Radical Humility

Consequences of other relevant concepts related to humility

Benefits of a quiet ego

Wellbeing

Researchers have recently developed a concept that is a quiet ego—a concept that overlaps with humility.  Like humble individuals, people who experience a quiet ego are aware of their attributes rather than defensive, feel a sense of belonging or affiliation with all humans rather than special, appreciate the perspectives of other people, fostering compassion, and strive to develop and learn from their experiences rather than demonstrate their capabilities (Wayment et al., 2015).  To measure a quiet ego, participants complete measures of these qualities, specifically detached awareness, inclusive identity, perspective taking, and growth-mindedness. This quiet ego has been shown to predict many favourable outcomes, such as happiness and wellbeing.

To illustrate, in one study, conducted by Bauer and Weatherbie (2023), 307 college students in America completed a series of measures online including

  • the quiet ego scale,
  • the satisfaction with life scale (e.g., Diener et al., 1985), comprising items like “If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing”,
  • the scale of positive and negative experience (Diener et al., 2010), designed to assess the degree to which individuals experienced positive affect and negative affect during the last month,
  • the multidimensional scale of psychological well-being (Ryff & Keyes, 1995), designed to measure purpose in life, personal growth, autonomy, environmental mastery, positive relationships, and self-acceptance,
  • the growth motivation index (Bauer et al., 2015), constructed to gauge the degree to which individuals feel inspired to grow from diverse experiences, such as “I try to form my personal goals in life around my deeper interests”, and grow from reflection, such as “I ask my friends what they think and feel about current issues so that I can understand other points of view”,
  • the Loyola Generativity Scale (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992), developed to assess the degree to which individuals feel they have contributed to future society, such as “I feel as though I have made a difference to many people”.

As a series of multiple regression analyses revealed (Bauer & Weatherbie, 2023), quiet ego was positively associated with

  • subjective wellbeing—an index that combines satisfaction with life, high positive affect, and low negative affect,
  • psychological well-being—an index that combines purpose in life, personal growth, autonomy, and the other subscales of this measure, and
  • the motivation of individuals to grow from experiences and reflection as well as generativity—or a feeling they have contributed to society.

Qualities that foster wellbeing: mindfulness and emotional intelligence

Many studies have explored the reasons that a quiet ego tends to improve wellbeing.  For example, as Liu et al. (2021) revealed, a quiet ego tends to foster mindfulness and improve emotional intelligence enhancing wellbeing and diminishing stress.  Specifically, when individuals experience a quiet ego, they can observe themselves from the perspective of someone else, objectively and fairly, called detached awareness.  Because of this detachment, they do not feel concerned about how their circumstances or surroundings reflect or affect their status or attributes.  They can thus observe these circumstances or surroundings, impartially and without judgment, epitomising mindfulness.

Similarly, a quiet ego, coupled with mindfulness, can foster emotional intelligence—or the capacity of individuals to recognise, utilise, apply, and manage emotions helpfully.  To illustrate,

  • if individuals adopt a quiet ego and thus appreciate the perspectives of other people, they can more readily imagine, decipher, and accommodate the emotions these people experience,
  • likewise, if individuals are mindful, they can observe themselves and other people, and hence appraise their emotions, more accurately. 

This emotional intelligence enables people to resolve challenges, such as conflicts with other individuals, more effectively, enhancing wellbeing and diminishing stress.  A survey of 300 participants that included measures of a quiet ego, mindfulness, emotional intelligence, life satisfaction, and stress, generated results that substantiate these arguments. 

Likewise, in an experimental study, Liu, Isbell, Constantino, and Leidner (2022) confirmed that a quiet ego may foster emotional intelligence.  In this study, half the participants were assigned to a program that was designed to foster a quiet ego.  Specifically, participants listened to an audio recording, lasting six minutes, that delineated the four key features of a quiet ego. They learned that people who adopt a quiet ego balance their personal interests with the needs of other individuals.  Next, they completed a reflective exercise in which they contemplated how they could apply these lessons to their lives. In the control condition, participants to an audio recording, of similar length, on the natural history of ledges.  Participants who learned about a quiet ego subsequently reported higher levels of emotional intelligence and flourishing in life. 

Qualities that foster wellbeing: suitable life choices

Yet, many other pathways can also explain this association between a quiet ego and wellbeing.  Liu, Isbell, and Leidner (2022) proposed that a quiet ego might also foster an inclination called self-concept clarity—or the degree to which individuals perceive their qualities and capabilities as unambiguous rather than hazy or conflicting.  Presumably, when individuals experience a quiet ego, they are not as inclined to inflate their qualities to themselves.  Their perceptions of themselves, thus, will be more consistent over time and compatible with the feedback they receive, promoting self-concept clarity. 

Armed with this clarity, individuals are more likely to reach suitable choices.  They gravitate to activities that are compatible with their values, interests, and capabilities.  They also embrace activities that may address their limitations, facilitating growth.  Because of these suitable choices, individuals who experience self-concept clarity, partly derived from their quiet ego, should experience satisfaction with their life.   Indeed, Liu, Isbell, and Leidner (2022) discovered, after conducting a survey of 500 participants, that self-concept clarity does indeed mediate the relationship between a quiet ego and various indices of wellbeing, such as purpose in life, autonomy, and trusting relationships.   

A quiet ego might also inspire individuals to adopt a more authentic lifestyle.  Pradhan et al. (2025), for example, demonstrated that individuals who experience a quiet ego report greater authenticity.  They tend to choose actions or verbalise opinions that resonate with their values rather than feel the urge to conform to societal expectations.  Presumably, a quiet ego, in which people observe themselves impartially, enables individuals to appreciate their values and understand their motives.  Consequently, they can more readily choose actions that resonate with these values and motives. 

Similarly, because of this quiet ego and authenticity, these individuals may not feel as inclined to flaunt their wealth or status. They will not, therefore, purchase unnecessary possessions to symbolise this rank.  Consistent with this possibility, Pradhan et al. (2025) showed that a quiet ego is also associated with voluntary simplicity or a decision to refrain from unnecessary consumption or purchases.  Both the authenticity and simplicity that emanate from a quiet ego also predicted the degree to which these individuals perceive their life as meaningful and rewarding.  

Prejudice

For several reasons, a quiet ego may diminish prejudice.  Specifically, when individuals adopt a quiet ego, they perceive the needs of other people as similar in importance to their own motivations.  Consequently, they are not as likely to perceive themselves as superior or special.  The tendency to regard some people or groups as inherently superior, called a social-dominance orientation (Pratto et al., 1994), should thus diminish.  Because these individuals do not regard some people or groups as inherently superior, unfavourable attitudes towards other religions or communities should dissipate, decreasing prejudice (e.g., Asbrock et al., 2010; Kteily et al., 2011). 

Similarly, when individuals adopt a quiet ego, they are especially motivated to grow and to develop.  Therefore, they are willing to question the status quo or adapt their existing practices.  The tendency of some individuals to comply fastidiously with traditions, called right-wing authoritarianism, should thus dissipate.  Consequently, these individuals may welcome communities or people whose customs vary from the norms or traditions of their region, diminishing prejudice (e.g., Asbrock et al., 2010; Cohrs & Asbrock, 2009).

Al-Kire et al. (2022) conducted a pair of studies that corroborates these arguments.  In one study, 519 undergraduate psychology students, enrolled at an American university, completed a series of scales including

  • the Quiet Ego Scale,
  • the Attitudes towards Muslim Scale (Altareb, 1997)—a measure that comprises questions like “I would support a measure deporting Muslims from America”, “Muslims are strict”, “Muslims should be feared”, and “The Muslim religion is too strange for me to understand”,
  • the Social Dominance Orientation Scale (Pratto et al., 1994) that comprises items like “Some groups are simply inferior to other groups”,
  • the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Revised Scale (Rattazzi et al., 2007) that comprises items like “What our country needs most is disciplined citizens, following national leaders in unity”,
  • the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding Short Form (Hart et al., 2015), administered to control the tendency of some individuals to bias their responses towards social conventions.

As the analyses revealed, a quiet ego was associated with positive, rather than unfavourable, attitudes towards Muslims. Social-dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism partly mediated this association.  This pattern was maintained after controlling socially desirable responding and political orientation. 

Benefits and complications of receptiveness to opposing views

Favourable evaluations during interactions

Humble individuals, as Tangney (2000) argued, are receptive to opposing and conflicting ideologies.  People who are receptive to these opposing beliefs tend to be trusted and respected.  Yeomans et al. (2020), for example, conducted a series of pioneering studies, revealing how people who are receptive to opposing ideologies tend to be evaluated more favourably during conversations.  In one study, 238 government professionals, comprising 119 dyads, completed a questionnaire on the first day of a training program.  This questionnaire included

  • the receptive to opposing ideologies scale,
  • questions that gauge the attitudes of these individuals to three sociopolitical controversies, such as the death penalty—and perceived importance of these controversies.

On the second day, participants were invited to write a compelling argument to support their opinion on one of these controversies.  The individuals then received an argument, written by another participant, who had expressed a position that opposed their opinion—and then countered this position with another written response.  Then, participants rated the degree to which their opponent seemed receptive to opposing beliefs.  Finally, participants rated other respondents on various characteristics such as

  • they would like this person to be assigned to their team in the future,
  • whether they trusted the judgment of this person,
  • the degree to which they would like this person to represent their organisation in a professional setting.

All the responses of participants were subjected to an algorithm, validated in this paper, that estimated the degree to which each text demonstrates the hallmarks of receptivity to opposing ideologies. As these findings revealed, if these individuals perceived someone as receptive to opposing beliefs

  • they believed this person may be a suitable team member in the future,
  • they tended to trust the judgment of this person,
  • they felt this person could represent their organisation professionally.

Thus, if people are receptive to opposing beliefs, they are deemed as suitable, judicious, and professional.  Likewise, when the algorithm perceived the responses of someone as receptive to opposing beliefs, this person was also regarded as a suitable, judicious, and professional.

As a subsequent study revealed, whenever editors of Wikipedia wrote posts that display receptivity to opposing beliefs, they were not as likely to receive personal attacks after delivering unfavourable feedback to writers. Thus, displays of receptivity seem to diminish the likelihood of subsequent conflict.

Receptiveness to opposing beliefs and persuasion

In 2021, two academics at the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University, Mohamed Hussein and Zakary Tormala, conducted a comprehensive literature review to show that people who seem receptive to opposing beliefs are often more persuasive (for other evidence, see Hussein & Tormala, 2024). Specifically, after reviewing the literature, the authors uncovered four actions of speakers that demonstrate this receptivity:

  • conveying uncertainty, such as expressing some doubt about an opinion or indicating a range, instead of specific number or outcome, when forecasting the future,
  • acknowledging mistakes they have committed, such as recognising their previous beliefs or decisions were incorrect,
  • highlighting drawbacks of their position or proposal, such as conceding a minor blemish in an argument they are advocating,
  • converting statements to questions. 

Next, Hussein and Tormala (2021) presented original research to show that such actions do indeed signal receptivity to opposing beliefs.  For example, in one of their original studies, 200 participants read a plan on how to maintain the economy during COVID.  If the person who communicated the plan acknowledged some uncertainty, expressing phrases like “I cannot be entirely sure, but I believe that…”, participants tended to perceive this person as more receptive to ideas and divergent perspectives.  Similar research was conducted to show the other actions also signal receptivity.

Finally, Hussein and Tormala (2021) outlined research that demonstrates that such actions tend to enhance the capacity of individuals to persuade other people.  Here are some examples:

  • If an expert posts a review of a restaurant on the internet, participants are more immersed in this review and persuaded by this review if the person expresses uncertainty, such as “I don’t have complete confidence in my opinion, but…” (Karmarkar & Tormala, 2010).
  • This pattern was not observed, however, is the reviewer was a typical college student rather than an expert (Karmarkar & Tormala, 2010).
  • Individuals perceive the forecasts of client scientists as more credible if these predictions include a range, such as “Sea levels could rise as little as 1 foot or… as much as 7 feet”, rather than a precise value, such as “Sea levels will rise 4 feet over the next 100 years” (Howe et al., 2019).
  • Individuals are more likely to purchase an item, such as a brand of headphones, that someone had recommended if this person had also referred to previous mistakes, such as “I had bought Nidec VIA headphones, and that was a mistake” (Reich & Maglio, 2020).
  • If participants complete an activity and are then invited to repeat this activity because, purportedly, they been assigned the wrong task, they are more willing to comply if the experimenter ascribes this error to themselves rather than denies fault (Gonzales, 1992).
  • Participants are more likely to purchase items from a company if they discover the organisation had changed their policies in response to a mistake—showing they acknowledge their errors—rather than changed their policies to pre-empt a possible mistake (Kupor et al., 2018).
  • People are more inclined to purchase an item when an advertisement shows this brand outperforms rivals on most but not all attributes—compared to when an advertisement shows this brand overperforms rivals on all attributes (Etgar & Goodwin, 1982).
  • Individuals are more inclined to agree with an argument, such as the notion that university applicants should first complete an entry exam, if the writer included a phrase called a tag question, such as “don’t you think?”—but only if the writer was deemed to be an expert (Blankenship & Craig, 2007).  

Collectively, as these findings reveal, individuals who display cues that indicate receptivity to diverse opinions, such as acknowledge uncertainty or pose questions, are often more persuasive.  Nevertheless, Hussein and Tormala (2021) also delineated the circumstances in which this receptivity may not improve, and could even diminish, the extent to which individuals are persuasive.  That is, people who seem receptive to diverse beliefs are not as persuasive if

In short, to speak persuasively, individuals should first establish their knowledge or experience on a topic and then display their receptivity to opposing beliefs. 

Detrimental effects on reputation

Although receptivity to opposing ideologies is often beneficial, people who display this receptivity can, in specific circumstances, may be evaluated unfavourably.  Specifically, as Hussein and Wheeler (2024) showed, in specific circumstances, individuals often do not like a member of their community or party who seems to contemplate and to consider the beliefs of a rival community or party. That is, the beliefs of a rival community or party are often deemed as immoral or unacceptable.  Anyone who contemplates these beliefs may be judged unfavourably.    

To illustrate, in the first study that Hussein and Wheeler (2024) published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 250 participants, recruited from the Lucid platform, imagined conversing with someone, called John, about politics and social media. They were informed that John is affiliated with the same political party as are they, such as the Democrats.  Apparently

  • John had recently decided to follow a Twitter account of someone, called Sam Becker, who belongs to another political partly, such as the Republicans
  • participants then reviewed this Twitter account, discovering that Sam Becker had posted comments that were prototypical of this rival political party,
  • John then indicated either that he wanted to consider the perspective of this person, demonstrating receptivity, or blocked the account, demonstrating limited receptivity,
  • participants then evaluated John, indicating whether they perceived him as favourable or unfavourable,
  • finally, participants indicated the degree to which they perceived the source of information—that is, the Twitter account—as moral or acceptable. 

As the findings revealed, if John indicated that he engaged with this Twitter account, he was more likely to be evaluated unfavourably. This pattern was observed especially when participants deemed the Twitter account as immoral or unacceptable.  Accordingly, if people engage in material that is deemed as immoral or unacceptable, they tend to be evaluated unfavourably, called the cost-of-receptiveness effect.

Hussein and Wheeler (2024) conducted six more studies and nine supplemental studies to explore the conditions that amplify or nullify this cost-of-receptiveness effect.  These studies explored a range of social issues, such as climate change, immigration, terrorism, and military spending. Rather than a Twitter account, these studies explored other sources of information, such as fictitious people, renowned politicians, or unidentified individuals.   As the findings reveal, people who seem receptive to opposing beliefs are often evaluated unfavourably in a range of settings.  However, these people are evaluated more favourably than people who are not receptive to opposing beliefs in some circumstances such as

  • when the source of information is a person who belongs to the same party or community,
  • when the source of information is a person who belongs to a rival party or community—but diverges from a prototypical member,
  • when the source of information is not identified.

Therefore, to maintain their reputation, if individuals demonstrate their receptivity to opposite beliefs, they should indicate the source of information was someone who deviates from prototypical rivals. 

Drawbacks of non-disclosure of imperfection

Psychopathologies

Humble people tend to acknowledge their faults (Tangey, 2000). A variety of studies have explored whether the opposite of this tendency, called non-disclosure of imperfection, is related to various mental health disorders (e.g., Besser et al., 2010; Goya Arce & Polo, 2017; Roxborough et al., 2012).  Indeed, Casale et al. (2024) conducted a systematic literature review to explore the association between perfectionistic self‐presentation, including non-disclosure of imperfection, and psychopathologies.  To unearth the relevant publications, the researchers

  • utilised a range of bibliographic databases, including Scopus, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library,
  • entered search terms that correspond to perfectionism together with search terms that correspond to psychopathy, such as “anxiety” or “psychiatric disorder”,
  • also searched relevant conference proceedings and clinical trial registers.

The researchers uncovered 30 studies that fulfill the eligibility criteria. The analyses revealed that

  • non-disclosure of imperfection is positively associated with psychopathology overall (r = .35), regardless of gender,
  • specifically, non-disclosure of imperfection is positively related to depression (r=.35), social anxiety (r=.46), and vulnerable narcissism (r=.48) but not to other psychopathological symptoms,
  • the same patterns emerged in undergraduate students, community samples, and clinical samples,
  • furthermore, non-disclosure of imperfection and non-display of imperfection were positively associated with the same psychopathologies (Casale et al., 2024).

Arguably, non-disclosure of imperfection coincides with the need in individuals to seek validation from other people. When people need to seek validation, they are more vulnerable to the precarious judgments of other individuals, potentially culminating in social anxiety or depression.

Suppression of pleasant emotions

In addition to severe mental health disorders, non-disclosure of imperfection may suppress pleasant emotions.  To illustrate, in one study, conducted by Hill et al. (2020), 78 students enrolled in music programs completed a survey at the beginning, middle, and end of an academic year. The survey included

  • the Perfectionistic Self-Presentation Scale, comprising items like “I try to keep my faults to myself”,
  • a Scale of Positive and Negative Experience, in which individuals indicated the degree to which they experienced six positive emotions, such as happy, and six negative emotions, such as sad, over the last four weeks. 

When music students reported non-disclosure of imperfection in the middle of the year, they were not as likely to experience positive emotions at the end of year (Hill et al., 2020).  Non-disclosure of imperfection thus seemed to inhibit subsequent happiness or other positive emotions. Arguably, after a successful or uplifting event, individuals who strive to conceal their faults may experience worries—such as the worry they may be evaluated more harshly in the future because of this success. These worries might dampen the positive emotions that success would otherwise elicit. 

Body dissatisfaction

People who do not disclose their imperfections—perhaps concerned that other individuals will judge these faults harshly—may be especially attuned to flaws in their body.  Therefore, non-disclosure of imperfection may be inversely associated with body satisfaction. 

To corroborate this possibility, in a study that Lundqvist et al. (2024) published, 170 basketballers and 440 gymnasts, aged between 10 and 25, completed a survey.  The survey included

As hypothesised, after controlling gender, age, and sport, non-disclosure of imperfection was negatively related to body satisfaction (Lundqvist et al., 2024).