Practices that may curb narcissism: Integrative complexity
Introduction
When contemplating and debating an issue, such as climate change or sugar taxes, some people can adopt and apply a variety of perspectives, called differentiation. A subset of these individuals can also recognise overlap and similarities across these divergent perspectives, called integration. This capacity to differentiate and to integrate diverse perspectives on these matters is referred to as integrative complexity (Suedfeld et al., 1992). When individuals who demonstrate integrative complexity present arguments, they typically mention and reconcile multiple positions, such as the benefits and drawbacks of some policy. Individuals who demonstrate integrative complexity are not as likely to exhibit the hallmarks of narcissism or antagonism (Tetlock et al., 1993). Consequently, initiatives that foster integrative complexity may diminish narcissism (for initiatives, see Nemr & Savage, 2022).
What is integrative complexity?
The existing measures of integrative complexity offer some insight into this capability. Specifically, researchers first collect some of the text that participants have written (Suedfeld & Tetlock, 1977) or speeches they have delivered (Tetlock, 1983). These texts or speeches, for example, can be derived from
- personal correspondence or letters (Suedfeld & Bluck, 1993),
- official documents, such as policy statements (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989),
- activities that are designed to generate text—such as the picture story exercise, in which participants write about ambiguous pictures (Tetlock et al., 1993), or requests to complete phrases, like “When I am confused…” (Suedfeld et al., 1992).
Next, the data are divided into paragraphs or other segments of text that relate to one idea. Judges then use a rating scheme to evaluate the integrative complexity of each unit on a seven-point scale. For example, 1 represents low differentiation and low integration; 7 represents high differentiation and high integration—as defined by various principles (for detailed information on these principles, see Baker-Brown et al., 1992). Specifically, 1 to 3 represent increasing levels of differentiation, with no integration. In contrast, 4 to 7 represent high levels of differentiation, with increasing levels of integration.
Usually, to gauge integrative complexity, judges receive appreciable training. Judges receive eight sets of paragraphs, on a diverse array of topics. They attempt to evaluate the integrative complexity of each paragraph, after differentiation and integration are defined and the coding scheme is delineated. These judges are deemed to be reliable once the correlation between their own ratings and the accepted ratings of these paragraphs exceeded some criterion, such as .80 (e.g., Feist, 1994).
In more recent years, researchers have developed automated programs to derive estimates of integrative complexity (e.g., Conway et al. 2014). On average, the correlation between these automated measures and the scores that humans generate when they apply the principles is about .48.
Impact of stress on integrative complexity
Research does reveal that various activities, practices, or circumstances can enhance integrative complexity and thus may diminish narcissism. To illustrate, several studies have shown how life events, especially stressful episodes, can affect the integrative complexity of individuals. Porter and Suedfeld (1981), for example, examined the integrative complexity of five novelists over the course of their lives. This study showed that stressful life events can reduce integrative complexity.
Indeed, many studies have shown that stressful events can undermine integrative complexity. Events such as war, economic decline, impending death, and international tension can reduce this form of complexity (Porter & Suedfeld, 1981; Suedfeld et al., 1986; Suedfeld & Garanstein, 1995). Accordingly, interventions or practices that diminish stress or enhance the capacity of individuals to withstand stress may foster integrative complexity and potentially curb narcissism.
Impact of multicultural engagement on integrative complexity
Other life experiences can also shape integrative complexity. When people travel or work in other nations, they actively immerse themselves in other cultures, called multicultural engagement. For example, they strive purposefully to learn about the customs, traditions, values, and beliefs of other cultures. In addition, they adapt their behaviour to be more compatible with these cultures. As Maddux et al. (2013) showed, this cultural engagement tends to enhance integrative complexity, ultimately improving the future job prospects of individuals.
To assess this possibility, 115 MBA students completed a questionnaire. These students were citizens of various nations but studying in either France or Singapore. The questionnaire assessed the degree to which these students actively learnt about the host culture and adapted their behaviours accordingly. In addition, a measure of integrative complexity was included. Specifically, participants wrote an essay on the benefits and pitfalls of multicultural teams. References to many dimensions and perspectives represented differentiation. Conceptual integration of these references represented integration. Individuals who exhibited multicultural engagement at one time were more likely to receive job offers soon after the program—and this relationship was mediated by integrative complexity.
Presumably, when people immerse themselves in norms and values that diverge from their own experiences, they need to override the feelings of conflict this divergence might elicit. To reconcile these different perspectives, they learn to apply a series of cognitive operations, such as the capacity to consider several dimensions of one issue as well as the associations between these dimensions. This mindset may become habitual and, ultimately, foster integrative complexity.
Exposure to art and integrative complexity
People do not necessarily have to immerse themselves in other cultures to develop integrative complexity. For example, as, Hagtvedt and Vohs (2022) revealed, even exposure to art that displays some unanticipated features can foster integrative complexity. In a pilot study, participants were exposed to some art, depicting a face. Some of the participants observed art that depicts a face without intricacies. Other participants observed art that embedded this face in a more intricate work, called high art. For example, the painting included some fuzzy strokes that were superimposed on the face. Next, participants completed a measure of integrative complexity. Specifically, their descriptions of this art were coded from low to high integrative complexity. Exposure to this high art did indeed foster integrative complexity.
Presumably, when individuals are exposed to unusual art, they may need to integrate distinct perspectives about this work to appraise these pieces. Thus, exposure to unusual art may elicit the cognitive operations that underpin integrative complexity.
Team exercises
Some team activities can also enhance the integrative complexity of workgroups. Brodbeck et al. (2021), for instance, introduced and validated an intervention that can improve the integrative complexity of team members. The researchers designed a procedure that comprises two activities: group dissent to foster differentiation and stepwise recapitulation to foster integration. Specifically,
- participants wrote about whether they feel people should work to receive social welfare,
- to promote dissent, people who expressed opposing perspectives on this matter were assigned to the same team whereas, on a control condition, people who expressed the same perspective on this matter were assigned to the same team,
- the teams then discussed this matter,
- to introduce a technique called stepwise recapitulation, two members with the same opinion first summarised the various opinions for 7 minutes, a third member with a conflicting opinion was then invited to present a divergent opinion, the group debated the matter, and finally a fourth member was invited to present an opinion. The third and fourth members had not observed the previous conversation before expressing their opinions.
The blend of group dissent and stepwise recapitulation enhanced the integrative complexity of the final argument these teams produced. Therefore, exposure to diverse opinions and then progressive exposure to these opinions—in which members progressively join this group—tends to facilitate integrative complexity (Rogelberg et al., 1992).
Other team practices may boost integrative complexity as well. For example, if individuals are informed they will need to justify their decisions, even before they commence a task, they tend to demonstrate greater integrative complexity (Tetlock & Kim, 1987).
Diversity in teams
Team demographics, rather than only team practices, may also shape the integrative complexity of members. Specifically, when teams are diverse, members are likely to express divergent opinions, and attempts to integrate this divergence should foster integrative complexity.
Solomon and Hall (2023) validated this premise. This study examined archival data about panels of judges. Panels were considered diverse if they included more than one gender or more than one race—as in both white and non-white judges. Similarly, panels were considered ideologically heterogenous if they included at least one judge appointed by the Democrats and one judge appointed by the Republicans. To measure the integrative complexity of these panels, the determinations and justifications of these judges were subjected to a method called the Automated Integrative Complexity (Conway et al. 2014; Houck et al. 2014). The results were informative:
- diversity in the panels did indeed foster integrative complexity, but only when the members were either all appointed by Democrats or all appointed by Republicans,
- presumably, similarity in political affiliation facilitated trust and conversations about other differences in opinion.
Accordingly, these findings suggest that, to foster integrative complexity, managers could establish teams in which the members have experienced diverse backgrounds but share an ideology.
