Content uploaded by Yaniv Efrati
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Yaniv Efrati on Oct 18, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
The sense of relational entitlement among adolescents
toward their parents (SREap) eTesting an adaptation of the
SRE
Rami Tolmacz, Yaniv Efrati, Boaz M. Ben-David
*
Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Herzliya, Israel
article info
Article history:
Keywords:
Sense of entitlement
Adolescenteparent relationship
Wellbeing
Attachment
abstract
The quality of the adolescenteparent relationship is closely related to the adolescent's
sense of entitlement. Study 1 (458 central-Israel adolescents, 69% girls, ages: 11e16)
developed the sense of relational entitlement among adolescents toward their parents
(SREap, adapted from the original SRE on adults' romantic relationships) and provided
initial validity evidence of its three-factor structure: exaggerated, restricted and assertive
ereplicating the SRE's factor structure. Studies 2e5 (1237 adolescents, 56% girls) exam-
ined the link between the SREap factors and relevant psychological measures. Exaggerated
and restricted SREap factors were associated with attachment insecurities. Restricted and
exaggerated entitlement factors were related to higher levels of emotional problems, and
lower levels of: wellbeing, positive mood and life satisfaction. Conversely, assertive enti-
tlement was related to higher life satisfaction and self-efficacy and lower levels of
emotional problems. The findings also indicate that SREap is not merely a form of
narcissism. The implications of SREap are discussed.
©2016 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier
Ltd. All rights reserved.
A person's sense of entitlement ethe subjective perception of what one deserves in a specific situation eis a subject
which in recent years has received an increasing amount of attention in psychological discourse and research. Individuals'
sense of entitlement influences their interactions and attitudes in a wide range of contexts, depending on the subjective
significance ascribed to them; it is considered an element of every interpersonal relationship (Spiegel, 1987) and an essential
aspect affecting the way we conduct our daily lives (Solomon &Leven, 1975). However, the quality and intensity of
entitlement-related feelings experienced in certain kinds of close relationships appear tobe unique. As these relationships are
by their very nature characterized by a high level of intimacy, they generate wants, needs and expectations of the sort we
would not expect to find in other, less intimate relationships. Among these, the adolescenteparent relationship is an
intersubjective field especially prone to raise issues of entitlement.
In the past decade, there have been a large number of studies focusing on the general sense of entitlement during
adolescence. Excessive or exploitative entitlement has been associated with socially maladaptive dispositions and behaviors,
such as greediness, aggression, poor work ethic, lack of financial responsibility, and reduced concern for the well-being of
*Corresponding author. Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, P.O. Box 167, Herzliya, 4610101, Israel. Fax: þ972 9
9602845.
E-mail address: boaz.ben.david@idc.ac.il (B.M. Ben-David).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Adolescence
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jado
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.09.003
0140-1971/©2016 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140
others (Beutler &Gudmunson, 2012; Lessard, Greenberger, Chen, &Farruggia, 2011). Non-exploitative or healthy entitlement
has been, by contrast, related to higher self-esteem (Lessard, Greenberger, Chen, et al., 2011), greater happiness, and the
development of fewer pathological symptoms (Rothman &Steil, 2012). General entitlement in adolescents has also been
linked with attachment orientations. Rothman and Steil (2012) found that there were associations between insecure
attachment and exaggerated entitlement, and between secure attachment and non-exaggerated entitlement. Nevertheless, to
the best of our knowledge, no study thus far has investigated adolescents' sense of entitlement towards their parent(s) as a
separate measure (see, however, the study by Beutler &Gudmunson, 2012, on quantifying the amount of money affluent
adolescents feel entitled to).
The goal of the current series of studies was to adapt the validated “sense of relational entitlement”scale (SRE, Tolmacz &
Mikulincer, 2011)ewhich measures entitlement in adult romantic relationships eto a new self-report scale tapping adaptive
and maladaptive manifestations of the sense of relational entitlement among adolescents towards their parents (SREap). In
addition, the current study aimed to provide initial validity evidence about the scale's factor structure, and to examine the
associations between SREap factors and personality and emotion-related variables.
Developmental perspectives on entitlement
For many years, the sense of relational entitlement (SRE) was mainly understood in pathological terms, as a diagnostic
criterion for a narcissistic personality disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2000) and as a component of psychopathy
(Hare, 1999). An alternative perspective was suggested by a number of authors, who conceptualized the sense of entitlement
in terms of attachment theory (Tolmacz, 2011; Wolfe &Bailey, 2003). These authors argued that the unique manner in which
the primary caregivers respond to the infants' appeals indicates to the infants how entitled they are, and establishes the
nature of their future sense of entitlement. According to this perspective, one's sense of entitlement is conceived as a part of
his/her internal working models. As such, the sense of entitlement is influential throughout one's life, especially in the context
of intimate relationships. In keeping with this perspective, one's sense of entitlement is no longer understood inpathological
terms only. Instead, it is considered to be a universal phenomenon, encompassing both the pathological and the healthy
assertion of needs and rights. On the one hand, entitlement can be adaptive, when it is assertive ewhen people can real-
istically appraise what they can expect from others and assertively stand up for their preferences. On the other hand, enti-
tlement can be less adaptive, when it is exaggerated ewhen people believe that they deserve to have all of their needs and
wishes fulfilled regardless of others' feelings and needs; or when it is restricted ewhen people are reluctant to express their
needs and wishes as if doubting their right to have them. Both exaggerated entitlement and restricted entitlement have been
considered to be defenses against psychic pain, reflections of an impaired sense of self-esteem, and the result of frustrating
interactions (Kriegman, 1983; Levin, 1970; Moses &Moses-Hrushovski, 1990).
Conceptualizing the sense of entitlement in terms of attachment theory implies the important role it plays during
adolescence, as children continue to rely on their parental figures as a secure base from which to explore and form new
intimate relationships outside of the family (Allen &Land, 1999). The adolescents' expectations that their wishes and needs
will be fulfilled by their parents may play a significant role in primary areas of psychological functioning, as the paren-
teadolescent relationship has a great influence on the adolescent's future well-being and emotional adjustment (Sund &
Wichstrøm, 2002). For example, adolescents' assertion of independence ea central aspect of their sense of entitlement e
is likely to lead to a renegotiation of parentally imposed restrictions, and to fundamentally affect the nature of the paren-
teadolescent relationship (Youniss &Smollar, 1985). If these relationship transformations and conflicts over everyday issues
are negotiated in an atmosphere of closeness and support, they help the adolescents achieve individuation: a key task of
adolescence. Inevitably, these relationships are profoundly influenced by adolescents' specific internal working models.
Measuring the sense of entitlement
In the past, an exaggerated sense of entitlement was considered to be an aspect of narcissism (Emmons, 1984). However,
growing interest in the topic led to the recognition that the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI, Raskin &Hall, 1979) was an
inadequate measure for entitlement. Specifically, items in the NPI entitlement subscale failed to load on a single, differen-
tiated factor (Emmons, 1984), lacked face validity, and had low reliability and a relative shortage of items (Campbell, Bonacci,
Shelton, Exline, &Bushman, 2004). There is also a theoretical basis for making this distinction. Narcissistic attitudes usually
imply a grandiose sense of self. By contrast, in many cases, people's entitlement demands may be based on a feeling of wrongs
done to them in the past efor instance, congenital diseases or disabilities, as Freud mentioned as early as 1916 (Freud,1963)e
rather than a grandiose sense of self. These distinctions prompted the development of two independent scales of a general
sense of entitlement: The Entitlement Attitude Scale (Nadkarni &Malone, 1989), and the Psychological Entitlement Scale
(Campbell et al., 2004). These scales are based on the conceptualization that “a sense of entitlement […] is experienced across
situations”(Campbell et al., 2004; p. 32).
Other purviews consider entitlement to be dependent on the specific situation or relationship (e.g., academic entitlement,
Chowning &Campbell, 2009) and the subjective meaning one attributes to it (Kriegman, 1983; Moses &Moses-Hrushovski,
1990). Recently, Tolmacz and Mikulincer (2011) developed and validated the SRE scale, measuring via 33 items one's sense of
entitlement in adult romantic relationships. Their findings indicated that one's SRE in close relationships must be measured
separately from one's narcissism and general sense of entitlement. A series of factor analyses revealed that the SRE scale was
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0128
organized around three main factors: exaggerated, assertive, and restricted. Higher scores on the exaggerated and restricted
factors were related to a larger extent of emotional difficulties and attachment insecurities, a lower extent of adaptive per-
sonality dispositions and a lower sense of well-being. Conversely, higher scores on the assertive factor were related to more
positive aspects of personality dispositions (Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011).
The current research
The current research includes five different studies. Study 1 describes the development and initial validation of a self-
report scale aimed at examining individual differences in the SREap (the sense of relational entitlement of adolescents to-
wards their parents). We defined SREap as the manifestations of adolescents' expectations that their relational wishes and
needs would be fulfilled by their parents, as well as their affective and cognitive responses to their parents' failures to meet
these wishes and needs. The SREap scale was adapted from the SRE scale (Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011), refining, removing
and adding items to fit the target population. Study 1 also provides initial data about the factor structure of the SREap scale
and the extent to which it replicates the three-factor structure of the original SRE scale. The subsequent four studies examined
the link between the three SREap factors and relevant personality and mental health constructs. Given existing evidence that
boys and girls may exhibit different relationship patterns (Gorrese &Ruggieri, 2012), gender differences were examined
across all studies.
In Study 2, we examined the association between adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their parents and
attachment. We adopted the theoretical conceptualization of the sense of entitlement as an aspect of one's internal working
models (Kingshott, Bailey, &Wolfe, 2004; Rothman &Steil, 2012; Tolmacz 2011;Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011), acknowledging
the important role played by entitlement expectations in the quality of the adolescenteparent relationship and its influence
on future relationships (Collins, Maccoby, Steinberg, Hetherington, &Bornstein, 2000). Keeping with these ideas, it can be
assumed that when one's attachment needs are not optimally met, attachment insecurities (anxiety, avoidance) together with
doubts concerning the sense of entitlement may arise. We thus hypothesized that attachment insecurities would be asso-
ciated with exaggerated and restricted SREap, as they were in the original SRE by Tolmacz and Mikulincer (2011).
In Study 3, we examined the associations between SREap and measures of narcissism, an examination based on thewidely
known notion that one's sense of entitlement is closely related to the construct of narcissism (Emmons, 1984; Exline,
Baumeister, Bushman, Campbell, &Finkel, 2004; Miller et al., 2011). However, when this link was tested experimentally,
evidence suggested that entitlement was not merely an aspect of narcissism, but rather a separate psychological construct
(Campbell et al., 2004; Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011). Study 3 also examined the association between SREap and measures of
self-esteem, a variable closely associated both with narcissism and entitlement. Specifically, healthy self-esteem was related
to one's adaptive entitlement feelings (Orenstein, 1994), whereas lower levels of self-esteem were associated with both
inflated and restricted sense of entitlement (Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011). In keeping with the evidence presented above,
which pertained to an adult population, we hypothesized that the SREap would be only moderately related to narcissism. We
also expected adaptive SREap to be related to high levels of self-esteem, while we expected maladaptive SREap to be related to
low levels of self-esteem.
The association between adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their parents and adolescents' emotional
difficulties was examined in Studies 4 and 5. These links have previously been tested among adults. For example, the sense of
entitlement among adults has been linked with depression (Halvorsen, Wang, Eisemann, &Waterloo, 2010; McGinn, Cukor, &
Sanderson, 2005), and anxiety (Muris, 2006; Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011). Recently, Grubbs and Exline (2016) concluded that
exaggerated entitlement renders an individual more vulnerable to an ongoing sense of unmet expectations, to a threatened
ego, and to a sense of perceived injustice, all of which may lead to psychological distress. It is reasonable to assume that when
adolescents' expectations are not responded to adequately, the adolescents will experience emotional difficulties, which may
as a result, interfere with the establishment of their healthy sense of entitlement. Hence, we hypothesized that imbalanced
SREap will be associated with measures of anxiety and depression.
Study 5 also examined the association between SREap and self-efficacy, two constructs that seem to be inversely related.
Individuals with high self-efficacy have been shown to be confident in their ability to effectively problem-solve and achieve
their desired outcomes (Bandura, 1977). At the other end of the spectrum, a tendency to externalize responsibility (low self-
efficacy) is seen as the essence of exaggerated entitlement (Chowning &Campbell, 2009). For example, academic entitlement
has been found to be inversely related to college course self-efficacy (Boswell, 2012). Similarly, when tested in the context of
parentechild relationships, parental behavior that emphasized control over the child has been associated with the child's
diminished self-efficacy and exaggerated psychological entitlement (Givertz &Segrin, 2014). We hypothesized that we would
find comparable links between SREap and measures of self-efficacy.
Studies 1e5egeneral procedure
In all five studies, we implemented the same method to distribute questionnaires to schoolchildren. Several research
assistants approached parents of children ages 11e16 years who resided in central Israel and were enrolled in middle school.
Using the snowball sampling method, these parents were asked to contact other parents and refer them to the research
assistants. No monetary reward was offered. Informed consent was obtained from both parents and their children in
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140 129
accordance with the Institutional Ethics Board. The vast majority (>90%) of participants (in all five studies) were born in Israel
and reported an average or above average socio-economic status.
Study 1 eDeveloping the SREap scale
The goal of Study 1 was to adapt the SRE scale to the adolescenteparent relationship, to develop the SREap scale, and to
provide initial validity evidence on its factor structure. We hypothesized that, as with the adult-romantic-relationship SRE
scale, factor structure would be organized around assertive, exaggerated and restricted factors of entitlement.
Method
Participants
Participants consisted of 458 schoolchildren (69% of whom were girls), ages 11e16 years (M¼13.65, SD ¼.68).
Measures
Entitlement. The items were adapted from the original SRE (we used 22 of the original 33 items, excluding items that
were specifictoromanticrelationships,e.g.,“I deserve to get in my relationship things I was deprived of in prior re-
lationships”,seeTable1inTolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011), with romantic relationship descriptions altered to parent-
adolescent descriptions. For example: “When my partner frustrates me, I contemplate ending the relationship”was
changed to “When my parent sfrustrate me, I so metimes thin k of running away from home.”Sixteen additional items were
included to encompass the SREap theme. All of the items (adapted and new) were reviewed by three clinical psychologists
who specialize in treating adolescents. Heeding their advice, ratings were done on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at
all)to5(very much), rather than a 7-point scale as was used in the original SRE, in order to simplify the procedure for the
adolescent population. The same anchors as used in the Hebrew version of the SRE were used here.
Then, in order to ensure that items and testing procedures were clear, a preliminary version of the scale was admin-
istered to a sample of 80 adolescents, who were taken from the same sampling pool as described in Studies 1e5 (note, Study
1 participants were not included in anyof the subsequent studies; in fact, there was no overlap whatsoever between study
participants in any of the five studies). Upon completion, a brief interview was conducted to verify that items and testing
procedures were well understood. This process led to a further simplification of the language used in the items.
Results
In order to determine the ideal number of factors to retain in exploratory factor analysis, we employed a parallel analysis
(Ledesma &Valero-Mora, 2007). The principal component analysis with oblique rotation indicated a three-factor solution, in
accordance with our hypothesis. Next, we used Winsteps software to estimate the effectiveness of each item in distinguishing
between participants, as well as to locate itemswith multiple loadings. In this step, we dropped 15 items with lowloadings (<.4),
multiple loadings or low discriminate ability, from the original 38-item scale. The final SREap comprised 23 items (see Table 1).
Table 1
Item loadings of the SREap (Study 1).
Item Exaggerated Restricted Assertive
7 When my parents hurt me, I immediately feel I cannot trust them .79
9 Sometimes I have a lot of criticisms of my parents .74
6 I spend a lot of time thinking about my parents' weaknesses .69
12 I feel I do not deserve to be frustrated by my parents .68
11 When my parents frustrate me I get very angry .65
23 Sometimes I'm more angry with my parents than with other people .64
5 When my parents make me angry I sometimes regret the fact that I don't have other parents .63
19 When my parents frustrate me, I sometimes think of running away from home .62
8 I often feel my parents deserve a better child than me .76
15 I think my parents deserve a more successful child than me .74
22 Sometimes I feel I'm not good enough for my parents .64
16 I often ask myself whether I deserve such great parents .54
20 Sometimes, I think my parents love me more than I deserve .53
14 Usually, when my parents compliment me I believe I deserve the compliment .49
18 I feel my parents deserve more than they get from me .46
2 I cannot let go of the expectations I have of my parents .62
3 My parents need to take care of my basic needs .60
21 I'm not willing to forgo what I deserve to get from my parents .56
4 I expect my parents to pay lots of attention to me .54
13 I cannot make a compromise about my expectations of my parents .53
10 My parents have to give me enough attention .53
17 When I have problems, my parents should help me .52
1 I have high expectations of my parents .50
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0130
In sum, we developed a 23-item SREap scale (see Appendix). The Appendix also includes a list of the items that were
removed from the original SRE scale, the items that were revised from the original SRE scale, and the items that were added to
the current version of the scale. As with the factor structure of the original SRE scale, three factors (averaged across relevant
items) tapped three main entitlement factors: (1) Items in the exaggerated factor (eight items) tap the adolescent's unrealistic
expectations of the extent to which his/her parents would attend tohis/her needs and wishes, and the adolescent's sensitivity
and responsiveness to parents' falling short on such expectations (e.g., “I feel I do not deserve to be frustrated by my par-
ents”). (2) Items in the restricted factor (seven items) tap the adolescent's feeling that he/she does not merit an adequate
amount of care from his/her parents (e.g., “I often feel my parents deserve a better child than me ”). (3) Items in the assertive
factor (eight items) tap the adolescent's confidence in his/her right to receive an adequate amount of parental care (e.g., “My
parents need to take care of my basic needs”). Means, standard deviations, Cronbach's alphas and inter-correlations for the
three SREap factors in this study are presented in the top panel of Table 2.
It should be noted that the SREap has a smaller number of items than the SRE, to make the questionnaire less daunting for
the adolescent population. In the process of reducing the number of items, we were very careful to ensure that final items
were represented proportionally across the different factors (7e8 items in each factor), and that the meaning of the factors
remained intact, avoiding “construct underrepresentation”(see, American Educational Research Association, American
Psychological Association, &National Council on Measurement in Education, 2014). In the following four studies, multi-
regression analyses were conducted to examine the unique and non-overlapping effect of each of the sense of entitlement
factors on the main study measures.
Study 2 eSREap, attachment and life satisfaction
In Study 2, we examined the link between SREap factors and attachment orientations, in keeping with the original SRE
study. In that original SRE study, which looked at adult romantic relationships, Tolmacz and Mikulincer (2011) found that
attachment insecurities were significantly associated with exaggerated and restricted factors of SRE. In a conceptual dis-
cussion, Tolmacz (2011) suggested that these factors of entitlement are specific manifestations of internal working models
that stem from attachment insecurities. In contrast, assertive entitlement is thought to be a reflection of more secure working
models of attachment. As such, we expected to find similar links with the SREap: i.e., whereas we expected the SREap
exaggerated and restricted factors to be associated with high levels of attachment insecurities, we expected the SREap
assertive factor to be related to low levels of attachment insecurities. Finally, we predicted that life-satisfaction (as tested in
this study) would likely be related positively with the assertive factor, whereas exaggerated entitlement, which reflects a
basic dissatisfaction with the relationship, would be linked with lower life satisfaction.
Method
Participants
Study 2 participants consisted of 537 schoolchildren (52.2% of whom were girls), ages 12e16 years (M¼13.6, SD ¼.63),
none of whom were involved in any of the other studies discussed in this paper.
Measures
Entitlement. The newly designed SREap was used to measure adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their
parents. The SREap is a 23-item measure that utilizes a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (very inaccurate)to5(very accurate).
Attachment. The child version of the Experiences in Close Relationships ScaleeRevised (ECR-RC;Brenning, Soenens, &Braet,
2015) was used to assess attachment avoidance and anxiety. The anxiety scale (18 items) taps into feelings of fear of aban-
donment and strong desires for interpersonal merger (e.g., “I worry about being abandoned”). The avoidance scale (18 items)
taps into discomfort with closeness, dependence, and intimate self-disclosure (e.g., “I prefer not to show how I feel deep
down”). Items are rated on a 7-point scale ranging from a (not at all)to7(very much). The children were asked to rate the 18
anxiety and 18 avoidance statements about their mothers.
Life satisfaction. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, &Griffin, 1985) was used to assess overall
satisfaction and happiness with life. The scale does not assess satisfaction with life in specific life domains, but allows re-
spondents to integrate and weigh satisfaction as a whole. The SWLS has five items (e.g., “So far I have gotten the important
things I want in life”) and employs a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to7(strongly agree). Summed
responses yield a life satisfaction total score, with higher scores reflecting higher levels of life satisfaction.
Results
Means, standard deviations, Cronbach's alphas and inter-correlations for the three
SREap factors as obtained in this study are presented in the second panel of Table 2. To examine whether the three SREap
factors were linked with attachment orientations (anxiety and avoidance) and life satisfaction, we conducted a series of
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140 131
multiple regression analyses in which the factors servedas predictors. Regression coefficients are also presented in the second
panel of Table 2.
As expected, higher scores on the exaggerated entitlement factor were linked with higher attachment avoidance and
anxiety scores, and with lower life satisfaction. Conversely, higher scores on assertive entitlement were associated with lower
attachment avoidance and anxiety scores, and with higher life satisfaction. It should be noted that higher scores on the
restricted entitlement factor were related to higher attachment anxiety scores, but not to avoidance or life satisfaction. An
examination of this pattern of results can be found in the General Discussion.
Study 3 eSREap, narcissism and self-esteem
In Study 3, pursuant to Campbell et al.'s (2004) and Tolmacz and Mikulincer's (2011) findings, we hypothesized that the
SREap would be only moderately associated with narcissism. As mentioned earlier, Campbell et al. (2004) previously pointed
out the limitations of the NPI narcissism scale in assessing the sense of entitlement. In addition, we suggest that narcissism
implies a grandiose sense of self, while entitlement may also stem from an individual's feeling of wrongs done to him/her.
With regard to self-esteem, we hypothesized that self-esteem would be positively correlated with the assertive factor and
negatively correlated with the maladaptive factors of SREap. The reason we hypothesized as such is that assertive entitlement
is likely to be related to adequate early relationships (Tolmacz, 2011). Research generally supports the view that if caregivers
have been sensitive and available to the child, a child constructs an internal model characterized by positive representations
of the self, including high levels of self-esteem. In contrast, if the parents have failed to be sensitive and accessible, a child
constructs models of the self as unworthy and undeserving of love (Laible, Carlob &Roeschc, 2004).
Method
Participants
Study 3 participants consisted of 234 schoolchildren (58% of whom were girls), ages 11e15 years (M¼13.58, SD ¼1.04),
none of whom were involved in any of the other studies discussed in this paper.
Measures
Entitlement. The SREap was used to measure adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their parents.
Self-esteem. The Single Item Self-Esteem Scale (SISE;Robins, Hendin, &Trzesniewski, 2001) was used to assess participants'
self-esteem via the following question, “I see myself as a person with high self-esteem.”Answers were given on a 9-point scale
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to9(strongly agree). The literature shows that this measure meets the desired criterion for
validity, with significant correlations with a wide range of criterion measures.
Narcissism. The Narcissistic Personality Questionnaire for Children-Revised (NPQC-R, Ang &Raine, 2009) was used to assess
narcissism among the adolescent study participants. It is a well validated 12-item questionnaire that consists of two of the
four original NPQC (Ang &Yusof, 2006) subscales: Superiority and Exploitativeness. Participants are asked to rate how much
they endorse items as descriptive of themselves on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (not at all like me)to5(completely
like me). In the present study, we used the total NPQC-R score, which presents an average of all items, where higher scores
indicate higher levels of narcissism as a trait.
Results
Means, standard deviations, Cronbach's alphas and inter-correlations for the three SREap factors as obtained in this study
are presented in the third panel of Table 2. To examine whether the three entitlement factors were linked with narcissism and
self-esteem, we conducted two multiple regression analyses in which the factors served as predictors. Regression coefficients
are also presented in the third panel of Table 2.
As expected, lower scores on exaggerated andyor restricted entitlement, and higher scores on assertive entitlement, were
associated with greater self-esteem. Contrary to expectations, none of the sense of entitlement factors was related to
narcissism. This last finding could indicate that the SREap taps an independent phenomenon and is not a mere reflection of
narcissism. Alternatively, the link between entitlement and narcissism may become apparent only later in the cycle of
adolescent development.
Study 4 eSREap, depression and anxiety
In Study 4, we hypothesized that maladaptive factors of entitlement would be positively related to emotional difficulties
and more school avoidance, whereas the assertive factor might not be strongly related to these issues. It should be recalled
that inadequate early relationships are likely related to later maladaptive entitlement (Tolmacz, 2011), and research has
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0132
shown that inadequate early relationships are significant predictors of fear and anxiety in later childhood. There is also
abundant evidence indicating that parents' insensitivity to- and inaccessibility for-their infants plays a role in the etiology of
child and adolescent depression (see a discussion in Muris, Meesters, van Melick, and Zwambag (2001)).
Method
Participants
Study 4 participants consisted of 234 schoolchildren (61.3% of whom were girls), ages 11e15 years (M¼13.64, SD ¼.68),
none of whom were involved in any of the other studies discussed in this paper.
Measures
Entitlement. The SREap was used to measure adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their parents.
Depression.The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ; Sund, Larsson, &Wichstrøm, 2001) was used to assess depressive
symptoms, as its wording was deemed appropriate for the cognitive and developmental level of the age group under study
(Kovacs, 1986). It is a 34-item questionnaire designed for children and adolescents between the ages of eight and eighteen.
The individual is asked to report on his or her feelings during the preceding two weeks. Responses are made to statements on
a three-point scale (not true,sometimes true and true) and the total scores range between 0 and 68.
Anxiety.The Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorder (SCARED; Birmaher et al., 1997) was used. This self-report
questionnaire contains 41 items related to common anxiety symptoms measured on a 3-point Likert scale. Five scores are
computed, i.e., separate scores for each of the five factors: somatic/panic (3 items, e.g., “When I feel frightened, it is hard to
breathe”); general anxiety (9 items, e.g., “I worry about other people liking me”); separation anxiety (8 items, e.g., “I get scared
if I sleep away from home”); social phobia (7 items, e.g., “I don't like to be with people I don't know well”); and school phobia
(4 items, e.g., “I get headaches when I am at school”). Each sub-score represents a sum of responses on the items in the
respective factor.
Results
Means, standard deviations, Cronbach's alphas and inter-correlations for the three SREap factors as obtained in this study
are presented in the fourth panel of Table 2. To examine whether the SREap factors were linked with depression, we con-
ducted a multiple regression analysis in which the three factors served as predictors. Regression coefficients are also pre-
sented in the fourth panel of Table 2. As expected, higher scores on exaggerated andyor restricted factors, and lower scores
on the assertive factor, were associated with greater depressive symptom severity.
To examine whether the three factors were linked with the liability for a panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder
(GAD), separation anxiety, social anxiety disorder andyor significant school avoidance, we conducted a series of logistic
regression analyses. Standardized regression coefficients (i.e., odds ratios) are presented in the fourth panel of Table 2.The
analyses indicated that, as expected, a greater exaggerated factor was related to a higher susceptibility to each of the
anxiety-related disorders. Specifically, a one-point increase in the exaggerated factor was associated with a higher like-
lihood for a panic disorder (202%), for GAD (229%), for a separation anxiety disorder (152%), for a social anxiety disorder
(178%), and for significant school avoidance (257%). Higher scores in the SREap restricted andyor assertive factors were
linked only with GAD and significant school avoidance. Specifically, a one-point increase in the restricted factor was
associated with a higher likelihood for GAD (171%) and for significant school avoidance (182%). Conversely, a one-point
increase in the assertive factor was associated with a lower likelihood for GAD (39%) and for significant school avoid-
ance (54%).
In sum, as hypothesized, maladaptive factors were associated with higher scores (and likelihood) for depression, GAD and
school avoidance, whereas assertive entitlement was related to lower scores on depression measures. In addition, exagger-
ated entitlement appears to have the strongest link to a higher likelihood of all forms of anxiety.
Study 5 eSREap and positive psychological variables
In Study 5, we continued to examine the link between SREap factors and emotional aspects. Noting that inadequate early
relationships are likely related to maladaptive entitlement (Tolmacz, 2011), we hypothesized that maladaptive factors would be
linked with lower self-efficacy, and with a higher proclivity for emotional problems. Research generally supports the view that
satisfyingearly relationships with parents are linked with positive representations of the self, includinghigh levels of self-efficacy
and otherpositive psychological variables(Arbona &Power, 2003; Thompson,1999,for review). This viewconcurs with Bandura's
(1982, 1989) self-efficacy theory, suggesting that self-efficacy is influenced by positive and negative feedback from others.
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140 13 3
Method
Participants
Study 5 participants consisted of 232 schoolchildren (59.4% of whom were girls), ages 12e16 years (M¼13.66, SD ¼.63),
none of whom were involved in any of the other studies discussed in this paper.
Measures
Entitlement. The SREap was used to measure adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their parents.
Self-Efficacy. Perceived self-efficacy was assessed using the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE; Schwarzer &Jerusalem, 1995).
The GSE is a 10-item self-report scale, on which respondents are asked to judge how accurately the items described them on a
four-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all true)to4(exactly true). A total score is obtained by summing the relevant item
responses in each scale, and a higher score reflects greater self-efficacy.
Mood regulation. The Negative Mood Regulation (NMR, Catanzaro &Mearns,1990) was used to measure mood and general
expectations of being able to alleviate negative moods. It is a 30-item questionnaire, with scores ranging from 30 to 150.
Responders are asked to rate on a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)to5(strongly agree), the degree to which
they believe their use of coping strategies can counteract a negative mood. The stem, “When I'm upset I believe that....”is
completed with items such as, “I can do something to feel better,”or “planning how I deal with things will help.”Higher scores
indicate better negative-mood regulation.
Table 2
A summary of the data obtained in Studies 1e5and the measures used. The top three rows in each study-section present the means, standard deviations and
Cronbach's Alpha (Alpha) for the three SREap factors and Pearson inter-correlations for Studies 1e5. The bottom lines in the sections related to Studies 2e5
present standardized and unstandardized regression coefficients and Pratt's d
j
s for the study-specific measures. The section related to Study 4 also presents
standardized logistic regression coefficients (odds ratios) for predicting the liability for the SCARED sub-scales by the sense of entitlement factors.
Mean (SD) Alpha Exaggerated Restrictive Assertive R
2
Study 1 eDeveloping the SREap scale (N¼458)
Exaggerated 2.17 (.91) .87
Restrictive 2.16 (.86) .79 .33*** e
Assertive 3.19 (.80) .78 .28*** .04
Study 2 eSREap,attachment and life satisfaction (N¼537)
Exaggerated 2.20 (1.0) .89
Restrictive 2.05 (.99) .86 .53*** e
Assertive 3.26 (.86) .81 .33*** .23***
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
Attach. Avoidance 3.62 (.87) .92 .15 17** .27 .06 .07 .09 -.26 .26*** .64 8.1%
Attach. Anxiety 3.47 (1.35) .83 .39 .29*** .47 .38 .28*** .44 .16 .1* .07 28.0%
Life satisfaction 24.4 (7.4) .87 2.21 .30*** .42 -.15 -.02 .01 2.9 .34*** .57 14.6%
Study 3 eSREap,narcissism and self-esteem (N¼234)
Exaggerated 2.29 (.93) .89
Restrictive 2.27 (.88) .82 .32***
Assertive 3.27 (.86) .83 .46*** .12
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
Narcissism 16.7 (2.8) .71 .06 .02 .1 .03 -.42 .12
Self-esteem 20.5 (5.3) e1.41 .23** .16 1.33 .23** .28 2.56 .40*** .56 22.0%
Study 4 eSREap,depression and anxiety (N¼234)
Exaggerated 2.11 (.94) .87
Restrictive 2.05 (.85) .79 .29***
Assertive 3.14 (.91) .82 .30*** .16*
Odds ratios
Somatic/panic 3.64 (4.5) .89 2.02** 1.42 .72 7.2%
General anxiety 5.11 (4.4) .86 2.29*** 1.71* .61* 12%
Separation anxiety 3.51 (3.0) .71 1.52* 1.21 1.02 4.5%
Social anxiety 4.07 (3.4) .81 1.78** 1.37 .81 5.8%
School avoidance 1.52 (1.7) .68 .57*** 1.82** .46** 16%
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
Depression 10.7 (11.9) .94 5.82 .47*** .70 3.8 .27*** .31 2.01 .16*** -.01 34.3%
Study 5 eSREap and positive psychological variables (N¼232)
Exaggerated 2.41 (1.0) .88
Restrictive 2.26 (.90) .79 .30*** e
Assertive 3.34 (.92) .84 .50*** .11
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
B
b
d
j
Self-efficacy 29.0 (5.8) .83 -.22 -.04 -.03 -.53 .08 .05 1.97 .32** .98 9.2%
Mood regulation 100.5 (14) .84 5.25 .37** .94 -.91 -.05 .05 2.76 .17 -.01 12.1%
*p <.05; **p <.01; ***p <.001; alpha ¼Cronbach's alpha; d
j
¼Pratt's index.
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0134
Results
Means, standard deviations, Cronbach's alphas and inter-correlations for the three SREap factors as obtained in this study
are presented in the fifth panel of Table 2. To examine whether the three SREap factors were linked with self-efficacy and
negative mood regulation, we conducted a series of multiple regression analyses in which the SREap factors served as pre-
dictors. Regression coefficients are also presented in the fifth panel of Table 2.
As expected, higher scores on exaggerated entitlement were linked with lower negative mood regulation, and higher
scores on assertive entitlement were associated with higher self-efficacy. Restricted sense of entitlement was not related to
either of the two scores.
Studies 2e5eConfirmatory factor analysis and gender effects
The samples of Studies 2e5(N¼1237) were collapsed and a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted, in order to
further validate the factor structure we identified in Study 1's exploratory factor analysis. In this analysis, we examined the fit
of a three-factor solution model, and compared it with a one-factor model, in which all of the items were loaded on a single
latent factor. The effectiveness of each model was compared using the Sample-Size Adjusted Bayesian Information Criterion
(Adjusted BIC). The model with the lowest adjusted BIC score was deemed the most effective. The CFAs were estimated using
MPlus 6.1 (Muth
en &Muth
en, 2010) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) software. Goodness of fit was examined using the
Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker Lewis Index (TLI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and Standardized
Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) scores. CFI and TLI scores above .95, RMSEA score below .06, and SRMR score below .07
indicate an excellent fit to the observed data. The analyses indicated again that the three-factor model had the lowest
adjusted BIC score (31395.63; as compared with the one-factor model, 32490.92), and fit well with the observed data,
c
2
(200) ¼363.27, p<.01, CFI ¼.95, TLI ¼.94, RMSEA ¼.04, 95% CI ¼.04, .05 (96.8% probability that RMSEA was lower than .05),
SRMR ¼.055.
In Studies 2e5, we wished to examine gender differences in regards to each of the sense of entitlement factors. As a
preliminary step, we tested for factorial invariance of SREap across boys and girls. We conducted a series of multi-group CFA
using MPlus 6.1. In these analyses, we compared boys' and girls' factor loadings and factors' variances/covariances by con-
trasting a model without equality constraints (i.e., fully free model) with a model in which factor loadings are constrained to
be equal, and a model in which the factors' variances/covariances are constrained to be equal (see Dimitrov, 2010 for more
information). In these tests, a non-significant
c
2
difference and a CFI difference .01 will indicate factorial invariance. As
expected, the analyses indicated that boys and girls did not differ in the SREap factorial loadings [
Dc
2(23)
¼14.04, p¼.95,
D
CFI ¼.00] or in the factors' variances/covariances [
Dc
2(3)
¼.55, p¼.90,
D
CFI ¼.00].
It should be noted that when this test was conducted on a single study (i.e., Study 2, since Studies 3, 4 and 5 had sample
sizes that were too small for this type of analysis), the models fit was not adequate for the boys (
c
2
(227) ¼6047, p<.001;
SRMS ¼.08, RMSEA ¼.10, CFI ¼.83) nor for the girls (
c
2
(227) ¼5663, p<.001; SRMS ¼.08, RMSEA ¼.10, CFI ¼.80). We also
did not get adequate fit indices when we tested configural equivalence (with no constraints,
c
2
(454) ¼1353.48, p<.001;
SRMS ¼.07, RMSEA ¼.06, CFI ¼.82). However, when the CFA analysis was conducted in Study 2, combining the data of boys
and girls, the analyses indicated again that the three-factor model fit the observed data well,
c
2
(227) ¼100 5.14 , p<.001,
CFI ¼.84, TLI ¼.81, RMSEA ¼.08, 95% CI ¼.075, .085 (.000% probability that RMSEA was lower than .05), SRMR ¼.07.
As a second step, we conducted a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with gender as the independent measure,
and sense of entitlement factors as the dependent measures, separately in each study. In Studies 2 (280 girls and 257 boys), 3
(136 girls and 98 boys) and 4 (145 girls and 89 boys), the analysis revealed significant gender differences in the sense of
entitlement across factors, (Pillai's T ¼.02, F(3, 485) ¼3.85, p¼.010; Pillai's T ¼.07, F(3, 148) ¼3.88, p¼.010; Pillai's T ¼.07, F(3,
147) ¼3.53, p¼.017; for Studies 2, 3 and 4, respectively), but not in Study 5 (138 girls and 94 boys, Pillai's T ¼.05, F(3,
137) ¼2.23, p¼.087). However, in post-hoc univariate analyses of variance (Bonferroni corrected, see Ben-David, Eidels &
Donkin, 2014; Ben-David, Multani, Shakuf, Rudzicz, &Van Lieshout, 2016), none of the four studies revealed significant
gender differences in any of the discrete factors, except for one unique case out of twelve (a difference in the assertive sense of
entitlement in Study 4; M¼3.42, SD ¼.90 and M¼2.96, SD ¼.94, for boys and girls, respectively; F(1,149) ¼8.73, p¼.004,
h
2p
¼.06).
General discussion
The parenteadolescent relationship is of major importance in an adolescent's life. Features of this relationship strongly
influence future relationships and decisions, and the sense of entitlement among adolescents towards their parents (SREap) is
a basic component in the dynamics of this relationship. Clearly, a better understanding of the nature of SREap, and its link
with other personality traits, serves as a valuable tool both in practice and in research. In our first study, we developed and
tested an SREap questionnaire and provided initial validity evidence of its factor structure. A factor analysis yielded three
factors: (1) exaggerated, which denotes demanding attitudes, inflated sensitivity and vigilance towards negative aspects of
parents; (2) restricted, which is expressed as a sense of limited sovereignty and self-assuredness; and (3) assertive, which is
defined as a realistic appraisal of expectations of parents.
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140 13 5
In four subsequent studies, we examined the link between the three SREap factors and related personality variables. First,
attachment insecurities were associated with higher scores on the SREap exaggerated and restricted factors, and lower scores
on the assertive factor of the SREap scale. Next, we ensured that adolescents' sense of relational entitlement towards their
parents reflected a unique psychological phenomenon, and not merely a form of narcissism. Finally, as hypothesized, we
found that the restricted and exaggerated factors were associated with a higher level of emotional problems, and with lower
well-being, positive mood and life satisfaction. The assertive entitlement factor, on the other hand, was associated with life
satisfaction, self-efficacy and reduced negative aspects.
The three SREap factors
The three SREap factors are consistent with the original SRE scale (Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011), therapeutic experience,
and theoretical literature (Kriegman, 1983; Levin, 1970; Moses &Moses-Hrushovski, 1990). The original SRE three-factor
model has been supported by a number of previous studies. For example, the exaggerated and restricted factors of the SRE
scale have been found to be related to pathological concern (Shavit &Tolmacz, 2014), whereas the assertive factor has been
found to be related to relationship satisfaction (George-Levi, Vilchinsky, Tolmacz, &Liberman, 2014). The results of the
current study suggest that three expressions of entitlement (as manifested by the three factors) are not limited to romantic
relationships, but can be found in the adolescenteparent context as well. These findings further suggest that the same un-
derlying mechanisms engender feelings of entitlement in different intimate relationships, across the life span. Possibly, this
three-factor model of entitlement may extend to other interpersonal domains as well (e.g., the work environment).
It is important to note that these three entitlement factors can coexist within the same adolescent. For example, he/she can
have high scores on assertive entitlement as well as moderately high scores on the two other factors. The SREap taps a
dispositional sense of entitlement toward a parent that reflects a global average across thousands of daily interactions that
adolescents have with their parents. Therefore, high scores on two or more entitlement factors (e.g., assertive and exag-
gerated) within the same adolescent can reflect the fact that s/he had a large number of meaningful interactions with a parent
in which s/he felt assertive entitlement, as well as a large number of other meaningful interactions in which s/he felt
exaggerated entitlement. Similar findings were indicated when evaluating the romantic relationship SRE (see, Tolmacz &
Mikulincer, 2011).
SREap and attachment orientations
In our model we conceptualized the SREap as an aspect of internal working models. The SREap assertive factor was
associated with lower attachment avoidance, while the SREap exaggerated and restricted factors were related to attachment
insecurities. These results are in line with previous findings on the SRE (George-Levi et al., 2014; Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011),
implying that attachment insecurities and imbalanced entitlement factors are closely linked across different intimate re-
lationships. In terms of attachment theory, the child's bids for proximity and support implicitly say: “Take care of me eIam
entitled”(Tolmacz, 2011). The ways in which significant others respond to this appeal create specific types of internal working
models that indicate to adolescents how entitled they are (Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011). If early expectations for proximity
and support are not optimally met, this insufficiency may engender imbalanced forms of both attachment and entitlement in
future intimate relationships. It is also possible that current insufficiencies on the part of the parent ei.e., partial and/or
inappropriate recognition of adolescents' entitlement needs elead to adolescents' imbalanced sense of entitlement.
The current data revealed that attachment anxiety was significantly related to both exaggerated and restricted entitle-
ment. While the link with exaggerated entitlement has been noted before, the link between attachment anxiety and
restricted entitlement may seem less intuitive. It is true that anxious attachment reflects early experiences of inconsistency in
parental responsiveness, which can inspire feelings of anger and demandingness, but it is also true that attachment anxiety is
related to an immense fear of rejection and abandonment. Thus, in addition to feeling overly entitled, anxiously attached
individuals may also try to please others, and to refrain from expressing their own needs in order to avoid rejection
(MacDonald, Locke, Spielmann, &Joel, 2013) and conflict (for an overview see the latest review by Mikulincer and Shaver
(2016)). These findings resonate with Mikulincer and Shaver's conceptualization of the “ambivalent nature of anxious
attachment”(p. 268) which on the one hand reflects anxiety and submission, and on the other hand, an unfulfilled desire to
force one's will on someone else (see also results by Maio, Fincham &Lycett, 2000).
Another finding of the current study was that avoidant attachment was significantly related to exaggerated entitlement.
This finding may again seem less obvious. However, avoidant attachment has been found in previous studies to be related to a
devaluation of the other, an increased sense of self-sufficiency, and fantasies of power (Edelstein &Shaver, 2004). These
characteristics can be expressed by an overblown sense of entitlement, in which the other is expected to serve the needs of
the self. Thus, the exaggerated sense of entitlement as expressed by the avoidant-attached individual reflects a different
psychological process from that which typifies the anxiously-attached individual. For the avoidant individual, it may relate to
feelings of superiority; for the anxious, however, it may reflect a “righting”of wrongs (e.g., unresponsiveness of the parent)
that were inflicted upon the individual in the past (see, Mikulincer &Shaver, 2016).
Finally, in this study the avoidant attachment style was not found to be significantly related to restricted SREap, in contrast to
previous findings on the SRE. This finding could reflect the differences between the two populations and the two types of
intimate relationships that were examined. The SRE focuses on adults, while the SREap looks at adolescents, for whom themes
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0136
of autonomy in general, and especially in regard to their parents, are of extreme importance (McGue, Elkins, Walden &Iacono,
2005). The adolescent's struggle for autonomy can be viewed as the background against which attachment processes play out
(Allen, 2008). Adolescents with avoidant attachment orientation have difficulties in achieving autonomy and may not be able to
adaptively manage the relational changes brought on by this push for autonomy (McElhaney, Allen, Stephenson, &Hare, 2009).
This process, coupled with their increased sense of superiority, affects adolescents' relationships with their parents, as well as
the expectations they have of this relationship, and might lead to an exaggerated rather than a restricted sense of ado-
lescenteparent relational entitlement. It is possible that this difference, between the findings that emerged from the SRE vs. the
findings that emerged from the SREap, might also relate to the larger number of items included in the SREap's restricted factor
than were included in the SRE's restricted factor (7 vs 4). As a result of this larger number of items, the restricted factor is better
represented in the SREap than in the SRE, and possible sources of variation in the scale were minimized.
Relating the SREap to psychological scales
First, in accordance with previous findings on the SRE, none of the three factors of entitlement was significantly associated
with narcissism. This finding further supports the claim that entitlement is a distinct construct, not embedded in other
general psychological constructs. However, as the associations were lower than expected, future studies should reexamine
the association between these two constructs. In the next step, we found the SREap to be related to major psychological
aspects. Our results indicated that exaggerated and restrictedentitlement were maladaptive and placed adolescents at risk for
emotional problems. Namely, these two entitlement factors were correlated with a higher likelihood for depression, anxiety
disorders and school avoidance, as well as lower levels of positive mood, self-esteem and life satisfaction.
A correlational study, of course, does not allow us to infer causality. It is possible that maladaptive SREap may be the
generator of reduced well-being, as it can foster interpersonal difficulties in an adolescent's life. On the other hand, emotional
problems and poor self-esteem may lead adolescents to adopt maladaptive expressions of entitlement as a coping strategy,
either to (1) restrict their sense of entitlement, reducing their expectations for the fulfillment of their needs; or (2) exaggerate
their demands and expectations of their parents in an attempt to alleviate distress. Moreover, maladaptive entitlement and
emotional difficulties might be mutually influential. The link between maladaptive entitlement and a lower level of life
satisfaction may reflect a vicious cycle, in which each factor engenders the other.
Assertive entitlement appears to present the opposite trend, as it is related to a lower likelihood of emotional difficulties
(e.g., GAD) and negative behaviors (e.g., school avoidance), and higher self-efficacy and life satisfaction. This manifestation of
entitlement represents what appears to be an adequate and efficient strategy for maintaining and promoting well-being and
positive mood, and reducing the risk of emotional and interpersonal problems. In broader terms, assertive entitlement may
represent a realistic approach to close relationships (e.g., romantic, parental), in that it seems to minimize conflicts related to
inappropriate and imbalanced expectations. Again, one cannot infer directionality from a correlational finding. Higher self-
efficacy, as well as lower anxiety, may lead to a sense of control in a person's intimate relationships (thus contributing to a
person's assertive sense of entitlement), and, in turn, assertive entitlement may promote different aspects of well-being.
The SREap assertive factor was not found to be significantly correlated with all of the tested aspects of emotional diffi-
culties (anxiety and depression measures, see Study 4), whereas the exaggerated entitlement factor was found to be highly
correlated with all of these measures. Replicating previous findings on the SRE (see Table 4 in Tolmacz &Mikulincer, 2011),
assertive SREap was found to be related more strongly to higher levels of positive aspects (e.g., well-being), than to lower
levels of psychological distress (e.g., anxiety). We therefore concur with Tolmacz and Mikulincer's suggestion (p.91) that
assertive entitlement might be correlated with other factors (e.g., ambition, autonomy and intimacy) and would suggest that
future studies further investigate this point in regard to both the SRE and the SREap.
SREap and gender differences
In general, the data collected in the current research does not point to gender as a major factor in SREap. Moreover, when
the data across all studies was collapsed, boys and girls did not differ in the SREap factorial loadings. These findings may seem
at odds with evidence in the literature that points to differences in psychological aspects between boys and girls during
adolescence. For example, these differences were noted in depression (Wade, Cairney, &Pevalin, 2002), risk-taking (Byrnes,
Miller, &Schafer, 1999), aggression (Card, Sawalani, Stucky &Little, 2008) and empathy (Garaigordobil, 2009). However, it is
important to note that measures of attachment in adolescence have been highly consistent across genders (Mikulincer &
Shaver, 2016). For example, using the attachment scale for children, Brenning, Soenens, Braet, and Bosmans (2011) found no
gender differences. This finding was supported in a recent meta-analysis (Gorrese, 2016) which concluded that the links
between attachment orientation and anxiety were not found to be moderated by gender. As we conceptualize the sense of
entitlement as an aspect of the internal working models, the lack of gender effects in our data may further support this link.
We note that the data in Study 2 could not support the factorial invariance of the SREap with gender that we found when
we collapsed the data of Studies 2e5. This finding could point to the possibility that gender differences do exist but were
“lost”in this case due to the heterogeneity across studies. Future studies should reexamine this possibility.
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140 137
Limitations and future directions
The studies reported here represent only an initial examination of the validity of the SREap scale, focusing on Israeli
participants. Future studies should attempt to examine the replicability and generalizability of the findings to other cultural
(Icht &Ben-David, 2014), ethnic and religious groups, as well as to different family constructs, changes between generations
(Ben-David, Erel, Goy, &Schneider, 2015) and testing which would, optimally, take place over multiple years in the ado-
lescent's life. Future research should also examine the links between the SREap and the adolescent's adjustment in significant
areas of functioning and other intimate settings. Also, while assertive SREap was found to have lower power in predicting a
reduction in psychological distress (e.g., anxiety), and restricted entitlement was found to have lower power in predicting
positive aspects (e.g., self-efficacy), future studies should further examine these links with other measures, to better un-
derstand the relationships between these constructs. Future studies should also further examine the potential for invariance
between boys and girls, as it was found only when all studies were collapsed. Finally, the SREap may be of particular
importance when testing adolescents with special needs, e.g., adolescents at risk, juvenile delinquents, and adolescents with
disabilities.
Appendix. SREap items in comparison to the SRE
References
Allen, J. P. (2008). The attachment system in adolescence. In J. Cassidy, & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications
(2nd ed., pp. 419e435). New York: Guilford.
Allen, J. P., & Land, D. (1999). Attachment in adolescence. In J. Cassidy, & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of Attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications
(pp. 319e335). New York: Guilford.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education [AERA, APA, &NCME].
(2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM IV), Text Revision (4th ed.). Arlington, VA: American
Psychiatric Association.
Ang, R. P., & Raine, A. (2009). Reliability, validity and invariance of the narcissistic personality questionnaire for children-revised (NPQC-R). Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 31(3), 143e151.
Ang, R. P., & Yusof, N. (2006). Development and initial validation of the narcissistic personality questionnaire for children: A preliminary investigation using
school-based Asian samples. Educational Psychology, 26,1e18.
SREap items SRE original item
1 I have high expectations of my parents 2 I have high expectations of my partner
2 I cannot let go of the expectations I have of my parents 3 I can't give up my expectations from
my partner in a relationship
3 My parents need to take care of my basic needs new
4 I expect my parents to pay lots of attention to me 5 I expect my partner to be very attentive to me
5 When my parents make me angry I sometimes regret the fact
that I don't have other parents
new
6 I spend a lot of time thinking about my parents' weaknesses 11 I am obsessed by my partner's faults
7 When my parents hurt me, I immediately feel I cannot trust them 12 When my partner hurts me, I'm immediately filled with a
sense of distrust
8 I often feel my parents deserve a better child than me new
9 Sometimes I have a lot of criticisms of my parents 14 Sometimes I become very critical of my partner
10 My parents have to give me enough attention new
11 When my parents frustrate me I get very angry 16 When I'm frustrated with my relationship, I become filled
with rage
12 I feel I do not deserve to be frustrated by my parents 17 When I'm frustrated with my relationship, I feel I don't
deserve to be frustrated
13 I cannot make a compromise about my expectations from my
parents.
new
14 Usually, when my parents compliment me I believe I deserve the
compliment
new
15 I think my parents deserve a more successful child than me new
16 I often ask myself whether I deserve such great parents 26 I feel my partner deserves to get more than s/he does in our
relationship
17 When I have problems, my parents should help me new
18 I feel my parents deserve more than they get from me new
19 When my parents frustrate me, I sometimes think of running
away from home
27 When my partner frustrates me, I contemplate ending the
relationship
20 Sometimes, I think my parents love me more than I deserve new
21 I'm not willing to forgo what I deserve to get from my parents 30 I insist on getting what I deserve in my relationship
22 Sometimes I feel I'm not good enough for my parents new
23 Sometimes I'm more angry with my parents than with other people 33 In my relationship with my partner I'm sometimes filled with
a kind of rage that I hardly ever experience in daily life
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0138
Arbona, C., & Power, T. (2003). Parental attachment, self-esteem, and antisocial behaviors among African American, European American, &Mexican
American adolescents. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(1), 40e51.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84,191e215.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37,122e147.
Bandura, A. (1989). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. The Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 2,411e424.
Ben-David, B. M., Eidels, A., & Donkin, C. (2014). Effects of aging and distractors on detection of redundant visual targets and capacity: Do older adults
integrate visual targets differently than younger adults? PLoS ONE, 9(12), e113551. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113551.
Ben-David, B. M., Erel, H., Goy, H., & Schneider, B. A. (2015). “Older is always better”: Age-related differences in vocabulary scores across 16 years. Psychology
and Aging, 30(4), 856e862.
Ben-David, B. M., Multani, N., Shakuf, V., Rudzicz, F., & Van Lieshout, P. H. H. M. (2016). Prosody and semantics are separate but not separable channels in the
perception of emotional speech: Test of rating of emotions in speech (T-RES). Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 59,72e89.
Beutler, I. F., & Gudmunson, C. G. (2012). New adolescent money attitude scales: Entitlement and conscientiousness. Journal of Financial Counseling and
Planning, 23(2), 18e31.
Birmaher, B., Khetarpal, S., Brent, D., Cully, M., Balach, L., Kaufman, J., et al. (1997). The screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders (SCARED): Scale
construction and psychometric characteristics. Journal of the American Academy of Child &Adolescent Psychiatry, 36(4), 545e553.
Boswell, S. S. (2012). “I deserve success”: Academic entitlement attitudes and their relationships with course self-efficacy, social networking, and de-
mographic variables. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 353e365.
Brenning, K., Soenens, B., & Braet, C. (2015). Testing the incremental value of a separate measure for secure attachment relative to a measure for attachment
anxiety and avoidance in middle childhood and early adolescence. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31 (Advance online publication). http://
dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000264.
Brenning, K., Soenens, B., Braet, C., & Bosmans, G. (2011). An adaptation of the experiences in close relationships scale-revised for use with children and
adolescents. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28, 1048e1072.
Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 367e383.
Campbell, W. K., Bonacci, A. M., Shelton, J., Exline, J. J., & Bushman, B. J. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a
self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(1), 29e45.
Card, N. A., Stucky, B. D., Sawalani, G. M., & Little, T. D. (2008). Direct and indirect aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of
gender differences, intercorrelations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development, 79,1185e1229.
Catanzaro, S. J., & Mearns, J. (1990). Measuring generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation: Initial scale development and implications. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 54(3e4), 546e563.
Chowning, K., & Campbell, N. J. (2009). Development and validation of a measure of academic entitlement: Individual differences in students' externalized
responsibility and entitled expectations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 982e997.
Collins, W., Maccoby, E., Steinberg, L., Hetherington, E., & Bornstein, M. (2000). Contemporary research on parenting: The case of nature and nurture.
American Psychologist, 55(2), 218e232.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71e75.
Dimitrov, D. M. (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development,
43(2), 121e149 .
Edelstein, R. S., & Shaver, P. R. (2004). Avoidant attachment: Exploration of an oxymoron. In D. Mashek, & A. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy
(pp. 397e412). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Emmons, R. A. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the narcissistic personality inventory. Journal of personality assessment, 48(3), 291e300.
Exline, J. J., Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., Campbell, W. K., & Finkel, E. J. (2004). Too proud to let go: Narcissistic entitlement as a barrier to forgiveness.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 894e912.
Freud, S. (1963). Some character types met with in psychoanalytic work. In J. Strachey (Ed.), Vol. 14.The standard edition of the complete psychological works
of Sigmund Freud (pp. 311e333). London, U.K: Hogarth Press (Original work published 1916).
Garaigordobil, M. (2009). A comparative analysis of empathy in childhood and adolescence: Gender differences and associated socio-emotional variables.
International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 9,217e235.
George-Levi, S., Vilchinsky, N., Tolmacz, R., & Liberman, G. (2014). Testing the concept of relational entitlement in the dyadic context: Further validation and
associations with relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(2), 193e203.
Givertz, M., & Segrin, C. (2014). The association between overinvolved parenting and young adults' self-efficacy, psychological entitlement, and family
communication. Communication Research, 41,1111e113 6 .
Gorrese, A. (2016). Peer attachment and youth internalizing problems: A meta-analysis. Child Youth Care Forum, 45,177e204.
Gorrese, A., & Ruggieri, R. (2012). Peer attachment: A meta-analytic review of gender and age differences and associations with parent attachment. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 650e672.
Grubbs, J. B., & Exline, J. J. (2016). Trait entitlement: A cognitive-personality source of vulnerability to psychological distress. Psychological Bulletin (Advance
online publication). http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/bul0000063.
Halvorsen, M., Wang, C. E., Eisemann, M., & Waterloo, K. (2010). Dysfunctional attitudes and early maladaptive schemas as predictors of depression: A9-
year follow-up study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 34(4), 368e379.
Hare, R. D. (1999). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. New York: Guilford Press.
Icht, M., & Ben-David, B. M. (2014). Oral-diadochokinesis rates across languages: English and Hebrew norms. Journal of Communication Disorders, 48,27e37.
Kingshott, B. F., Bailey, K., & Wolfe, S. E. (2004). Police culture, ethics, and entitlement theory. Criminal Justice Studies, 17(2), 187e202.
Kovacs, M. (1986). A developmental perspective on methods and measures in the assessment of depressive disorders. In M. Rutter, C. Izard, & P. Read (Eds.),
Depression in young people (pp. 435e489). London: Guilford Press.
Kriegman, G. (1983). Entitlement attitudes: Psychosocial and therapeutic implications. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 11(2), 265e281.
Laible, D. J., Carlo, G., & Roesch, S. C. (2004). Pathways to self-esteem in late adolescence: The role of parent and peer attachment, empathy, and social
behaviours. Journal of Adolescence, 27(6), 703e716.
Ledesma, R., & Valero-Mora, P. (2007). Determining the number of factors to retain in EFA: An easy-to-use computer program for carrying out parallel
analysis. Practical Assessment, Research &Evaluation, 12,1e11.
Lessard, J., Greenberger, E., Chen, C., & Farruggia, S. (2011). Are youths' feelings of entitlement always “bad”?: Evidence for a distinction between exploitive
and non-exploitive dimensions of entitlement. Journal of Adolescence, 34(3), 521e529.
Levin, S. (1970). On the psychoanalysis of attitudes of entitlement. Bulletin of the Philadelphia Association for Psychoanalysis, 20,1e10.
MacDonald, G., Locke, K. D., Spielmann, S. S., & Joel, S. (2013). Insecure attachment predicts ambivalent social threat and reward perceptions in romantic
relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30,647e661.
Maio, G. E., Fincham, F. D., & Lycett, E. J. (20 00). Attitudinal ambivalence toward parents and attachment style. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
26(12), 1451e1464.
McElhaney, K. B., Allen, J. P., Stephenson, J. C., & Hare, A. L. (2009). Attachment and autonomy during adolescence. In R. M. Lerner, & L. Steinberg (Eds.),
Handbook of adolescent psychology (2nd ed., pp. 358e403). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
McGue, M., Elkins, I., Walden, B., & Iacono, W. G. (2005). Perceptions of the parenteadolescent relationship: A longitudinal investigation. Developmental
Psychology, 41, 971e984.
McGinn, L. K., Cukor, D., & Sanderson, W. C. (2005). The relationship between parenting style, cognitive style, and anxiety and depression: Does increased
early adversity influence symptom severity through the mediating role of cognitive style? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29(2), 219e242.
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e140 13 9
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in adulthood, second edition: Structure, dynamics, and change (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Gaughan, E. T., Gentile, B., Maples, J., & Keith Campbell, W. (2011). Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: A nomological network
analysis. Journal of Personality, 79,1013e1042.
Moses, R., & Moses-Hrushovski, R. (1990). Reflections on the sense of entitlement. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 45,61e78.
Muris, P. (2006). Maladaptive schemas in non-clinical adolescents: Relations to perceived parental rearing behaviours, big five personality factors and
psychopathological symptoms. Clinical Psychology &Psychotherapy, 13, 405e413.
Muris, P., Meesters, C., van Melick, M., & Zwambag, L. (2001). Self-reported attachment style, attachment quality, and symptoms of anxiety and depression
in young adolescents. Personality and Individual Dif ferences, 30(5), 809e818.
Muth
en, L. K., & Muth
en, B. O. (2010). 1998-2010 Mplus user's guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muth
en &Muth
en.
Nadkarni, L., & Malone, J. A. (1989). The development of a self report inventory to measure personal entitlement. In Paper presented at the meeting of the
eastern psychological association, Boston: MA.
Orenstein, P. (1994). Schoolgirls: Young women, self-esteem, and the confidence gap. New York: Anchor Books.
Raskin, R., & Hall, C. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45(2), 590.
Robins, R. W., Hendin, H. M., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg
self-esteem scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 151e161.
Rothman, A. M., & Steil, J. M. (2012). Adolescent attachment and entitlement in a world of wealth. Journal of Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 11(1),
53e65.
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user's
portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35e37). Windsor. England: NFER-NELSON.
Shavit, Y., & Tolmacz, R. (2014). Pathological concern: Scale construction, construct validity, and associations with attachment, self-cohesion, and relational
entitlement. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 31(3), 343e356.
Solomon, I., & Leven, S. (1975). Entitlement. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12, 280e285.
Spiegel, R. (1987). Reflections on entitlement and idealization. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 23,272e277.
Sund, A. M., Larsson, B., & Wichstrøm, L. (2001). Depressive symptoms among young Norwegian adolecents as measured by the mood and feelings
questionnaire (MFQ). European Child Adolescent Psychology, 10(4), 222e229.
Sund, A. M., & Wichstrøm, L. (2002). Parent-child attachment and internalizing symptoms in childhood and adolescence: A review of empirical findings and
future directions. Journal of the American Academy of Child &Adolescent Psychiatry, 41,1478e1485.
Thompson, R. (1999). Early attachment and later behavior. In J. Cassidy, & P. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Research, theory, &clinical applications
(pp. 265e286). New York: The Guilford Press.
Tolmacz, R. (2011). A sense of entitlement in the couple relationship: An attachment theory perspective. The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 71,37e57.
Tolmacz, R., & Mikulincer, M. (2011). The sense of entitlement in romantic relationshipsdScale construction, factor structure, construct validity, and its
associations with attachment orientations. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 28(1), 75e94.
Wade, T. J., Cairney, J., & Pevalin, D. J. (2002). Emergence of gender differences in depression during adolescence: National panel results from three
countries. Journal of the American Academy of Child &Adolescent Psychiatry, 41(2), 190e198.
Wolfe, S., & Bailey, K. (2003). Relational treatment for youth and families: A practitioner’s guide to entitlement theory. Internal Document. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Grand Valley State University.
Youniss, J., & Smollar, J. (1985). Adolescent relations with mothers, fathers and friends. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
R. Tolmacz et al. / Journal of Adolescence 53 (2016) 127e14 0140
