Psychological Entitlement and Relative Deprivation Have Reciprocal Cross-lagged Associations for Both Structurally Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups

Abstract Although relative deprivation theory argues that individual differences influence the degree to which people perceive themselves (IRD) or their group (GRD) as unfairly disadvantaged, few studies directly assess the psychological motivators underlying perceptions of injustice. We address this oversight by examining the relationships between psychological entitlement and relative deprivation using twelve annual waves of a nationwide random panel sample of adults ( N = 71,587). Random intercept cross-lagged panel modelling revealed that within-person changes in psychological entitlement predicted subsequent changes in IRD and GRD. Within-person changes in IRD and GRD also predicted changes in psychological entitlement over time. These results replicated across structurally advantaged and disadvantaged groups based on ethnicity, gender, and immigrant status. We thus highlight how psychological entitlement shapes—and is shaped by—perceptions of injustice, irrespective of one’s objective societal position. We encourage future research to further explicate the role of individual differences in relative deprivation theory.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Social Justice Research
Published
2025-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-025-00453-5
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Psychological Entitlement and Relative Deprivation Have Reciprocal Cross-lagged Associations for Both Structurally Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups

Danny Osborne, Kieren J. Lilly, Brian P. Don, Chris G. Sibley et al.
1 citations
Social Justice Research
Social and Intergroup Psychology
4.20
article

Psychological Entitlement and Relative Deprivation Have Reciprocal Cross-lagged Associations for Both Structurally Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups

Danny Osborne, Kieren J. Lilly, Brian P. Don, Chris G. Sibley, Eden V. Clarke
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Although relative deprivation theory argues that individual differences influence the degree to which people perceive themselves (IRD) or their group (GRD) as unfairly disadvantaged, few studies directly assess the psychological motivators underlying perceptions of injustice. We address this oversight by examining the relationships between psychological entitlement and relative deprivation using twelve annual waves of a nationwide random panel sample of adults ( N = 71,587). Random intercept cross-lagged panel modelling revealed that within-person changes in psychological entitlement predicted subsequent changes in IRD and GRD. Within-person changes in IRD and GRD also predicted changes in psychological entitlement over time. These results replicated across structurally advantaged and disadvantaged groups based on ethnicity, gender, and immigrant status. We thus highlight how psychological entitlement shapes—and is shaped by—perceptions of injustice, irrespective of one’s objective societal position. We encourage future research to further explicate the role of individual differences in relative deprivation theory.

Social Justice ResearchVol. 38(2)
University of Auckland (NZ), The University of Queensland (AU)
University of Queensland, Templeton Religion Trust
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.