits of intellectual humility, including more informed decisions, ingenuity, and life satisfaction, embedded with comments like “Admitting what you don’t know can have profound benefits”,
the other participants read an article that outlined the benefits of intellectual certainty, embedded with comments like “Being very vocal in showing how much you know can have profound benefits”,
next participants completed a short measure, designed to assess intellectual humility, comprising six items like “I try to reflect on my weaknesses in order to develop my intelligence” or “I am willing to admit it if I don’t know something”,
finally, participants were informed they will complete another task and were granted opportunities to learn about how to thrive on this task—a measure of effort investment.

As hypothesised, if participants read about the benefits of intellectual humility, they were subsequently more likely to report elevated levels of intellectual humility. Furthermore, these individuals were more inclined to learn about how to thrive on a subsequent task—purportedly a manifestation of humility.

Exposure to information about humility: Evidence in a setting that revolves around political debates

Similarly, to foster intellectual humility, Knöchelmann et al. (2025) also presented information about the benefits of this humility during political discussions in particular. Specifically, in one study, 1592 participants expressed their opinions on three political topics, such as reduction of waste in supermarkets, and choose which of these three topics they would like to discuss during a subsequent task. Next, participants were randomly assigned to one of several conditions, each designed to foster intellectual humility or intellectual certainty. For example, to foster intellectual humility, participants read an article that included some of the following sentences:

Recent social psychological research shows how important it is to acknowledge that one’s own beliefs and knowledge might be wrong.
Overestimating one’s own knowledge prevents one from comprehending the other person’s opinion.
Awareness of one’s own gaps in knowledge enables a more positive perception of the counterpart.
Admitting that one cannot know everything about the topic is a desirable tool in politically controversial discussions, (enabling) respectful interaction and ideally helps to reach a compromise.

In contrast, to foster intellectual certainty, participants read an article that outlined the benefits of intellectual certainly, embedded with sentences like “It is a desirable tool in politically controversial discussions to admit that one already knows some things about the topic oneself, (enabling) respectful interaction and ideally helps to reach a compromise. Both articles could be read within two minutes. After reading the article, participants completed various measures, such as

the Specific Intellectual Humility Scale, adapted to measure the degree to which individuals recognise the limitations of their beliefs on the political topic they chose,
the General Intellectual Humility Scale, designed to gauge whether individuals recognise the limitations of their beliefs in general.

Finally, participants indicated their level of knowledge about the topic and specified whether they would be interested in participating on future studies about this topic. The results were interesting:

If participants read about the benefits of intellectual humility, they were more likely to display intellectual humility about the topic they chose, as gauged by the Specific Intellectual Humility Scale.
Thus, even an intervention that lasts about two minutes can be effective.
However, this intervention did not significantly improve intellectual humility in general, perhaps because the article was not compelling enough.
Similarly, as a subsequent study revealed, this intervention was not sufficient to increase the degree to which participants actually engaged with diverse perspectives.

Exposure to wise leaders

After individuals contemplate a wise leader, they are more likely to exhibit intellectual humility. To illustrate, in one study, published by Bostanli (2023) in the Psychology of Leaders and Leadership, 34 business students agreed to participate in an experiment. Half the participants nominated a wise leader, recounted a story about this person, and reflected upon this story. To facilitate this reflection, these individuals considered the challenge or conflict in this story, how the leader managed this challenge, and their thoughts about this story now. The other participants were not invited to undertake this procedure.

Next, all participants completed an exercise that is designed to measure intellectual humility and other facets of wisdom. That is

the participants read a scenario about a workplace conflict, in which a staff member complained about a critical sales manager
next, participants transcribed their response to this conflict, prompted by questions such as how should the supervisor of this sales manager respond?
two trained judges then evaluated the degree to which these answers exemplify intellectual humility, compromise, and consideration of diverse perspectives.

As hypothesised, if participants had reflected upon a wise leader, they were more likely to exhibit the hallmarks of intellectual humility, compromise, and consideration of diverse perspectives in their answers (Bostanli, 2023). This finding is compatible with the notion that exposure to a wise leader can prime tendencies that epitomise wisdom.

Exposure to generative AI

Many scholars and commentators have raised concerns about the potential impact of generative AI on the emotional, social, and cognitive attributes of users. Nevertheless, some research also shows that greater exposure to generative AI may improve some personal attributes, such as foster intellectual humility.

To illustrate, in one study, conducted by Hruschka and Appel (2026), 508 American individuals, all of whom identified as supporters of either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, participated in an online experiment. This experiment comprised three main phases. First, participants indicated their attitudes towards four controversial topics—the war in Ukraine, the budget deficit, gun regulation, and U.S. energy policy—on an 11-point scale and then wrote a few sentences to justify their position.

Second, participants conversed with an AI bot, GPT-4o-mini, on a topic in which these individuals had expressed the most extreme or polarised attitude, submitting at least six messages. During these conversations, the AI bot presented counterarguments. Participants were assigned to one of four conditions:

In one condition, the AI bot demonstrated receptivity, by acknowledging the merit of other perspectives, using phrases like “I see what you mean”, qualifying the certainty of their statements, using phrases like “Some people argue that…”, and minimising negations, such as shunning phrases like “That is wrong”.
In another condition, the AI bot also demonstrated active listening or interest in the opinion of this person, such as “Could you share your reasons why you feel…”
In a third condition, the AI bot demonstrated neither receptivity nor active listening.
Finally, in the control condition, the AI bot discussed an irrelevant topic: experiences with firefighters.

After these interactions with the AI bot, participants completed questions that assess the attitudes and feelings towards the topic that was discussed as well as measures that gauge the degree to which they would like to interact with the AI bot again to discuss other contentious topics. Finally, participants completed a measure of specific intellectual humility (Hoyle et al., 2016) to measure their humility around the topic of discussion. A sample item in “I am open to new information around gun control that might change my view”. As the analyses revealed, when the AI exhibited receptivity and active listening rather than neither of these qualities

participants reported greater intellectual humility,
participants expressed more favourable attitudes towards people who espouse divergent opinions on this topic,
participants were more inclined to interact with the AI bot in the future to discuss other contentious topics,
a second study replicated these findings, except the participants were not strongly affiliated with one political party.

These findings imply that AI bots, if governed appropriately, could foster intellectual humility and diminish polarisation.

Religious and spiritual beliefs

Rationale

Scholars have proposed that religious and spiritual beliefs may either hinder or foster intellectual humility. For example, several features of religious and spiritual beliefs may hinder intellectual humility. To illustrate

people may deem their religious and spiritual beliefs as too important or valuable to question, impeding their intellectual humility,
some religious and spiritual beliefs prioritise faith—or unconditional adherence—over doubt and, therefore, contradict the assumption that all beliefs are fallible (see also Fisch, 2003),
some of the needs that motivate religious and spiritual beliefs, such as the pursuit of clarity and certainty, may discourage the tendency to question assumptions (Brandt & Reyna, 2010).

Nevertheless, because of other reasons, religious and spiritual beliefs may foster intellectual humility. Specifically

many religious leaders and teachings attach significant value to tolerance and humility (Cornille, 2008; Woodruff et al., 2014)—although their definitions of humility may be confined to facets that are consistent with their religious orientation,
many religious organisations instil the notion that people are ignorant relative to an omniscient God (Pardue, 2011)—an ignorance that may foster intellectual humility,
some leaders maintain that spiritual maturity encourages an appreciation that life is replete with paradoxes, contradictions, and mystery (Fowler, 1981), diminishing certainty and thus encouraging intellectual humility.

Empirical findings

To explore whether religious and spiritual beliefs or behaviours are associated with intellectual humility, Krumrei-Mancuso (2018) administered a survey on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Of the 302 individuals who completed this survey, 100 of these participants also completed this survey three years later. Almost 45% of the sample identified as Christian and only about 5% of the sample identified as Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, or Muslim. The survey comprised a range of scales including

the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale—an instrument that measures four distinct facets of intellectual humility: the capacity to separate feedback on beliefs from personal attacks, a willingness to revise beliefs, respect for diverse perspectives, and limited overconfidence in beliefs,
the Religious Fundamentalism Scale to measure the degree to which individuals believe their religious teachings are infallible and must be followed unconditionally, epitomised by items like “God will punish most severely those who abandon his true religion” (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992),
the Religious Belief Salience Scale to measure the degree to which individuals perceive religion as important and integrated with their life, typified by items like “My religious beliefs are what lie behind my whole approach to life” (Blaine & Crocker, 1995),
the Spiritual Transcendence Scale or extent to which individuals derive fulfillment from meditation or prayer, feel connected to the universe, and perceive all life as interconnected (Piedmont, 1999),
questions that assess the frequency with which the individuals participated in religious or spiritual activities over the last month, such as attending religious services or meditating (Exline et al., 2000),
measures of right-wing authoritarianism and social desirability.

Krumrei-Mancuso (2018) subjected the data to a series of hierarchical regression analyses that were designed to examine both linear and curvilinear relationships between religious or spiritual beliefs and intellectual humility. These analyses uncovered a nuanced but telling set of observations. For example

religious fundamentalism, religious belief salience, the degree to which prayer and meditation are fulfilling, the perception that all life is interconnected, and religious participation diminished intellectual humility over time, as longitudinal analyses revealed,
nevertheless, these associations were small in magnitude—consistent with the notion that religious and spiritual beliefs may simultaneously inhibit and foster intellectual humility,
right-wing authoritarianism fully mediated the majority of these relationships, suggesting the belief in tradition and compliance may explain some of these relationships,
analyses of curvilinear relationships demonstrated that very low and, to a lesser extent, very high levels of religious fundamentalism, religious belief salience, and prayer fulfillment coincided with intellectual humility.

Conceivably, when people experience moderate levels of religious or spiritual beliefs, they experience uncertainty or contradictions. To suppress the sense of dissonance or unease these contradictions can elicit, these individuals may strive to mask this uncertainty and demonstrate confidence in their beliefs, impeding their intellectual humility (Krumrei-Mancuso, 2018).

Work or study characteristics that foster humility

A culture that values quality over capability

In some organisations, leaders, managers, or supervisors imply that intelligence is vital to career success. For example, a university leader might proclaim the university admits only students whose intellectual abilities are advanced. Interestingly, as Porter and Cimpian (2023) have revealed, these messages tend to dissuade individuals from expressing their doubts and humility. That is, in these work environments, intellectual humility may dissipate.

To illustrate, in one study, 329 students, enrolled at a large public university, completed an online study. Half the participants read about a hypothetical university that attached significant value to intelligence, epitomised by messages like “We would like to admit students whose intellectual abilities stand out from … their peers”. The other participants read about a hypothetical university that valued high standards but not necessarily intellectual ability, epitomised by messages like “We would like to admit students who are willing and able to meet the high standards we set for ourselves”. To immerse participants in the descriptions of each university, these individuals were asked to memorise, and then later transcribe, this information.

Next, participants indicated the degree to which they would be willing to express intellectual humility in classes at this university. For example, they indicated the degree to which they agree with statements like “If I realised I was incorrect or mistaken about something, I would openly tell other people in the class”. Furthermore, participants indicated the degree to which they feel the culture of this university may be masculine and competitive, exemplified by items such as “In this university, admitting you don’t know the answer looks weak” (Glick et al., 2018).

Participants exposed to the university that prioritises intellectual ability were less inclined to express intellectual humility. A sense the culture of this university is masculine and competitive mediated this relationship. Another study revealed these findings persist even after controlling the degree to which individuals embrace a fixed mindset, in which they assume that intelligence cannot be modified over time. Arguably, if workplaces attach importance to intellectual ability, rather than quality, staff assume that leaders value only the most capable individuals. Consequently, staff become competitive, striving to depict themselves as capable and undermining anyone who is deficient. These staff will thus feel that, if they acknowledge their doubts or limitations, they may be derided rather than supported and assisted. Accordingly, leaders should instead underscore the degree to which they value staff who recognise and address their limitations.

Elevated feedback, expectations, and challenge from teachers: Rationale

According to Porter, Elnakouri, et al. (2022), intellectual humility often evolves from two conditions. The first condition is an opportunity to grow. That is, when individuals feel their knowledge about some question or matter is limited—but believe they could resolve this uncertainty—they sense an opportunity to learn or grow.

The second condition relates to whether the people who arranged this opportunity to grow, such as their teacher, are supportive. If these people are supportive, individuals are not as concerned they may be ridiculed or criticised. They are, therefore, more willing to embrace this opportunity to grow, unconcerned they might not succeed initially, manifesting as humility. If these people are unsupportive, they may be reluctant to embrace this opportunity to grow, manifesting as arrogance.

As DeVries et al. (2025a) proposed, this model predicts that teachers who expect students to excel, arrange useful examinations, and deliver helpful feedback are more likely to foster humility in their students. That is

if teachers expect students to excel, called high expectations, they are more likely to supply challenging questions or assignments; when students recognise they cannot readily answer these questions, they may recognise an opportunity to grow,
similarly, if teachers arrange many useful tests and examinations, students also more inclined to recognise they cannot readily answer the questions, also fostering an opportunity to grow,
finally, if teachers deliver helpful feedback, students feel supported rather than ridiculed, translating this opportunity to grow to the pursuit of knowledge, analogous to humility.

Elevated feedback, expectations, and challenge from teachers: Evidence

DeVries et al. (2025a) conducted a study that corroborates these arguments. In this study, 456 students completed a questionnaire twice: in fall and winter of the same year. Specifically, students answered questions about the course they perceived as most challenging and important. The questions assessed

the degree to which they felt the teachers expected the students to excel, ranging from very low expectations to very high expectations,
the extent to which the students perceived the examinations as useful,
the degree to which the students perceived the feedback of teachers as helpful, and
the extent to which they and their teachers demonstrated intellectual humility, such as “I admitted if I did not know or understand something” (for evidence of validity, see DeVries et al., 2025b).

As hypothesised, when teachers expected the students to excel, arranged useful examinations, and delivered helpful feedback, the students were more likely to demonstrate intellectual humility. Interestingly, teachers who were perceived as humble were more likely to arranged useful examinations and deliver helpful feedback—thus promoting the humility of their students.

Experimental protocols that foster humility

Fallibility salience

Koetke et al. (2023) designed and validated an experimental protocol that promotes intellectual humility. In essence, this protocol was designed to expose individuals to information that underscores the fallibility of their beliefs and limitations of their knowledge.

First, the researchers invited participants to complete a task that, purportedly, revolves around a study about general knowledge. The participants received three questions about science in which the answers might seem obvious, originally collated by Cutolo (2021)

What weighs more, a pound of gold or a pound of feathers?
What mountain peak is farthest from the centre of the Earth
How many senses do humans have?

Three to four options accompanied each question. Participants then received information about the surprising answer: a pound of feathers weighs more, Chimborazo, and over seven senses, respectively. Next, on a scale from 1 to 7, the participants indicated the degree to which their answers had been accurate and the degree to which they had trusted their knowledge. Finally, these individuals wrote a short essay on why recognising their knowledge and beliefs may be inaccurate could be beneficial. This task is designed to prime a principle under the guise of advising future individuals (cf Walton & Wilson, 2018).

Relative to a control condition in which participants completed questions and wrote a brief essay about office technology, participants who were exposed to this protocol were subsequently

more likely to report higher levels of intellectual humility,
more inclined to seek information to verify and question suspicious headlines.sess whether yoga or meditation tends to amplify self-enhancement biases over an extended duration.

Causes of humility in generative AI

Illustration

When people observe humility in leaders, teachers, parents, friends, or other individuals, they may be more inclined to demonstrate humility in themselves. Similarly, if generative AI models exhibit humility, users may also be more likely to become humble in the future.

Interestingly, researchers have uncovered techniques that increase the extent to which large language models, the models that underpin generative AI, exemplify humility. For example, to achieve this goal, Jha et al. (2026) utilised a training paradigm called Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards. This paradigm was designed to explicitly rewarded large language models that either answer a question correctly or acknowledge they do not know the answer, called abstention.

Jha et al. (2026) first explored whether this technique improved the answers of generative AI tools to multiple-choice questions. As the researchers discovered, if the models received moderate rewards in response to abstention—about 25% to 30% of the rewards the correct responses attract

the generative AI tools were not as likely to answer questions incorrectly,
overall performance on the test was preserved.

Jha et al. (2026) also examined whether this approach improved the answers of generative AI tools to open-ended questions. When abstention was rewarded, generative AI tools were not as likely to supply erroneous information—but only if coupled with supervised fine-tuning strategies that encourage abstention. In short, this study, although designed to stem hallucinations, offers some insight into how developers can further enhance the degree to which generative AI exemplifies, and potentially encourages, intellectual humility.

Complications around which practices foster humility

The immediate effects of yoga and meditation

Many practices that researchers or practitioners have designed to foster humility may be ineffective; indeed, some of these practices might even diminish some features of humility. To illustrate, many individuals assume that yoga and meditation should quieten the ego and thus foster humility. However, as Gebauer et al. (2018) revealed, yoga and meditation may amplify the tendency of people to inflate some of their qualities, reminiscent of narcissism, called a self-enhancement bias.

To illustrate, in one study, 93 participants were members of hatha yoga schools in Germany. The yoga practices varied across schools but also included postures, breathing exercises, meditation, and relaxation. To assess the impact of yoga, participants completed a series of measures either before or after these yoga practices. These measures included

the degree to which individuals perceive themselves as better than average, compared to other members of their class, on the yoga exercises (see Alicke & Govorun, 2005)—a measure of self-enhancement,
the Communal Narcissism Inventory (Gebauer et al., 2012) to gauge the degree to which individuals perceive themselves as more helpful than a typical person, such as “I will be well known for the good deeds I will have done”,
four questions to gauge the degree to which yoga is central to the identity of participants.

The responses, when subjected to random-intercept models in the lme4 package of R (Bates et al., 2015), revealed that self-enhancement biases were elevated after, compared to before, yoga practice. Furthermore, yoga was perceived as more central to the identity of participants after yoga practice. The second study revealed that loving-kindness meditation in particular amplified these self-enhancement biases—and thus such biases also seemed to boost pleasant emotions. Accordingly, yoga seemed to increase the likelihood that individuals would inflate their qualities.

To explain these findings, Gebauer et al. (2018) invoked the principle of self-centrality (Gebauer et al., 2017). Specifically, after individuals practice a skill, this skill feels more central to their identity—more relevant to who they are. When skills feel central to identity, people tend to exhibit greater self-enhancement. For example, they tend to inflate their capability on this skill and perceive themselves as more worthy overall.

Admittedly, this study did not assess whether yoga or meditation tends to amplify self-enhancement biases over an extended duration. To illustrate, despite the findings, people may exhibit greater humility, and reduced self-enhancement biases, after 15 weeks of yoga compared to before they commenced this practice. The findings merely indicate that self-enhancement biases are more pronounced immediate after each session of yoga.