Content uploaded by Paolo Riva
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Paolo Riva on Oct 23, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Self-image and schadenfreude: Pleasure at others’misfortune
enhances satisfaction of basic human needs
Marco Brambilla & Paolo Riva
Department of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
Correspondence
Marco Brambilla, Department of Psychology,
University of Milano-Bicocca, Piazza
dell’Ateneo Nuovo, 1, 20126 Milano, Italy.
E-mail: marco.brambilla@unimib.it
Received: 27 November 2015
Accepted: 7 June 2016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2229
Keywords: schadenfreude, self-image,
emotion, psychological needs, social
comparison
Abstract
The present research tested whether observing the failure of another individual
and experiencing schadenfreude (i.e., pleasure at others’misfortune) enhance
the satisfaction of basic psychological needs in terms of self-esteem, control,
belongingness, and meaningful existence. Considering hypothetical scenarios
(Experiments 1 and 4), real-life experiences (Experiment 2), and ostensibly
real interactions (Experiment 3), four experiments revealed that individuals
reported higher levels of need satisfaction when another’s setback occurred
in a competitive circumstance rather than in a non-competitive circumstance.
Moreover, the increased feeling of schadenfreude accounted for the effect of
observing the misfortune befalling a competitor on the subsequent satisfaction
of human needs. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical implications
for research on schadenfreude, and future research directions are outlined.
When others suffer a setback, people may experience a
range of emotions. Individuals can empathize and have
feelings of affection for the other or may feel schaden-
freude—pleasure at others’misfortune (Heider, 1958;
Smith, 2013; Smith, Powell, Combs, & Schurtz, 2009).
Although schadenfreude carriesa negative connotation,
such an emotional reaction is widespread in interper-
sonal (Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk, Goslinga, & Nieweg,
2005; Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk, Goslinga, Nieweg, &
Gallucci, 2006; Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk, Wesseling, &
van Koningsbruggen, 2011) and intergroup (Cikara,
Bruneau, Van Bavel, & Saxe, 2014; Cikara & Fiske,
2013; Leach & Spears, 2008, 2009; Leach, Spears,
Branscombe, & Doosje, 2003) encounters. Thus, a grow-
ing body of research has investigated the determinants
of schadenfreude, revealing that it is typically evoked
by misfortunes happening in competitive circumstances
(Cikara & Fiske, 2012, 2013; Smith et al., 2009) and
when observers gain from the misfortune (Smith, Eyre,
Powell, & Kim, 2006). In a similar vein, people feel
pleased when a setback befalls an envied target (Cikara
& Fiske, 2013; Smith et al., 1996; Van Dijk et al., 2006)
and when another’s misfortune is perceived as deserved
(Feather & Sherman, 2002; Van Dijk et al., 2005).
Although the circumstances eliciting schadenfreude
have been studied extensively, the effects of such
malicious pleasure have received less attention. Indeed,
hardly any experimental work has investigated how
individuals feel after they experience joy at others’mis-
fortunes. However, to understand why schadenfreude
is widespread in everyday life, it is important to con-
sider the consequences of this emotion. Thus, drawing
from theory and research on the satisfaction of basic
psychological needs, the present research considered
the psychological consequences of schadenfreude by
investigating the influence of such malicious pleasure
on four basic psychological needs that shape self-image.
Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that feeling joy at
another’s suffering would increase individuals’satisfac-
tion of the basic psychological needs of self-esteem,
control, belongingness, and meaningful existence.
Schadenfreude and Self-Image
People’s motivation to view themselves positively is an
important drive of human behavior (Baumeister,
1991; Sedikides & Strube, 1997; Sherman & Cohen,
2006). A good deal of work has shown that a possible
route to a more positive self-image involves compar-
ing themselves with a less fortunate other (Collins,
1996; Wills, 1981; Wood, 1989). Indeed, downward
social comparisons remove the basis for painful feel-
ings of envy and increase own sense of social compe-
tence and adequacy (Gibbons & Gerrard, 1989; Morse
& Gergen, 1970; Wills, 1981). Research has further
shown that downward social comparisons elicit a wide
array of emotions, including positive emotional states
(e.g., schadenfreude) and negative emotional states
(e.g., worry and pity; for a review, Smith, 2000). Thus,
schadenfreude represents one of the possible out-
comes of downward social comparisons. In particular,
schadenfreude is the joy evoked by downward social
comparisons involving another individual’smisfor-
tune, particularly in competitive contexts (Smith,
2013; Smith et al., 2009).
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 399
EJSP
Considering that downward social comparisons
promote self-enhancement (Collins, 1996; Gibbons &
Gerrard, 1989; Morse & Gergen, 1970; Wills, 1981)
and that schadenfreude is an emotional consequence
of downward social comparisons (Smith, 2000), one
possibility is that schadenfreude might be instrumental
in enhancing one’s self-view. In line with this reason-
ing, it has been shown that the feelings of schaden-
freude and self-enhancement are inherently linked
and that people enjoy others’misfortunes primarily
when their personal self-evaluation is chronically or
momentarily threatened (Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk, et al.,
2011; Van Dijk, Van Koningsbruggen, Ouwerkerk, &
Wesseling, 2011; for a review, Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk,
Smith, & Cikara, 2015). Thus, individuals who experi-
ence a self-evaluation threat have a greater need to
protect their self-image and are consequently more
likely to experience schadenfreude following another’s
setback than those who are not under threat (Van Dijk,
Ouwerkerk, et al., 2011). In a similar vein, people with
low self-esteem who have a chronic need to enhance
their self-image experience more joy at the misfortune
of other individuals than people with high self-esteem
do (Van Dijk, Van Koningsbruggen, et al., 2011). Re-
search on group-based schadenfreude shows similar
findings. Indeed, feelings of ingroup inferiority pre-
dicted schadenfreude at the failure of a successful
outgroup (Leach & Spears, 2008; Leach et al., 2003).
Based on these findings, we aimed to investigate how
individuals feel after experiencing schadenfreude. In-
deed, most research on schadenfreude has investigated
the circumstances that elicit such malicious pleasure,
paying less attention to its consequences. Past research
has shown that self-evaluation threat and low self-
esteem are key factors eliciting schadenfreude (Van
Dijk, Ouwerkerk, et al., 2011; Van Dijk, Van
Koningsbruggen, et al., 2011). Yet, no prior research
has investigated whether individuals have an enhanced
self-view after experiencing schadenfreude. However,
this issue is key in order to define whether the feeling
of schadenfreude and self-enhancement are inherently
linked (Van Dijk et al., 2015). Moreover, by exploring
the psychological consequences of schadenfreude for
self-image, we gain further insight into the effects of
schadenfreude on social relations, an issue that has
been overlooked by previous research. Our approach
further aimed to gain insight into the effects of down-
ward social comparisons. Indeed, while prior studies
have shown that downward social comparisons pro-
mote self-enhancement (Collins, 1996; Gibbons &
Gerrard, 1989; Morse & Gergen, 1970; Wills, 1981),
they did not test whether the sense of joy and pleasure
induced by others’setbacks (i.e., schadenfreude) might
account for the effects of downward social comparisons
on self-image.
Basic Psychological Needs
Extending prior findings, we investigated whether people
feel better about themselves after experiencing pleasure
at the failure of others. In doing so, we connected the
literature on schadenfreude with research on the satis-
faction and frustration of basic psychological needs.
Since Maslow (1954) developed his hierarchy of
needs, several taxonomies of basic psychological needs
have been proposed. In recent years, Williams (Williams,
2009; Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000) has proposed a
comprehensive model suggesting that social threats can
reduce the satisfaction of four specific psychological
needs: self-esteem, control, belongingness, and mean-
ingful existence. In making this point, Williams re-
ferred to a good deal of work showing that each of
these needs is key in shaping an individual’s self-
image. Indeed, to feel good about themselves, individ-
uals need to enhance their self-esteem (Rosenberg,
1965; Steele, 1988) and view themselves as members
of a community (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Further-
more, it has been shown that the perception of
controlling events and influencing others (Burger,
1992; Peterson & Seligman, 1984) and the feeling of
being important, useful, and meaningful (Greenberg,
Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1986) are key to maintaining
a positive self-view.
Consistent with this reasoning, an increasing amount
of research has shown that when the self-evaluation is
under threat—when individuals undergo experiences
of ostracism, exclusion, and relational devaluation—
people are less satisfied with respect to each of the four
fundamental needs (Riva, Wirth, & Williams, 2011;
van Beest, Williams, & Van Dijk, 2011; Williams, 2009;
Williams et al., 2000).
Williams (2009) reviewed the theory and research
suggesting that each of the hypothesized four constructs
should be considered a fundamental psychological need
rather than simply a motive. Accordingly, research has
shown that poor self-esteem and lack of meaning are
linked to depression (Kreger, 1995; Stern, Lynch, Oates,
O’Toole, & Cooney, 1995), which has in turn been
associated with physical illness, suicidal behaviors, and
reduced life expectancy (Allen & Badcock, 2003;
Myoshi, 2001). In a similar vein, accumulating evidence
has shown that a frustrated need to belong can be
associated with reduced well-being, depression, heart
problems, and reduced life expectancy (Sorkin, Rook,
& Lu, 2002). Finally, the need for control has been linked
with lower levels of psychological well-being and poorer
health outcomes (Lachman & Weaver, 1998; Seligman,
1975). Thus, although it is possible to consider other tax-
onomies (e.g., self-determination theory; Deci & Ryan,
1985, 2000), Williams (2009) cogently argued that each
of these constructs is a fundamental need that strongly
affects an individual’s psychological equilibrium.
The Present Research
The present research seeks to illuminate the psycholog-
ical consequences of schadenfreude for self-image by
investigating whether feeling joy at another’s suffering
increases individuals’satisfaction of basic psychological
needs that shape self-image. Considering that prior
M. Brambilla & P. RivaSelf-image and schaden freude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.400
research has proposed that another’s suffering may be
linked to an enhanced self-image (Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk,
et al., 2011; Van Dijk, Van Koningsbruggen, et al., 2011;
see also Van Dijk et al., 2015) and considering that
self-esteem, control, belongingness, and meaningful
experience are key human needs that shape self-image
(Williams, 2009; Williams et al., 2000), we anticipated
that people would report experiencing enhanced satis-
faction of fundamental needs when observing other’s
misfortune. Our hypothesis is based on the possibility
that the misfortunes of others can provide people with
social comparison benefits. Thus, such misfortunes could
promote downward comparisons, which might protect
the self and enhance the feeling of self-worth (Collins,
1996; Wills, 1981).
More in detail, we predicted that observing another
person’s suffering might enhance the general satisfac-
tion of basic human needs by potentially intervening
in the fulfillment of each need. Indeed, the misfortune
of another individual may increase self-esteem: By
observing a misfortune befalling a competitor, individ-
uals could receive feedback on their sense of social
competence or adequacy (compared with the person
who incurred the misfortune). In a competitive context,
others’misfortunes might also enhance the perceivers’
feelings of control or power over the course of events
and/or their social environment. Similarly, a person
who observes the failure of a competitor may feel more
socially connected compared with the victim of the set-
back. Finally, observing the failure of another individual
may also enhance one’s sense of purpose or meaning in
life: other’s misfortune may increase in people the feel-
ing that her or his life is more relevant (or has a greater
probability of being relevant) than the life of the person
who suffered a setback.
Crucially, considering past accounts suggesting that
schadenfreude might be instrumental in protecting
and enhancing one’s self-view (Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk,
et al., 2011; Van Dijk, Van Koningsbruggen, et al.,
2011), we predicted that the experience of schaden-
freude would be the key mediating mechanism driving
the predicted direction of influence from another
person’s misfortune to enhanced self-view. That is, we
expected that feelings of schadenfreude would account
for the link between perceiving another’smisfortune
and the increased satisfaction of basic human needs.
Indeed, the sense of relief and joy induced by the other’s
misfortune might foster self-worth, which should in-
crease basic need satisfaction. We tested these predic-
tionsinfourstudiesbyconsideringhypothetical
scenarios (Experiments 1 and 4), real-life experiences
(Experiment 2), and an ostensibly real schadenfreude-
eliciting situation (Experiment 3).
1
Experiment 1
Experiment 1 was designed as a first test of our hypoth-
esis that people would be satisfied in terms of basic
needs after observing the failure of another individual.
Moreover, we tested whether schadenfreude would
mediate the predicted relationship between another’s
misfortune and the subsequent reported self-view.
Considering that schadenfreude is typically evoked by
misfortunes happening under competitive circum-
stances (Cikara & Fiske, 2012, 2013; Smith et al.,
2009), we described a setback that occurred to a com-
petitor (vs. a non-competitor) and then asked partici-
pants to report their feelings. We predicted that
misfortunes occurring to a competitor would trigger
schadenfreude, which would in turn lead to greater sat-
isfaction of human needs.
Method
Participants. An a priori power analysis was con-
ducted for sample size estimation (using GPOWER 3.1;
Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007). With an
α= .05 and power = 0.80, the projected sample size
needed to detect a medium to large effect size (f
2
= 0.25,
Cohen, 1988) is approximately N= 50 for a between-
groups comparison (multivariate analysis of variance,
MANOVA) global effects. Overall, we recruited 68
students
2
from the University of Milano-Bicocca (51%
female; M
age
= 24; standard deviation, SD =3.84) in an
experimental design that was subdivided into two
groups.
Materials and procedure. Participants were asked
to imagine being involved in a job interview. Next, par-
ticipants were randomly assigned to one of the two
experimental conditions. In the competitive condition
(N= 36), participants learned that a former university
colleague with whom he or she has been always in com-
petition had also been selected for the job interview and
that only one candidate will get the job. Moreover, the
other candidate (who was the same gender as the
respondent) was described as having high potential for
achievement and a strong likelihood of being offered
the job. In the non-competitive condition (N=32), par-
ticipants learned that a former university colleague had
been selected for a job interview to fill a job position un-
related to the participant’sposition.
Next, we introduced the misfortune information.
Participants learned that the other person missed the
job interview because a car accident occurred a couple
of hours before the job interview.
1
The studies reported in this paper have been approved by the Ethical
Committee at the University of Milano-Bicocca, and informed consent
was obtained from all participants. According to the EJSP’spolicyon
data archiving, we have archived electronic copies of the anonymized
raw data, related coding information, and all materials in a secure data
repository (i.e., PsychoScope) provided by the Department of Psychol-
ogy. Both authors have access to such a repository.
2
In Studies 1, 2, and 4, participants were sampled online. The surveys
were posted online for 1 week in order to reach the total samplesize in-
dicated bythe power analysis.However, in that amount of time, wecol-
lected a larger number of participants than we expected. We decided to
retain all the participants we collected even though the sample sizes
were larger than those indicated by the power analysis.
M. Brambilla & P. Riva Self-image and schadenfreude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 401
After reading this description, participants were asked
to indicate how they might feel if they were in the
situation described in the vignette. In particular, partici-
pants indicated the extent to which they would experi-
ence schadenfreude (i.e., I would enjoy what happened
to that person; I couldn’t resist a little smile; What
happened to that person would amuse me; I would be
happy about what happened; α= .89; Van Dijk, Van
Koningsbruggen, et al., 2011). Participants provided all
their responses on 7-point scales, ranging from 1 (not
at all)to7(extremely). Participants further indicated
how they would feel in terms of self-esteem (i.e., I feel
good about myself; My self-esteem is high; I feel liked;
I feel insecure—reverse-scored; I feel satisfied; α= .79),
control (i.e., I feel powerful; I feel I have control of the
events; I feel I have the ability to significantly alter
events; I feel the others decided everything in my life
—reverse-scored; I feel I am unable to influence the ac-
tion of others—reverse-scored; α= .66), belongingness
(i.e., I feel I belong to my community; I feel I interact a
lot with people; I feel disconnected—reverse-scored; I
felt rejected—reverse-scored; I feel like an outsider—re-
verse-scored; α= .47), and meaningful existence (i.e., I
feel invisible—reverse-scored; I feel meaningless—re-
verse-scored; I feel non-existent—reverse-scored; I feel
important; I feel useful; α= .80). In particular, partici-
pants were asked to indicate how they might feel if they
were in the situation described in the vignette. Responses
were provided on 5-point scales ranging from 1 (not at
all)to5(extremely). Finally, participants were thanked
and debriefed.
Results and Discussion
First, a t-test confirmed that participants experienced
more schadenfreude in the competitive condition
(M=2.73, SD = 1.51) than in the non-competitive con-
dition (M=1.15, SD = 0.35), t(66) = 5.78, p= .001,
d=1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [0.87, 1.93].
3
Further, a MANOVA revealed a multivariate effect
of our manipulation on the basic psychological needs,
F(4, 62) = 7.36, p<.001, η2
p= 0.32 (see Table 1 for the
means and SD). Thus, at the univariate level, we found
that participants reported feeling greater self-esteem in
the competitive condition than in the non-competitive
condition, F( 1, 65) = 5.55, p=.02, η2
p=0.08. A greater
sense of control over events was reported in the com-
petitive condition than in the non-competitive condi-
tion, F(1, 65) = 18.44, p<.001, η2
p= 0.22. Participants
further reported a greater sense of belonging in the
competitive condition than in the non-competitive con-
dition, F(1, 65) = 9.35, p= .003, η2
p= 0.13. Participants
also reported a greater perception that their lives are
meaningful in the competitive condition than in the
non-competitive condition, F(1, 65) = 23.02, p<.001,
η2
p=0.26.
4
We next tested the hypothesized mediations consider-
ing each basic human need using a bootstrapping proce-
dure (Hayes, 2013; Preacher & Hayes, 2008). We found
that our manipulation (coded as non-competitive =0 and
competitive = 1) predicted self-esteem scores (B =0.43, SE,
standard error = 0.19, p=.03). Moreover, our manipula-
tion predicted schadenfreude (B = 1.54, SE = 0.27,
p<.001). When schadenfreude scores were included in
the regression equation, they predicted self-esteem scores
(B = 0.29, SE = 0.07, p= .004), whereas the direct effect of
the manipulation on self-esteem was no longer signifi-
cant (B = 0.03, SE = 0.21, p= .87). The analysis revealed
that the indirect effect via the mediator was significant
(B = 0.47, SE = 0.14, 95% CI = [0.22, 0.79], 5000
3
To assure that our manipulation triggered only schadenfreude and not
any kind of positive emotions, we randomly assigned 50 students
(M
age
=23.36, SD = 5.45) to one of the two conditions. After reading
this description, participants wereasked to indicate how they mightfeel
if they were in the situation described in the vignette in terms of scha-
denfreude, pride, and admiration. Results showed that participants ex-
perienced more schadenfreude in the competitive condition (M= 2.36,
SD = 1.02) than in the non-competitive condition(M=1.15,SD = 0.45),
t(48) = 5.79, p= .001. In contrast, our manipulation did not affect either
pride, t<1, p=.77, oradmiration, t<1, p= .50. Thus, confirming our
expectations, these findings show that the manipulation fostered only
schadenfreude rather than any positive emotions.
4
To providea more conservativetest of our hypothesis (i.e., that observ-
ing the failure of a competitor increases needs in comparison to a base-
line), we ran a follow up study in which participants (N= 75) were
randomly exposed either to the competitive condition or to a baseline
condition (i.e., participants were not exposed to any manipulation
and were asked to report their satisfaction of basic human needs). Re-
sults showed that participants reported feeling greater self-esteem in
the competitive condition (M=3.88, SD = 0.67) than in the baseline
condition (M= 2.97, SD = 0.87) , t(73) = 5.09, p<.01. A greater sense
of control over events was reported in the competitive condition
(M= 3.60, SD = 0.63) than in the baseline condition (M= 3.23,
SD = 0.63), t(72) = 2.78, p<.01. Participants further reported a greater
sense of belonging in the competitive condition (M=4.53, SD =0.49)
than in the baseline condition (M= 3.73, SD = 0.99), t(73) = 4.53,
p<.01. Participants also reported a greater perception that their lives
are meaningful in the competitive condition (M= 4.60, SD = 0.50) than
in the baseline condition (M=4.02, SD = 0.93), t(73) = 3 .78, p<.01.
Taken together, these findings suggest that the competitive condition
increased people’s reports of basic human need satisfaction compared
with a baseline.
Table 1. Means and standard deviations for each human need as a function of the event manipulation (Experiment 1)
Condition
Human needs
Self-esteem Control Belonging Meaningful existence
Competitive 3.03 (0.84)a 3.33 (0.71)a 3.85 (0.53)a 4.04 (0.50)a
Non-competitive 2.57 (0.73)b 2.65 (0.56)b 3.46 (0.50)b 3.28 (0.78)b
Note: Means with different letters in a given column are significantly different at p<.05. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.
M. Brambilla & P. RivaSelf-image and schaden freude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–41 1 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.402
bootstrap resamples) and that schadenfreude fully medi-
ated the relationship between the misfortune experi-
enced by a competitor and the subsequent reported
self-esteem.
5
We further found that our manipulation predicted
the control scores (B = 0.66, SE =0.15, p=.001). When
schadenfreude scores were included in the regression
equation, they predicted control scores (B = 0.30,
SE = 0.06, p= .001), whereas the direct effect of the
manipulation on control was no longer significant
(B = 0.18, SE =0.16, p=.28).Theindirecteffectviathe
mediator was significant (B = 0.48, SE =0.11, 95% CI=
[0.26, 0.73]), suggesting that schadenfreude fully media-
ted the relationship between the misfortune befalling a
competitor and the subsequent reported sense of control.
Regarding the sense of belonging, the analysis
revealed that our manipulation predicted belonging
scores (B = 0.37, SE =0.12, p= .004). When schaden-
freude scores were included in the regression equation,
they predicted the participants’belonging scores
(B = 0.14, SE =0.05, p= .01), whereas the direct effect
of the manipulation was no longer significant
(B = 0.14, SE =0.14,p= .31). Consistent with our predic-
tions, schadenfreude fully mediated the relationship be-
tween the misfortune experienced by a competitor and
the subsequent reported sense of belonging (B = 0.22,
SE = 0.10, 95% CI = [0.04, 0.43]). Finally, we found that
our manipulation predicted the meaningful existence
scores (B = 0.75, SE = 0.15, p<.001). When schaden-
freude scores were included in the regression equation,
they predicted the meaningful existence scores
(B = 0.17, SE =0.06, p= .01), whereas the direct effect
of the manipulation was reduced (B = 0.49, SE =0.18,
p= .01). The indirect effect was significant (B = 0.26,
SE = 0.08, 95% CI = [0.12, 0.44]), suggesting thus that
schadenfreude partially mediated the relationship be-
tween the misfortune that occurred to a competitor
and the subsequent perception of meaningful existence.
Taken together, these findings showed that partici-
pants reported more schadenfreude when a misfortune
occurred in a competitive circumstance rather than in a
non-competitive circumstance. Our data also showed
that a misfortune occurred to a competitor increased
people’s reports of basic human need satisfaction, in
terms of a greater perception of self-esteem, sense of
control, belongingness, and meaningful existence.
Moreover, schadenfreude mediated the effects of ob-
serving a misfortune befalling a competitor on the
subsequent satisfaction of human needs.
Experiment 2
Experiment 2 was designed to replicate the findings of
Experiment 1 by considering real situations. In particu-
lar, we asked a participant to recall an experience in
which a competitor suffered a misfortune and to report
how he or she felt in that specific situation (for a similar
procedure, Leach, Spears, & Manstead, 2015). This
helped us to go beyond expectations about the feelings
associated with others’misfortune and to investigate
real feelings experienced by individuals.
Method
Participants. Based on the same a priori power
analysis of Study 1, we recruited 81 students from the
University of Milano-Bicocca (84% female; M
age
= 22.09,
SD = 3.48) in an experimental design that was sub-
divided into two groups.
Materials and procedure. As a cover story, partic-
ipants were asked to participate in a study aimed at
defining the memory abilities to remember past events.
In the competitive condition (N= 38), partici pants were
asked to type in a text box the description of an experi-
ence in which they were in competition with a peer
who suffered a misfortune (i.e., “The present research
aims to explore your ability to remember past events.
In the space below please describe a recent event in
which a peer of yours whom you were competing
against suffered a misfortune”). In the non-competitive
condition (N= 43), participa nts w rote about an experi-
ence in which a peer suffered a misfortune (i.e., “[…]
In the space below please describe a recent event in
which a peer of yours suffered a misfortune”). Next,
participants were asked to indicate the extent to which
they felt schadenfreude during the recalled circum-
stance (i.e., I enjoyed what happened to that person; I
couldn’t resist a little smile; What happened to that per-
son amused me; I was happy about what happened;
α= .94) using 7-point scales, ranging from 1 (not at all)
to 7 (extremely). Finally, participants indicated how they
felt in the recalled episode in terms of self-esteem
(α= .78), control (α= .66), belongingnes s (α= .60), and
meaningful existence (α= .60) using the measures
employed in Experiment 1. Participants provided their
responses on 5-point scales, ranging from 1 (not at all)
to 7 (extremely).
Results and Discussion
Preliminary analyses revealed that most participants
recalled episodes related to sports or academic achieve-
ments. Participants in the non-competitive condition
did not mention competitive peers. In line with Experi-
ment 1, we found that participants experienced more
schadenfreude in the competitive condition (M=3.10,
SD = 1.82) than in the non-competitive condition
(M=1.28, SD =0.87), t(79) = 5.83, p= .001, d=1.29,
95% CI = [0.81, 1.77], Further, a MANOVA revealed a
multivariate effect of our manipulation on the basic psy-
chological needs, F(4, 7 3) = 4.31, p=.003, η2
p=0.19 (see
Table 2 for the means and SD). Thus, at the univariate
level, we found that participants reported a greater
5
In each study, we tested alternative models using the basic psycholog-
ical needs as the potential mediators and schadenfreude as the depen-
dent variable. However, none of these models fitted better than those
reported in the manuscript.
M. Brambilla & P. Riva Self-image and schadenfreude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 403
self-esteem in the competitive condition than in the
non-competitive condition, F(1,76) = 10.69, p= .002,
η2
p= 0.12. A greater sense of control over events was
reported in the competitive condition than in the
non-competitive condition, F(1,76) = 10.86, p= .001,
η2
p= 0.13. However, participants did not report a greater
sense of belonging in the competitive condition than in
the non-competitive condition, F<1, p= .80. In con-
trast, participants reported a greater perception that
their lives are meaningful in the competitive condition
than in the non-competitive condition, F(1, 76) = 5.66,
p=.02, η2
p=0.07.
6
We next tested the hypothesized mediations consid-
ering each basic human needs (Hayes, 2013; Preacher
& Hayes, 2008). We found that our manipulation
(coded as non-competitive = 0 and competitive =1) pre-
dicted self-esteem scores (B = 0.72, SE =0.21, p= .001).
Moreover, our manipulation predicted schadenfreude
(B = 1.88, SE = 0.32, p<.001). When schadenfreude
scores were included in the regression equation, they
predicted self-esteem scores (B = 0.25, SE =0.07,
p= .001), whereas the direct effect of the manipulation
on self-esteem was no longer significant (B = 0.2 5,
SE =0.23, p= .28). The analysis revealed that the indi-
rect effect via the mediator was significant (B = 0.47,
SE = 0.15, 95% CI = [0.21, 0.83]) and that schaden-
freude fully mediated the relationship between the mis-
fortune that occurred to a competitor and the
subsequent reported self-esteem. We further found that
our manipulation predicted the control scores (B =0.54,
SE =0.17, p= .002). When schadenfreude scores were
included in the regression equation, they predicted the
control scores (B = 0.28, SE =0.05, p=.001), whereas
the direct effect of the manipulation on control was no
longer significant (B = 0.0 3, SE =0.17, p= .86). Thus,
the indirect effect via the mediator was significant
(B = 0.51, SE = 0.14, 95% CI = [0.27, 0.83]), and scha-
denfreude fully mediated the relationship between the
misfortune that occurred to a competitor and the subse-
quent reported sense of control.
Regarding the sense of belonging, schadenfreude did
not mediate the relationship between the misfortune
that occurred to a competitor and the subsequent
reported sense of belonging (indirect effect via the
mediator, B = 0.05, SE = 0.11, 95% CI = [0.20, 0.26]).
Finally, we found that our manipulation predicted the
meaningful existence scores (B = 0.34, SE =0.15,
p= .03). When schadenfreude scores were included in
the regression equation, they predicted the meaningful
existence scores (B = 0.12, SE =0.05, p= .03), whereas
the direct effect of the manipulation was no longer sig-
nificant (B = 0.12, SE =0.18, p= .51). Schadenfreude
fully mediated the relationship between the misfortune
befalling a competitor and the subsequent perception
of meaningful existence (B = 0.22, SE = 0.10, 95%
CI = [0.05, 0.45] ).
Thus, these findings showed that participants experi-
enced more schadenfreude when a misfortune occurred
in a competitive circumstance rather than in a non-
competitive circumstance. In a similar vein, our data
show that a misfortune that occurred to a competitor
increased people satisfaction in terms of a greater
perception of self-esteem, sense of control, and mean-
ingful existence. Crucially, schadenfreude mediated
the effects of observing a misfortune befalling a compet-
itor on the subsequent satisfaction of human needs. In
other words, the more someone felt joy at another’s
misfortune, the more she or he reported a higher satis-
faction of basic human needs.
Experiment 3
Experiment 3 was designed to test our predictions by
going beyond recalled events and involving an ostensi-
bly real online interaction. Thus, in Experiment 3, we
developed a lab paradigm that engaged participants in
a task in which a competitor (vs. a non-competitor) suf-
fered a setback.
Method
Participants. Based on the same a priori power anal-
ysis, we recruited 50 students from the University of
Milano-Bicocca. However, seven participants expressed
6
An analysis of the content recalled by participants revealed that in the
competitive condition, participants recalled either misfortunes that
gave them a directadvantage (e.g., a sportcompetitor sufferedan injury
during a match) or misfortunes that did not give them any advantage
(e.g., a long lasting competitor failed an academic examination that
did not involve the participant). Supplementary analyses revealed that
participants reported the same level of self-esteem in the misfortune
with gain condition and in the misfortune without personal gain condi-
tion (t<1, p= .85). Similar findings emerged on the control (t<1,
p= .96), belonging (t<1.29, p= .20), and meaningful e xistence (t<1,
p= .50) scales. Moreover, a MANOVA including these two competitive
conditions and the non-competitive condition revealed a multivariate
effect of our manipulation on the basic psychological needs, F(4, 73)
=2.58, p=.01,η2
p= 0.12. At the univariate level, the effect was signifi-
cant for self-esteem, F(2, 75) = 5.38, p=.007, η2
p= 0.12, control,
F(2, 75) = 5.32, p= .007, η2
p= 0.12, and meaningful existence scores,
F(2, 75) = 3.23, p=.04,η2
p=0.07.
Table 2. Means and standard deviations for each human need as a function of the event manipulation (Experiment 2)
Condition
Human needs
Self-esteem Control Belonging Meaningful existence
Competitive 3.37 (0.97)a 3.36 (0.90)a 3.77 (0.69)a 3.83 (0.67)a
Non-competitive 2.68 (0.88)b 2.78 (0.63)b 3.73 (0.67)a 3.45 (0.74)b
Note: Means with different letters in a given column are significantly different at p<.05. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.
M. Brambilla & P. RivaSelf-image and schaden freude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–41 1 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.404
suspicions about the manipulation, and they were re-
moved from the analyses, leaving thus 43 participants
aged between 19 and 27 (M=21.56, SD = 2.20).
Materials and procedure. To induce the real on-
line interaction, we used a modified version of the com-
petitive reaction time task (Giancola & Parrott, 2008;
Giancola & Zeichner, 1995). In the modified version,
participants were told they would play a game on reac-
tion times with an opponent. They were also informed
that there would be two sets of opponents. Thus, partic-
ipant’s task was to compete with the opponent in her or
his own set. The cover story continued by informing
participants that the winner of each set would win €5.
Participants were informed that they would have to play
two rounds of the game with the same opponent. Im-
portantly, the outcomes of the two sets of opponents
were independent. Indeed, the sole purpose of includ-
ing a second set of opponents in the cover story was to
implement the control condition. The entire session
was video-taped using a webcam that was placed on
top of the participant’s computer screen.
Participants were then shown the interface of the
competitive reaction time game. Following the typical
procedure of the task, the experimenter explained to
participants that if they lost a trial, they would actually
hear a burst of noise through their headphones and
the noise level would be set by their opponent.
However, if they won a trial, their opponent would
hear the burst of noise set by them. Thus, participants
knew that they could set the noise level for their
opponent and that the opponent could set the noise
level for them.
Next, participants were shown the actual screen on
which they would play. They were first shown a learn-
ing trial. They were told that they had to click on a
square on the screen as soon as it turned red. Whoever
was the quickest to click the red square (i.e., the partic-
ipant or the opponent) would win the trial, and who-
ever clicked second would lose and hear the noise set
by the other person. The actual noise levels set by the
other person would also appear on the screen; there-
fore, the participant would always know which noise
level was set by the opponent in each trial. Unbe-
knownst to the participant, there was no real online
opponent.
When the participant was ready to start the competi-
tion, the experimenter made a fake phone call to make
sure that the supposed opponent was ready as well.
Then, a connection screen appeared on the participant’s
screen. On the connection screen, a series of messages
appeared in sequence to inform participants that they
were connected to the competition as part of the first
set of opponents, that their opponent was successfully
logged in, and that the two players of the other set of
opponents were also connected. Participants were
asked to indicate their names. Accordingly, players’
names appeared on the connection screen, so that
participants could see that their opponent was always
of the same sex.
Then, participants could play the first round of nine
trials. The task was pre-programmed to make the partic-
ipant lose five of nine trials. At the end of the first round
of competition, the ranking showing the results of the
first round of competition appeared on the screen.
Participants were shown the actual scores, and they
were informed that they had lost the first round of
competition against the competitor. Then, a second
connection screen appeared on the screen, ostensibly
to reconnect all participants in the second round of
competition. Participants could see that they were
successfully logged into the competition.
Next, participants were randomly assigned to one of
two experimental conditions. In the competitive condi-
tion, a message appeared saying that the participant’s
opponent could not be connected to the game owing
to a technical problem on his or her computer. Thus,
the failure of Internet connection represented a clear
misfortune because the opponent lost the chance to
win the money. In the non-competitive condition, a
similar message reported that one of the two players of
the other set of opponents could not be logged on. At
this point, the experimenter approached the participant
and read the messages on the computer screen. The ex-
perimenter informed the actual participants that they
would have to stop for a short while to determine how
to manage the issue, as all players (of both sets of oppo-
nents) should be connected before proceeding.
However, before leaving the experimental room, the
experimenter asked participants if they would be willing
to complete a short questionnaire for another study. In
this questionnaire, participants were asked to indicate
how they currently felt in terms of self-esteem
(α= .76), control (α= .50), belongingnes s (α= .78), and
meaningful existence (α=.66) using the same items
employed in Experiments 1 and 2. To accomplish the
cover story and avoid having participants guess the pur-
pose of the experiment, we did not include any item
measuring schadenfreude in this study. Indeed, the
inclusion of items such as “I enjoyed what happened
to the other student”would have been perceived as
suspicious by participants, and the misfortune would
have appeared unrealistic. After a few minutes, the
experimenter returned to the room to collect the
questionnaire, and participants were fully debriefed
about the aim of the experiment.
Results and Discussion
First, to test whether our new manipulation was able to
induce feelings of schadenfreude, we asked two inde-
pendent judges, who were blind to the hypotheses and
to the experimental conditions, to watch the videos
(without any audio) and to report the extent to which
each participant appeared to be enjoying himself orher-
self and smiling (i.e., looking at the video, please report
the extent to which the person in the video is enjoying
himself or herself; looking at the video, please report
the extent to which the person in the video is smiling).
Participants provided their answers on 7-point scales
M. Brambilla & P. Riva Self-image and schadenfreude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 405
ranging from 1 (not at all)to7(extremely). We used these
items (r=.80, p<.001) as an index of schadenfreude
(Boecker, Likowski, Pauli, & Weyers, 2015). In particu-
lar, the two judges analyzed only the section of each
video (60seconds long) in which the manipulation
occurred on the participants’screen (i.e., when the
participant realized the other’s misfortune). The evalua-
tions of the two judges have been averaged (r=.67,
p<.001). The analysis revealed that participants were
judged to experience more schadenfreude when the
misfortune occurred in a competitive circumstance
(M=3.17, SD = 1.20) than in the non-competitive
condition (M=2.42, SD =0.85), t(36)
7
=2.39, p= .03,
d= 0.72, 95% CI = [0.06, 1.38].
Next, in line with the findings reported in our prior
experiments, a MANOVA revealed a multivariate effect
of our manipulation on the basic psychological needs,
F(4, 36) = 4.48, p=.005, η2
p= 0.33 (see Table 3 for the
means and SD). Thus, at the univariate level, we found
that participants reported greater self-esteem in the
competitive condition than in the non-competitive
condition, F(1, 39) = 13.52, p= .001, η2
p= 0.25. A
greater sense of control over events was reported in
the competitive condition than in the non-competitive
condition, F(1, 39) = 5.93, p=.02,η2
p= 0.13. Mo reover,
participants reported a marginally greater sense of
belonging in the competitive condition than in the non-
competitive condition, F(1, 39) = 3.63, p=.06, η2
p=0.08.
Finally, participants reported a greater perception that
their lives are meaningful in the competitive condition
than in the non-competitive condition, F(1, 39) = 9.91,
p= .003, η2
p=0.20.
Although our findings confirmed that our manipula-
tion elicited schadenfreude, in Experiment 3, we did not
find that such a score of schadenfreude mediated the ef-
fects of observing a misfortune befalling a competitor on
the subsequent satisfaction of human needs. This might
be due to the fact that in Study 3, schadenfreude was
not reported by the participants themselves (thus
accounting for their self-reported basic needs) but was
inferred by third-party observers who rated each partic-
ipant’s facial expression. Indeed, observers might not
have been accurate enough to rate participants’subtle
smiling in order to account for the participants’subse-
quent basic need satisfaction. The possibility that partic-
ipants’facial expression could account for basic need
satisfaction elicited by our manipulation remains an
interesting topic; however, physiological recording of
participants’smiling (electromyography) should convey
a more precise test of this relationship.
Overall, these findings confirmed that a misfortune
that occurred to a competitor in an ostensibly real online
interaction elicited schadenfreude and increased people
satisfaction in terms of a greater perception of self-
esteem, sense of control, belonging, and meaningful
existence.
Experiment 4
Experiment 4 was designed to test whether the effects
we found in previous experiments arise from a misfor-
tune that benefits the observer or if they occur even
when the misfortune does not give the observer any di-
rect advantage. Indeed, in the first three experiments,
the competitor’s failure could have implied the partici-
pant’s victory. Therefore, the greater fulfillment of basic
needs and the greater schadenfreude we found in the
competitive condition might be due to the participants’
expectation of winning rather than the participants’
expectation of the other individual loosing. To address
this issue, in Experiment 4, we described a setback that
did not benefit the observer occurred to a competitive
(vs. non-competitive) peer and observed changes in
schadenfreude and need satisfaction.
Method
Participants. Based on the same a priori power
analysis, we recruited 73 students from the University
of Milano-Bicocca (57 female; M
age
= 21.92, SD = 4.48)
in an experimental design that was subdivided into
two groups.
Materials and procedure. Following the proce-
dure of Experiment 1, we employed two hypothetical
scenarios. In the competitive condition (N= 42), partici-
pants learned that a former university colleague with
whom they have been always in competition has been
selected for a job interview. Differently from Experi-
ment 1, the participant was not involved in the job
interview and did not compete directly with the other
individual to get the job. In the non-competitive
condition (N= 31), participants learned that a former
university colleague has been selected for a job inter-
view to fill a job position. In this condition, we did not
7
Owing to a technical problem, the webcam did not record five exper-
imental sessions.
Table 3. Means and standard deviations for each human need as a function of the event manipulation (Experiment 3)
Condition
Human needs
Self-esteem Control Belonging Meaningful existence
Competitive 3.88 (0.59)a 3.40 (0.34)a 4.26 (0.74)a 4.36 (0.37)a
Non-competitive 3.21 (0.56)b 3.06 (0.50)b 3.84 (0.66)b 3.97 (0.41)b
Note: Means with different letters in a given column are significantly different at p<.05. For the belonging scale, p= .06. Standard deviations are reported
in parentheses.
M. Brambilla & P. RivaSelf-image and schaden freude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–41 1 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.406
mention that the participant and the target person have
been in competition in the past. Next, we introduced the
misfortune information. Participants learned that the
other person missed the job interview because of a car
accident that occurred a couple of hours before the job
interview. Importantly, such a misfortune did not give
the observer any direct advantage because he or she
was not involved in any job interview. After reading this
description, we assessed participants’reactions to this
misfortune in terms of schadenfreude (α= .88), self-
esteem (α=.81), control (α= .84), belongingness
(α= .50), and meaningful existence (α= .78) following
the procedure of the previous three experiments.
Results and Discussion
First, we found that participants experienced more
schadenfreude in the competitive condition (M=3.66,
SD = 1.42) than in the non-competitive condition
(M= 1.70, SD =0.94), t(69) = 6.54, p=.001, d=1.57,
95% CI = [1.02, 2.10]. Furthermore, a MANOVA
revealed a multivariate effect of our manipulation on
the basic psychological needs, F(4, 67) = 2.79, p= .03,
η2
p=0.14(seeTable4forthemeansandSD). Thus, at
the univariate level, we found that participants reported
greater self-esteem in the competitive condition than in
the non-competitive condition, F(1, 70)= 10.12,
p=.002,η2
p= 0.12. A greater sense of control over events
was reported in the competitive condition than in the
non-competitive condition, F(1, 70) = 7.14, p= .00 9,
η2
p= 0.09. However, participants did not report a
greater sense of belonging in the competitive condi-
tion than in the non-competitive condition, F<1.59,
p= .21. In contrast, participants reported a greater per-
ception that their lives are meaningful in the compet-
itive condition than in the non-competitive condition,
F(1, 70) = 3.91, p=.05, η2
p= 0.05.
We next tested the hypothesized mediations consid-
ering each basic human needs (Hayes, 2013; Preacher
& Hayes, 2008). We found that our manipulation
(coded as control = 0 and experimental = 1) predicted self-
esteem scores (B = 0.63, SE = 0.19, p= .002). Moreover,
our manipulation predicted schadenfreude (B = 1.95,
SE = 0.29, p<.001). When schadenfreude scores were
included in the regression equation, they predicted
self-esteem scores (B = 0.32, SE = 0.02, p= .001),
whereas the direct effect of the manipulation on self-
esteem was no longer significant (B = 0.01, SE = 0.22,
p= .93). The analysis revealed that the indirect effect
via the mediator was significant (B = 0.62, SE = 0.17,
95% CI = [0.32, 1.02]) a nd that schadenfreude fully
mediated the relationship between the misfortune that
occurred to a competitor and the subsequent reported
self-esteem. We further found that our manipulation
predicted the control scores (B = 0.48, SE = 0.18,
p= .009). When schadenfreude scores were included in
the regression equation, they predicted the control
scores (B = 0.17, SE = 0.07, p= .02), whereas the direct
effect of the manipulation on control was no longer sig-
nificant (B = 0.15, SE = 0.23, p= .50). Thus, the indirect
effect via the mediator was significant (B = 0.32,
SE = 0.16, 95% CI = [0.04, 0.67]), a nd schadenfreude
fully mediated the relationship between the misfortune
that occurred to a competitor and the subsequent re-
ported sense of control. Regarding the sense of belong-
ing, schadenfreude mediated the relationship between
the misfortune that occurred to a competitor and the
subsequent reported sense of belonging (indirect effect
via the mediator, B = 0.18, SE = 0.08, 95% CI = [0.03,
0.35]) even if we did not find that our manipulation af-
fected the sense of belonging (Hayes, 2013). Finally, we
found that our manipulation predicted the meaningful
existence scores ( B = 0.37, SE = 0.18, p= .05). When
schadenfreude scores were included in the regression
equation, they predicted the meaningful existence
scores (B = 0.17, SE = 0.07, p= .02), whereas the direct
effect of the manipulation was no longer significant
(B = 0.04, SE = 0.23, p= .85). Schadenfreude fully
mediated the relationship between the misfortune
befalling a competitor and the subsequent perception
of meaningful existence (B = 0.33, SE = 0.16, 95%
CI = [0.02, 0.70]). Overall, these findings showed that a
misfortune that occurred to a competitor increased
schadenfreude and the fulfillment of basic needs, even
when such a misfortune did not provide any direct
advantage for the observer.
General Discussion
The word “schadenfreude”captures the malicious plea-
sure that people may feel when other individuals and
groups suffer a misfortune (Cikara & Fiske, 2013; Heider,
1958; Smith et al., 2009). Because extant research in this
area has investigated the circumstances that elicit scha-
denfreude, our understanding of the consequences of
such malicious pleasure is limited. Across four studies,
we investigated the psychological consequences of scha-
denfreude on four basic human needs shaping self-
image: self-esteem, sense of control, belongingness, and
meaningful existence. Experiment 1 revealed that when
Tab l e 4. Means and standard deviations for each human need as a function of the event manipulation (Experiment 4)
Condition
Human needs
Self-esteem Control Belonging Meaningful existence
Competitive 2.43 (0.90)a 2.00 (0.89)a 3.58 (0.51)a 2.17 (0.89)a
Non-competitive 1.81 (0.69)b 1.51 (0.55)b 3.41 (0.61)a 1.80 (0.61)b
Note: Means with different letters in a given column are significantly different at p<.05. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses.
M. Brambilla & P. Riva Self-image and schadenfreude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 407
a competitor incurred a misfortune, people reported in-
creased overall feelings of satisfaction of basic needs. Spe-
cifically, individuals reported greater self-esteem, an
enhanced sense of control, a greater sense of belonging,
and a greater perception that their lives are meaningful.
Moreover, Experiment 1 showed that schadenfreude
mediated the relationship between another person’ssuf-
fering and the subsequent enhanced self-view of the ob-
server. Thus, misfortune befalling a competitor increased
schadenfreude, which in turn led to a higher level of sat-
isfaction of the need for self-esteem, control, belonging,
and meaningful existence. Experiment 2 further corrob-
orated these findings by considering a different context.
While Experiment 1 considered hypothetical scenarios
(see van de Ven et al., 2015; Smith et al., 2009), Experi-
ment 2 considered real situations. In particular, we asked
participants to report how they felt after recalling an ex-
perience in which a competitor suffered a misfortune
(Leach et al., 2015). Results of this study offer further
support of our hypothesis. Indeed, recalling a misfortune
that occurred under competitive circumstances rather
than non-competitive circumstances raised schaden-
freude, which in turn led to a greater satisfaction of hu-
man needs in terms of self-esteem, control, and
meaningful existence in particular. In line with Experi-
ment 1, we found that the experience of schadenfreude
mediated the relationship between another person’ssuf-
fering and the subsequent reported self-view. Experi-
ment 3 corroborated that people felt schadenfreude and
were satisfied in terms of fundamental needs after ob-
serving the failure of another individual by considering
a lab paradigm in which a misfortune occurred to an os-
tensibly online competitor. Finally, Experiment 4
showed that when a misfortune befell a competitor,
schadenfreude and the fulfillment of basic needs in-
creased, even when the misfortune did not provide any
direct advantage for the observer.
Experiments 2 and 4 did not reveal a direct link
between another person’s suffering and the sense of
belonging. Indeed, Experiment 2 showed that recalling
another individual’s misfortune did not lead to a greater
perception of being connected to one’s community or to
an enhanced sense of belonging. In a similar vein,
Experiment 4 showed that imagining the failure of a
long-lasting competitor did not enhance the sense of
belonging (although schadenfreude mediated the rela-
tionship between our manipulation and the sense of
belonging). Even if we found such a link in the other
two studies, the pattern that we found in Experiments
2 and 4 suggests that the relationship between down-
ward comparison, schadenfreude, and the sense of be-
longing should be interpreted cautiously. The lack of
effect on belonging could reflect a possible dissociation
among the four psychological needs thatwe considered.
Indeed, there is an ongoing debate regarding the degree
of interdependency between these constructs (Williams,
2009). Scholars have argued that these four needs are
intrinsically connected to one another. For instance,
theory and research have shown that self-esteem may
simply reflect the degree of social connection that an
individual perceives (Leary et al., 1995). For that rea-
son, the four basic psychological needs are usually
highly correlated to one another (Williams, 2009).
Although it is outside the scope of the current investiga-
tion to settle this matter, downward social comparison
and schadenfreude might be cases in which some of
these psychological needs go hand in hand (i.e., self-
esteem, control, and meaningful existence), whereas
others do not (i.e., the need to belong). It should also
be noted that we considered an interpersonal context
rather than a group context. Given that the basic need
for belonging is closely connected to being part of a
group and a community (Williams, 2009), it is possible
that such a basic need would be more affected by the
group forms of downward comparison and schaden-
freude. This possibility might also explain why the
reliability of the scale used in Experiments 1 and 4 was
not fully satisfactory. Moreover, prior studies also
reported low alphas in relation with some of the
subscales of the basic needs satisfaction (e.g., Ren,
Wesselmann, & Williams, 2013). Thus, future studies
may address this issue by adopting different measures
of basic needs satisfaction and/or comparing interper-
sonal and group-based schadenfreude.
Taken together, these findings advance our under-
standing of the psychological consequences of schaden-
freude. Indeed, our studies are the first to show that
schadenfreude increases satisfaction of the psychologi-
cal basic needs that shape self-image. Although past
research revealed that self-evaluation threats and low
self-esteem are key factors contributing to schadenfreude
(Van Dijk, Ouwerkerk, et al., 2011; Van Dijk, Van
Koningsbruggen, et al., 2011), no prior work has investi-
gated whether individuals have a stronger self-image af-
ter experiencing schadenfreude. Thus, complementing
prior evidence, we showed that feeling pleased after an-
other person experiences a setback increases one’sself-
esteem, which is a crucial component of self-image
(Williams, 2009). Going beyond self-esteem, we further
revealed that the malicious pleasure following another’s
misfortune affected other aspects of self-image. First,
feeling pleased about another person’s setback increases
the perception of feeling meaningful and important.
We showed that in a competitive setting, observing a
competitor’s misfortune causes people to perceive that
their lives are more meaningful. Second, we found that
observing the failure of another individual and feeling
joy about his or her misfortune affect one’ssenseof
power and the perception of influencing events. Thus,
schadenfreude leads people to perceive greater feelings
of control. Third, we found that observing the failure of
another individual tends to increase the feeling of being
socially connected and enhances the sense of belonging.
In sum, extending prior findings that have mainly
considered the circumstances eliciting schadenfreude,
we showed how such malicious pleasure affects social
relations. In a similar vein, by showing that feeling
pleasure at others’misfortune positively influences one’s
self-image, we may have partially explained why this
emotion is commonly felt in interpersonal and intergroup
M. Brambilla & P. RivaSelf-image and schaden freude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–41 1 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.408
relations. In considering the effects of schadenfreude on
the basic human needs that shape self-image, our
research not only extends prior findings on the conse-
quences of schadenfreude but also connects the literature
on this emotion with theory and research on the satisfac-
tion and frustration of basic psychological needs.
As they stand, our findings have also implications for
the self-enhancement literature. Indeed, a good deal of
work has shown that personal success and positive so-
cial emotions (e.g., pride) increase self-image, including
self-esteem (Williams & DeSteno, 2008; Williams &
DeSteno, 2009). Our findings complement such prior
evidence by showing that a less social desirable emotion
resulting from the misfortune of another individual
(i.e., schadenfreude) has a similar self-enhancement
function. Based on this, an interesting avenue for future
research would be to explore whether the increased
self-worth resulting from personal success and by an-
other setback might promote similar or different long
term effects.
More generally, our findings provide a novel
contribution to the literature on downward social
comparison. Indeed, while a good deal of work has
shown that downward social comparisons promote
self-enhancement (Collins, 1996; Gibbons & Gerrard,
1989; Morse & Gergen, 1970; Wills, 1981), our data
are the first showing that schadenfreude is one factor
driving the effects of downward social comparisons
evoked by another’s misfortune on self-image.
We acknowledge that our findings are based on
measures that were largely developed and framed to
investigate how social threats—such as ostracism, social
exclusion, rejection, and loneliness—can frustrate
attempts to achieve basic psychological needs (Gerber
& Wheeler, 2009). Nevertheless, past research has
shown that other type of threats (i.e., physical pain)
can affect the satisfaction of this set of basic needs
(e.g., Riva et al., 2011). In line with previous theoriza-
tion (Williams, 2009), we contend that this set of basic
needs, although it may not represent an exhaustive
description of the full range of psychological human
needs, represents the core of fundamental needs of
human psychology. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that
past research has primarily focused on how situational
factors can frustrate attempts to satisfy these four needs
(for a meta-analysis, see Gerber & Wheeler, 2009). In
contrast, our findings suggest one situational factor that
enhances the satisfaction of these four needs. Future
research should further investigate the psychological
consequences of schadenfreude by considering a differ-
ent and/or larger set of basic human needs (e.g., “safety”
or “predictability”) and a larger variety of responses. In a
similar vein, it would be beneficial to investigate the
long-lasting effects of schadenfreude on self-image,
even comparing how negative and positive events that
befall a competitor affect an individual’s self-worth over
time. Indeed, our studies are the first investigating the
psychological consequences of schadenfreude and sys-
tematically show how such malicious pleasure affects
self-image. Clearly, more research is needed to further
investigate the influence of schadenfreude on social
relationships, and we hope that the present data will
be a step on that path.
References
Allen, A. B., & Badcock, P. B. (2003). The social risk hypoth-
esis of depression: Evolutionary, psychosocial, and neuro-
biological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin,129,887–913.
Baumeister, R. F. (1991). The meaning of life. New York, NY:
Guilford.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong:
Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental
human motivation. Psychological Bulletin,117,497–529.
Boecker, L., Likowski, K. U., Pauli, P., & Weyers, P. (2015).
The face of schadenfreude: Differentiation of joy and
schadenfreude by electromyography. Cognition and Emo-
tion,29, 1117–1125.
Burger, J. M. (1992). Desire for control: Personality, social, and
clinical perspectives. New York, NY: Plenum.
Cikara, M., Bruneau, E., Van Bavel, J. J., & Saxe, R. (2014).
Their pain gives us pleasure: How intergroup dynamics
shape empathic failures and counter-empathic responses.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,55,110–125.
Cikara, M., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). Stereotypes and schaden-
freude: Behavioral and physiological markers of pleasure
at others’misfortunes. Social Psychological and Personality
Science,3,63–71.
Cikara, M., & Fiske, S. T. (2013). Their pain, our pleasure:
Stereotype content and schadenfreude. Annals of the New
York Academy of Sciences,1299,52–59.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral
sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of up-
ward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychological
Bulletin,119,51–69.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-
determination in human behaviour. New York, NY: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’and ‘why’of
goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination
of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry,11,227–268.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007).
G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program
for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior
Research Methods,39,175–191.
Feather, N. T., & Sherman, R. (2002). Envy, resentment,
schadenfreude, and sympathy: Reactions to deserved and
undeserved achievement and subsequent failure. Personal-
ity and Social Psychology Bulletin,28,953–961.
Gerber, J. & Wheeler, L. (2009). On being rejected: Ameta-
analysis of experimental research on rejection. Perspectives
on Psychological Science 4,468–488.
Giancola, P., & Parrott, D. (2008). Further evidence for the
validity of the Taylor aggression paradigm. Aggressive
Behavior,34,214–229.
Giancola, P. R., & Zeichner, A. (1995). Construct validity of a
competitive reaction-time aggression paradigm. Aggressive
Behavior,21,199–204.
Gibbons, F. X., & Gerrard, M. (1989). Effects of upward and
downward social comparison on mood states. Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology,8,14–31.
M. Brambilla & P. Riva Self-image and schadenfreude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 409
Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S. (1986). The
causes and consequences of the need for self-esteem: A
terror management theory. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), Pub-
lic Self and Private Self (pp. 189–212). New York, NY:
Springer-Verlag.
Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations.New
York, NY: Wiley.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). An introduction to mediation, moderation,
and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Kreger, D. W. (1995). Self-esteem, stress, and depression
amonggraduatestudents.Psychological Reports,76,345–346.
Lachman, M. E., & Weaver, S. L. (1998). The sense of control
as a moderator of social class differences in health and
well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74,
763–773.
Myoshi, K. (2001). Depression associated with physical ill-
ness. Japanese Medical Association Journal,44,279–282.
Morse, S., & Gergen, K. J. (1970). Social comparison, self-
consistency, and the concept of self. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,40,624–634.
Leach, C. W., & Spears, R. (2008). A vengefulness of the im-
potent: The pain of ingroup inferiority and schadenfreude
toward a successful outgroup. Journal of Personality and So-
cial Psychology,95,1383–1396.
Leach, C. W., & Spears, R. (2009). Dejection at in-group de-
feat and schadenfreude toward second- and third-party
out-groups. Emotion,9,659–665.
Leach, C. W.,Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2015). Parsing
(malicious) pleasures: Schadenfreude and gloating at
others’adversity. Frontiers in Psychology,6.
Leach, C. W., Spears, R., Branscombe, N. R., & Doosje, B.
(2003). Malicious pleasure: Schadenfreude at the suffering
of another group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
84,923–943.
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D.L.
(1995). Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor:The
sociometer hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology,68,518–530
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York:
Harper
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (1984). Causal explanations
as a risk factor for depression: Theory and evidence. Psycho-
logical Review,91,347–374.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resam-
pling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects
in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods,40,
879–891.
Ren, D., Wesselmann, E. D., & Williams, K. D. (2013). Inter-
dependent self-construal moderates coping with (but not
the initial pain of) ostracism. Asian Journal of Social Psychol-
ogy,16,320–326.
Riva, P., Wirth, J., & Williams, K. D. (2011). The consequences
of pain: The social and physical pain overlap on psychological
responses. European Journal of Social Psychology,41,681–687.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1997). Self-evaluation: To
thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure, to thine
own self be true, and to thine own self be better. In M. P.
Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol.
29, pp. 209–269). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Seligman,M.E.P.(1975).Helplessness: On depression, develop-
ment, and death. San Francisco, CA: Freeman & Co.
Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). The psychology of
self-defense: Self-affirmation theory. In M. P. Zanna
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 38,
pp. 183–242). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Smith, R. H. (2000). Assimilative and contrastive emotional
reactions to upward and downward social comparisons.
In Handbook of social comparison (pp. 173–200). New York,
NY: Springer.
Smith, R. H. (2013). The joy of pain: Schadenfreude and the dark
side of human nature. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Smith, R. H., Eyre, H. L., Powell, C. A., & Kim, S. H. (2006).
Relativistic origins of emotional reactions to events hap-
pening to others and to ourselves. British Journal of Social
Psychology,45,357–371.
Smith, R. H., Powell, C. A., Combs, D. J. Y., & Schurtz, D. R.
(2009). Exploring the when and why of schadenfreude.
Social and Personality Psychology Compass,3(4), 530–546.
Smith, R. H., Turner, T. J., Garonzik, R., Leach, C. W., Urch-
Druskat, V., & Weston, C. M. (1996). Envy and schaden-
freude.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,25,158–168.
Sorkin, D., Rook, K. S., & Lu, J. L. (2002). Loneliness, lack of
emotional support, lack of companionship, and the likeli-
hood of having a heart condition in an elderly sample. An-
nals of Behavioral Medicine,24,290–298.
Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustain-
ing the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Stern, A. E., Lynch, D. L., Oates, R. K., O’Toole, B. I., &
Cooney, G. (1995). Self-esteem, depression, behaviour
and family functioning in sexually abused children. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,36,1077–1089.
vandeVen,N.,Hoogland,C.E.,Smith,R.H.,VanDijk,W.W.,
Breugelmans, S. M., & Zeelenberg, M. (2015). When envy
leads to schadenfreude. Cognition and Emotion,29,1007–1025.
van Beest, I., Williams, K. D., & Van Dijk, E. (2011).
Cyberbomb: Effects of being ostracized from a death game.
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,14,581–596.
Van Dijk, W. W., Ouwerkerk, J. W., Goslinga, S., & Nieweg,
M. (2005). Deservingness and schadenfreude. Cognition &
Emotion,19,933–939.
Van Dijk, W. W., Ouwerkerk, J. W., Goslinga, S., Nieweg, M.,
& Gallucci, M. (2006). When people fall from grace:
Reconsidering the role of envy in schadenfreude. Emotion,
6,156–160.
VanDijk,W.W.,Ouwerkerk,J.W.,Smith,R.H.,&Cikara,M.
(2015). The role of self-evaluation and envy in schaden-
freude. European Review of Social Psychology,26, 247–282.
Van Dijk, W. W., Ouwerkerk, J. W., Wesseling, Y. M., & Van
Koningsbruggen, G. M. (2011). Towards understanding
pleasure at the misfortunes of others: The impact of self-
evaluation threat on schadenfreude. Cognition and Emotion,
25,360–368.
Van Dijk, W. W., Van Koningsbruggen, G. M., Ouwerkerk, J.
W., & Wesseling, Y. M. (2011). Self-esteem, self-
affirmation, and schadenfreude. Emotion,11,1145–1149.
Williams, L. A., & Desteno, D. (2009). Pride: Adaptive social
emotion or seventh sin? Psychological Science,20,284–288.
Williams, L. A., & DeSteno, D. (2008). Pride and persever-
ance: The motivational role of pride. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,94,1007–1017.
M. Brambilla & P. RivaSelf-image and schaden freude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–41 1 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.410
Williams, K. D. (2009). Ostracism: A temporal need-threat
model. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology (pp. 279–314). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K., & Choi, W. (2000).
Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignored over the Internet.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,79,748–762.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social
psychology. Psychological Bulletin,90,245–271.
Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social com-
parisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin,106,
231–248.
M. Brambilla & P. Riva Self-image and schadenfreude
European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (2017) 399–411 Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 411
