Consequences of intellectual humility

Because of many reasons, intellectual humility could enhance the wellbeing of individuals.  Here are some examples of these reasons:

• Because of their receptivity to diverse perspectives, intellectually humble people listen and empathise better (Krumrei-Mancuso, 2017), fostering meaningful interpersonal relationships (Porter et al., 2022).
• Because they do not feel the need to be certain or correct, intellectually humble people may experience less stress or worry about errors; for example, they experience diminished anxiety before exams (Huynh et al., 2023)
• Because they recognise the limitations of their knowledge, intellectually humble people perceive setbacks or failures as opportunities to learn and not as threats to their perception of themselves (Porter et al., 2020).
• Because they are receptive to diverse perspectives, intellectually humble people may be more willing to seek the support of mental health practitioners, such as psychologists, when needed (Bąk et al., 2021).
• Because they do not perceive themselves as special or entitled, intellectually humble people are not as likely to experience resentment or other negative emotions when they are not treated differently (Bo et al, 2017; Haggard et al., 2018).

To verify the assumption that intellectual humility often coincides with wellbeing, Chukwudebe et al. (2025) conducted two studies.  In the first study, 398 participants, recruited from Prolific, an online crowdsourcing site, completed a series of scales that were presented in a random order.  The questionnaire included

• the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale to measure the main facets of intellectual humility, in which a typical item is “I am willing to change my mind once it is made up about an important topic”,
• the meaning in life scale to measure presence of meaning, such as “My life has a clear sense of purpose”, (Steger et al., 2006),
• a measure of life satisfaction (Diener et al., 1985), such as “In most ways, my life is close to my ideal…” and flourishing in life (Diener et al., 2009), such as “I am engaged and interested in my daily activities”,
• measures of depressive symptoms and general anxiety.

Overall, intellectual humility was positively associated with meaning in life, life satisfaction, flourishing as well as inversely associated with depression and anxiety.  Two subscales of intellectual humility, independence of intellect and ego as well as respect for others’ viewpoints, generated higher correlations.  Thus, people who do not perceive criticisms are personal affronts, epitomising independence of intellect and ego, as well as people who welcome diverse perspectives were especially likely to experience wellbeing.   The second study replicated these findings.

Resilience during tests

Intellectual humility may also diminish the anxiety that individuals experience before tests.  Specifically, when people feel the results of a forthcoming test could threaten their perceptions of themselves, they experience anxiety about this impending possibility (Ringeisen et al., 2016).  That is, they feel worried this test might uncover unrecognised limitations. In contrast, if individuals experience intellectual humility, they are more aware of their limitations and motivated to learn and to overcome these limitations.  In these individuals, tests are not as likely to unearth overlooked limitations but instead are deemed as opportunities to develop knowledge and capabilities. 

Huynh et al. (2023), academics at Texas A&M University, published two studies to explore whether intellectual humility does indeed prevent or curb test anxiety.  In the first study, 184 university students completed the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale—a scale that measures four subscales or facets of intellectual humility.  In addition, to assess test anxiety, these students completed

• the Westside Test Anxiety Scale (Driscoll, 2007), designed to assess the degree to which participants experience various signs and symptoms of anxiety before tests, such as “During important exams, I think that I am doing awful or that I may fail”,
• the Sarason Test Anxiety Scale (Sarason, 1977), in which participants specify whether they experienced anxiety around testss , such as “If I were to take an intelligence test, I would worry a great deal before taking it”.

Overall, intellectual humility was inversely associated with test anxiety, at least as gauged by the Sarason Test Anxiety Scale but not the Westside Test Anxiety Scale.  However, one of the subscales— independence of intellect and ego, in which individuals do not feel offended if criticised or challenged—was negatively related to both measures of test anxiety.  The second study was similar, except the survey was administered to the general public, using Amazon Mechanical Turk.  In this study, intellectual humility was inversely associated with both measures of test anxiety. 

As Jongman-Sereno et al. (2025) revealed, when people exhibit intellectual humility and thus recognise their beliefs or opinions may be biased or misguided, their relationships are more likely to be satisfying.  Specifically, in this study, 75 couples, ranging in age from 21 to 61, completed a questionnaire. The questionnaire included measures of

• intellectual humility, such as “I reconsider my opinions when presented with new evidence”,
• satisfaction with the relationship, such as “My relationship is much better than other people’s relationships”,
• affective bond, corresponding to the degree to which they love, like, and feel in love with their partner,  
• frequency of conflicts and degree to which they argue,
• goals or tendencies during conflicts.

Generally, intellectual humility was positively associated with relationship quality, although some of these associations were not significant.  Specifically, if men reported intellectual humility, they reported a stronger affective bond and their partner experienced fewer concerns about the relationship.  If women reported intellectual humility, both partners felt that arguments were managed effectively.     

Several accounts can explain why intellectual humility may improve relationships.  First, people who exhibit intellectual humility may naturally appreciate and accommodate the needs of other individuals, manifesting as empathy, gratitude, and benevolence rather than a pursuit of power. This empathy, gratitude, and benevolence may thus facilitate understanding and flexibility in relationships.

Some research has corroborated this possibility. In one study, conducted by Krumrei-Mancuso (2017), over 300 Americans completed a survey that measured intellectual humility as well as

• empathy, such as “I often have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me”,
• gratitude, such as “‘I am grateful to a wide variety of people”,
• benevolence, such as “I value being loyal”, and
• power, such as “I value social power”.

Intellectual humility was positively associated with empathy, gratitude, and benevolence as well as inversely associated with power. One explanation is that many individuals like to inflate their qualities, achievements, and contributions. If they develop intellectual humility, however, individuals may be more inclined to question these beliefs.  They are thus more likely to recognise the qualities, achievements, and contributions of other people, fostering gratitude and respect.  Their contempt towards other individuals might dissipate, promoting empathy.

Other studies have uncovered similar results.  For example, people who are perceived as intellectually humble by peers tends to be rated as more agreeable and supportive during conversations (Meagher et al., 2021). 

Besides their tendency to appreciate and to accommodate the needs of other people, individuals who exhibit intellectual humility may also, during conflicts or disagreements, consider the perspective of their opponent.  For example, as Porter and Schumann (2018) revealed, individuals who exhibit intellectual humility are especially motivated to learn from the perspectives of their opponent.  Rather than disregard the opinions of political opponents, these individuals often deliberately want to read or hear these opinions.   Accordingly, if people develop intellectual humility, they may, in romantic settings, be more inclined to consider and to embrace the perspective of their partner during arguments. Conflicts will thus tend to recede rather than persist or escalate, improving their relationships.

Sharing resources fairly

Humble people tend to share resources fairly. That is, humble people are not preoccupied with their personal needs but recognise and accommodate the concerns of other individuals.  Therefore, if granted an opportunity to distribute resources—such as funds or opportunities—their decisions would be fair.  They would not, for example, assign most of the funds to themselves or their friends. They would not assume only the most enjoyable or rewarding jobs.  They would instead accommodate the needs of other people appropriately. 

Wang et al. (2025) conducted a study that verifies this proposal.  In their first study, 72 university students, from Peking University, first completed the modesty subscale of the Honesty-Humility HEXACO measure—a rough measure of humility.  Next, these individuals participated in an exercise that was designed to assess fairness.  In essence

• participants were misled to believe they would need to share resources with another person who they would never meet,
• they were asked to indicate how resources should be shared, such as “60% for you and 40% for the other person”, “80% for you and 0% for the other person”, or “55% for you and 45% for the other person”,
• participants were informed their decisions would affect the money they earned to complete the study.

Humble individuals were more likely to select options in which they shared the resources relatively equally between themselves and the other person. 

Communicating honestly: Over-claiming or exaggerating knowledge

Some people inflate their knowledge.  To illustrate, imagine people who need to complete a task called the Overclaiming Questionnaire (Paulhus et al., 2003).  To complete this task, they receive a table that comprises 45 words that purportedly represent scientific terms.  Some of the labels are legitimate, such as photon, whereas other labels are fictitious, such as ultra-lipid.  The task of participants is to indicate the terms of which they are familiar.  Nevertheless, some people incorrectly maintain they are familiar with the fictitious terms, such as ultra-lipid, called overclaiming.  People who demonstrate this tendency might inflate their knowledge in other settings as well.

Bowes et al. (2024) demonstrated that intellectual humility tends to diminish overclaiming Four samples of participants, from the general community and from several colleges, completed this test of overclaiming.  These participants also completed various measures of intellectual humility.  Overclaiming—or the tendency of individuals to confuse legitimate and fictitious terms—was inversely related to several measures of intellectual humility including

• the General Intellectual Humility Scale
• the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale,
• the McElroy Intellectual Humility Scale, and
• the Alfano Intellectual Humility Scale.

Furthermore, overclaiming was positively associated with honesty and humility, as measured by the HEXACO model (Ashton & Lee, 2009; Lee & Ashton, 2018).  Thus, both intellectual humility and general humility tend to stem overclaiming.

Accuracy and certainty

Some people, albeit incorrectly, assume that people who are intellectually humble may seem unconfident and unconvincing, devoid of conviction and certainty.  However, in practice, individuals who exhibit intellectually humble are no less confident about their beliefs than other people.  Instead, intellectual humility enhances the capacity of people to differentiate validated beliefs from tenuous belies.  So, if people are intellectually humble, they tend to be more certain about accurate beliefs and uncertain about inaccurate beliefs. 

A compelling study, reported by Fischer et al. (2025), explored this possibility.  In this study of over 1000 American adults, participants first completed a measure of intellectual humility.  Next, participants completed an activity called the evidence distinction task.  Specifically, participants read four summaries of fictitious studies that investigate renewable energy. 

• Each summary included a set of findings, such as “…in cities that invested in solar power, unemployment decrease was 2.3% or more”. 
• After each summary was one of two statements, such as “Unemployment increased by 2.3% more in cities that invested in solar power” and “Unemployment decreased by 2.3% more in cities that invested in solar power”.
• Participants then indicated which statement they believed was more accurate and the degree to which they were certain, on a scale from 50% to 100%. 

If participants reported elevated levels of intellectual humility, they were not only more likely to answer the questions correctly but also expressed more confidence when correct and less confidence when incorrect.  Hence, in contrast to other participants, the degree to which humble people felt certain was an accurate reflection of whether they were correct.  Overall level of confidence was not significantly related to humility: so humble people were not less confident in general. 

Need for closure

When individuals demonstrate intellectual humility, their beliefs are often more accurate and considered, partly because they tend to be more willing to update these beliefs over time.  Specifically, intellectual humility is inversely associated with need for closure—the tendency of some individuals to reach judgments prematurely and fail to update these judgments in response to additional information.  Specifically, according to the work of Webster and Kruglanski (1994)–two renowned scholars at the University of Maryland–this need for closure manifests as five distinct, but related, tendencies:

• First, if individuals develop a need for closure, they exhibit discomfort with ambiguity and feel uneasy when uncertain about some event or issue—an emotion that dissipates once they receive clarity. 
• Second, to override this ambiguity and to achieve clarity, these individuals demonstrate a preference for predictability and prefer settings in which they can anticipate the events that are likely to unfold. 
• Third, because they like predictable settings, these individuals report a preference for order and seek environments that are organized and ordered, governed by consistent rules, policies, and practices. 
• Fourth, because of their aversion to ambiguity, these individuals reach decisions rapidly, without deliberation or delay, referred to as decisiveness. 
• Finally, to reach decisions swiftly, these individuals seldom consider other sources of information, such as the advice of experts, before they reach these decisions, designated as close mindedness. Some researchers, however, exclude decisiveness, because this subscale does not correlate positively with the other dimensions (e.g., Pierro et al., 2003).

Intellectual humility coincides with the inclination of poeple to question assumptions and should, therefore, diminish this need for closure.  To explore this possibility, in a study conducted by Almeida et al. (2024), 119 participants, all enrolled in an undergraduate psychology course, received a questionnaire that, as part of a broader study, measured

• intellectual humility, such as “My ideas are usually better than other people’s ideas” (reverse scored),
• need for closure, such as “I would rather know bad news than stay in a state of uncertainty”.

One facet of intellectual humility, called lack of intellectual overconfidence, was negatively related to need for closure.  Accordingly, if individuals are intellectually humble, they may demonstrate many of the benefits that coincide with a limited need for closure.  Specificaly, when individuals experience a need for closure

• they feel uncomfortable with information or perspectives that contradict their beliefs or experiences (Kruglanski, Shah, Pierro, & Mannetti, 2002),
• consequently, they are not receptive to diverse values, attitudes, and demographics, sometimes manifesting as prejudice and racism (e.g., Van Hiel, Pandelaere, & Duriez, 2004),
• because they prefer clarity rather than ambiguity, these individuals tend to like autocratic leaders-leaders who enforce rules (Pierro et al., 2003),
• similarly, because of this aversion to ambiguity, they do not like to be challenged or questioned and thus respond combatively, rather than cooperatively or flexibly, during negotiations, disputes, or conflicts (Golec & Federico, 2004), sometimes impeding their capacity to reach suitable agreements (DeDreu et al., 1999),
• in addition, because of this aversion to ambiguity, they do not explore perspectives or information that may counter their initial assumptions, compromising their capacity to learn effectively in online courses (e.g., Kahn et al., 2021).

Accordingly, intellectual humility should diminish need for closure and thus decrease the likelihood of prejudice as well as foster greater flexibility, adaptability, and learning in challenging settings.

Biased assumptions

Partly because intellectual humility should diminish a need for closure, people who report this humility may not be susceptible as other individuals to cognitive biases.  That is, if individuals develop intellectual humility and thus are not as likely to reach judgments or conclusions prematurely, their beliefs or assumptions should be more accurate rather than distorted.  Some research has indeed confirmed this possibility (Bowes et al., 2022; Cao & Li, 2023).

To illustrate, Bowes et al. (2022) explored whether intellectual humility tends to diminish political myside bias—the inclination of people tend to appraise and to seek evidence that confirms their political beliefs.  To assess this possibility, American participants first completed measures of intellectual humility.  Next, participants indicated whether they identify with the Democrats or Republicans before answering a series of questions about a Democratic and Republican candidate.  Specifically, for each candidate, participants indicated, for example, whether

• this candidate shifts his or her opinions merely to attract votes
• this candidate seems moral,
• global warming can be ascribed to human actions,
• gun control can prevent deaths,
• free health care is a privilege.

Consistent with the notion of political myside bias, participants tended to perceive the candidate for whom they voted as more suitable—such as less inclined to shift their opinions merely to secure votes and higher in morality.  Similarly, participants tended to express attitudes towards global warming, gun control, and other matters that were typical of other supporters of their party.  However, this political myside bias was not as pronounced in people who reported elevated levels of intellectual humility.  Intellectual humility, or the tendency to question personal beliefs and consider other perspectives, was negatively related to political myside bias in both Democrat and Republican voters.

Intellectual humility may diminish other biases as well.  For example, people often prefer drugs that are labelled as natural to synthetic alternatives that are equally, or even more, safe and effective—called a naturalness bias.  In a series of studies, Cao and Li (2023) revealed that intellectual humility diminished this tendency to prefer natural drugs over synthetic drugs.  That is, if people experience intellectual humility, they are more willing to consider their decisions carefully and question their biases. 

Specifically, in a series of studies, participants first answered questions that assess their intellectual humility.  Next, they were invited to imagine that, after receiving a diagnosis of some health condition, they must choose one of two drugs.  One drug is synthetic, developed in the laboratory, but is effective in 85% of users, with mild and unlikely side effects.  The second drug is natural and also effective in 85% of users, producing few side effects as well.  As the findings revealed,

• students and community members who reported elevated levels of intellectual humility were more inclined than other individuals to choose a synthetic drug over a natural drug when granted an option,
• after individuals consider the possibility that perhaps their knowledge and beliefs may be flawed or fallible, potentially inducing this intellectual humility, they were more inclined to choose a synthetic drug over a natural drug.

This research also explored the reason that intellectual humility may diminish this naturalness bias.  Specifically, people who report intellectual humility were more curious and thus open to diverse experiences.  They are thus more willing to consider alternative drugs or procedures.

Political beliefs

In recent years, and across many nations, political hostility has escalated.  Many individuals espouse unwavering and extreme political opinions, sometimes culminating in aggression and violence.  Arguably, intellectual humility could mitigate this political hostility. 

However, intellectual humility, although generally fostering an openness towards other perspectives, does not necessarily limit the conviction of political beliefs.  That is, people who demonstrate intellectual humility have often considered extensive and conflicting evidence to establish their political opinions.  Consequently, when intellectual humility is elevated, people will not necessarily shift these opinions swiftly in response to additional information (Haggard et al., 2018).  Instead, because their opinions have evolved and developed over time, these individuals may exhibit conviction in these beliefs. 

To explore this matter, Koetke and Schumann (2025b) investigeated the association between intellectual humility and political beliefs.  In this study, participants were derived from a range of samples.  The precise questions they completed varied across these samples.  Overall, however, participants

• completed a measure of intellectual humility,
• indicated the extent to which they identify with their political ideology or affiliation,
• specified the degree to which they believe their political opinions are related to their moral convictions or beliefs about what is right and wrong (se Garrett, 2016),
• specified their political orientation—such as whether they consider themselves liberal, moderate, or conservative on economic policy and on social policy (Wetherell et al., 2013).

The results did vary across samples and thus warrant further replication.  Nevertheless, in general, intellectual humility was not significantly associated with the strength of political beliefs. To be more precise

• in six of the eight samples of participants, intellectual humility not significantly associated with strength of political beliefs—such as the degree to which people identify with their political affiliation or feel their political opinions reflect their moral convictions,
• however, in two of these samples, intellectual humility was negatively related to strength of political beliefs,

Arguably, two effects of intellectual humility—openness to information but conviction after careful reflection—nullify one another.   Although unrelated to the strength of political beliefs, intellectual humility did tend to coincide with a liberal political orientation. That is, in six of the eight samples of participants, intellectual humility coincided with a liberal orientation.  Arguably, both intellectual humility and liberal ideologies coincide with a tendency to question the status quo.

Cognitive reflection—or the capacity to override mistaken intuitions

Often, the initial or first instinct of individuals is mistaken.  For example, consider the following question, derived from a measure called the cognitive reflection test:  A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. What is the cost of this ball?

Initially, people often assume the ball costs 10 cents.  But, if so, the bat would need to cost $1.00 more or $1.10.  Consequently, the total would be $1.20.  Instead, the ball actually costs only 5 cents.   

To answer this question correctly, individuals need to recognise their first instinct may be mistaken, override this first instinct, and consider a different answer.  That is, they need to contemplate and review their answer carefully, called cognitive reflection. This capacity increases the likelihood that individuals reach considered, rather than detrimental, biased, and impulsive, decisions (Frederick, 2005; Toplak et al., 2011).

As Bowes et al. (2024) revealed, intellectual humility tends to improve cognitive reflection, diminishing the likelihood of detrimental or unhelpful decisions in life.  Four samples of participants, from the general community and from several colleges, completed the cognitive reflection test (Frederick, 2005; Thomson & Oppenheimer, 2016).  This test comprises a few questions, including the question on the cost of a bat and ball.  These participants also completed various measures of intellectual humility.  Performance on the cognitive reflection test was positively associated with several measures of intellectual humility including

• the General Intellectual Humility Scale
• the Comprehensive Intellectual Humility Scale,
• the McElroy Intellectual Humility Scale, and
• the Alfano Intellectual Humility Scale,

These relationships, however, were observed only in the general public and not in the college sample.  Furthermore, cognitive reflection was only modestly, but inversely, associated with honesty and humility, as measured by the HEXACO model (Ashton & Lee, 2009; Lee & Ashton, 2018).  As these findings reveal, intellectual humility in particular, rather than general humility in general, seems to facilitate cognitive reflection.

A learning or mastery orientation

Intellectual humility may also shape the motivations of individuals, ultimately affecting a range of behaviours, from persistence to cooperation.  Specifically, as Porter et al. (2020) demonstrated convincingly, intellectual humility tends to foster a learning or mastery orientation: in which individuals feel especially motivated to develop, rather than merely demonstrate, their capabilities—and thus seek challenges and persist after setbacks.   The authors conducted five studies to establish this association between intellectual humility and a mastery orientation across a range of settings, populations, and skills. 

• In the first study, participants who exhibited higher levels of intellectual humility, as measured in a survey, were more likely to persist on a task after they received corrective feedback.  These participants invested greater effort to learn about a topic they did not initially master.
• In the second study, high school pupils who exhibited higher levels of intellectual humility indicated they would be more inclined to persist and learn more about a topic after failing a quiz.
• The third study replicated the second study but also separated the measures of intellectual humility and mastery orientation—and also invited teachers to corroborate the responses of students.
• The fourth study revealed that intellectual humility enhanced persistence on online task.
• In the final study, after individuals were encouraged to embrace intellectual humility—and, for example, recognise their beliefs could be mistaken—they invested more effort to learn a topic after a previous failure.  This pattern of findings was observed even after controlling a growth mindset.

Many studies have corroborated the benefits of a learning or mastery orientation in contrast to a performance or ego orientation, in which individuals are largely motivated to complete task and to demonstrate their proficiency.  Here are some examples.

• Individuals who adopt a learning or mastery orientation, and thus perceive challenges as opportunities to learn, are more resilient and persistent in response to setbacks—such as increases in workload (Van Yperen & Janssen, 2002) or rejections to job applications (Creed et al., 2009).
• People who adopt a learning or mastery orientation tend to be more cooperative and willing to sacrifice their interests to assist other people (Poortvliet & Giebels, 2012).  In contrast to individuals who espouse a performance or ego orientation, individuals who experience a learning or mastery orientation are not as likely to perceive other people as rivals to outperform but as possible sources of insight and knowledge. 
• During conflicts and disputes, individuals who strive to master skills, epitomising a learning orientation, are able to integrate and reconcile the conflicting perspectives more effectively, facilitating resolutions (Darnon, et al., 2006).
• People who adopt a learning or mastery orientation are not as likely to exploit opportunities to cheat on tasks—because their goal is to develop rather than demonstrate capabilities (Van Yperen et al., 2011).
• When individuals adopt a learning or mastery orientation, they tend to acquire knowledge and wisdom more effectively—but primarily when the topic is confusing, challenging, or stressful (Covington & Omelich, 1984; Licht & Dweck, 1984; Utman, 1997).   In contrast, when individuals adopt a performance or ego orientation, they often learn materials by rote instead, sometimes compromising their capacity to understand or to apply these materials (Fisher & Ford, 1998).

Researchers, however, have acknowledged a vital caveat around these findings.  For example, as Van Yperen, Elliot, and Anseel (2009) argued, the key difference between a learning or mastery orientation and a performance or ego orientation may relate more to the distinction between approach and avoidance.  That is, in many studies, a learning or mastery orientation may be conflated with approach rather than avoidance.  Specifically, when individuals experience a learning or mastery orientation, their attention may be oriented towards gains and opportunities they could achieve in the future rather problems or complications they need to address or consider now.  This pursuit of future opportunities, called an approach motivation, instead of the orientation towards learning, may explain the observed benefits of this mastery orientation.

To disentangle the benefits of a learning orientation and an approach motivation, Van Yperen, Elliot, and Anseel (2009) developed a procedure that primes both mastery and avoidance.  In principle, individuals can adopt a learning or mastery orientation, while striving to prevent or overcome problems and complications.  Specifically, in one study, participants completed a task that was designed to assess and enhance their verbal skills.  Midway through this task, participants were encouraged to set goals.  Specifically, they were instructed to “not do worse” or “do better”—intended to evoke an avoidance or approach orientation—than either “their last performance” or “the average participant”–intended to evoke a mastery or performance orientation respectively.  Relative to the other conditions, mastery avoidance diminished improvement over time.  These findings indicate that approach motivation, rather than a mastery orientation per se, is especially likely to enhance performance, at least on some tasks.