The Content Structure of Cynicism Mentality

Zhong Xiaoyu, Guo Yongyu

Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2025, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (2) : 414-424.

PDF(677 KB)
PDF(677 KB)
Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2025, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (2) : 414-424. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250214
Social, Personality & Organizational Psychology

The Content Structure of Cynicism Mentality

  • Zhong Xiaoyu, Guo Yongyu
Author information +
History +

Abstract

Cynicism mentality is a social mentality that arises in the process of modernization. People with this mentality follow the principle of the supremacy of personal interests, and believe in moral nihilism, often show an attitude of seeing through and mocking everything, unprincipled contempt for all moral judgments, and wear a “mask” to live. Cynicism is a negative attitude to life, formed by the combination of China's moral and cultural environment and social problems during the transition period, and this trend of thought may spread like a plague among the masses. At present, the research on cynicism is mainly concentrated in the fields of philosophy and sociology, mainly through speculation to explore this phenomenon. In psychology, distrust and malicious speculation about human nature, organization, social system, and ideology are generally called “cynicism”, which is difficult to accurately describe this social psychological phenomenon and easily confused with other similar concepts. Therefore, we summarize the relevant psychological research on cynicism and divide it into dimensions. We found that previous studies focused on three fields: humanity, system, and morality, and based on this, proposed their respective sub-dimensions.
First, there is the humanity dimension, which has two sub-dimensions: “alienation from others” and “interpersonal masquerading”. There has been a lot of research in psychology on “humanity cynicism”, which generally refers to a negative assessment of the motives and moral character of others, namely the belief that others are “Machiavellians”. This skeptical attitude toward human nature makes it easy for individuals to feel disrespected, lack trust in others, and eventually produce psychological distance, forming a sense of “alienation from others”. In modern society, people cannot avoid necessary communication and cooperation, but one principle of cynicism is “interests first”, which makes them play different roles in different occasions against their will, wear a “mask” to get along with people, and hide their real purpose. It's a negative survival strategy full of pretense.
Second, there is the system dimension, which has three sub-dimensions: “alienation from the system”, “conscious falsity” and “submissive criticism”. In psychology, “system cynicism” refers to an individual’s suspicion or distrust of the social order or status quo (i.e., the state, the economic system, the governing government, the corporate unit or organization, etc.). According to existing psychological theories, cynicism implies a low level of system-justifying belief and political efficacy, a high level of psychological distance from the political community, and a sense of burnout from public affairs. But cynics know how to use the system to obtain their own interests skillfully, and after careful calculation and reflection, they become “exquisite egoists”. When the cynics know that they are powerless and unimportant, they will use negative criticism or sarcasm to relieve the strong external pressure, which is a form of self-defense.
Finally, there is the moral dimension, which has two sub-dimensions: “mocking mainstream values” and “understanding without rejection”. “Moral cynicism” is very similar to moral disengagement, resulting from the failure of individuals to self-regulate in the process of weighing their own interests against moral standards. Moral nihilism allows cynics to deride public order, mainstream discourse, or traditional values, to deny any moral standards, and to stigmatize moral ideals in ways that are not mainstream, leading them to become desensitized to ugly phenomena, to shirk their civic responsibilities, and even to approve of immoral events, even when they may know they are wrong.
Cynicism mentality can be a measure of the health of a society. In the future, the scale can be compiled according to its content structure, and the internal relationship between the three dimensions of humanity, system, and morality can be explored. In addition, it is possible to explore ways to intervene against cynicism, especially by focusing on strengthening the social structure and ultimately weakening its negative effects.

Key words

cynicism mentality / humanity dimension / system dimension / moral dimension

Cite this article

Download Citations
Zhong Xiaoyu, Guo Yongyu. The Content Structure of Cynicism Mentality[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2025, 48(2): 414-424 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250214

References

[1] 艾里希·弗洛姆. (2018). 健全的社会 (孙恺祥译). 上海译文出版社..
[2] 安斯加尔·艾伦. (2023). 犬儒主义 (倪剑青译).商务印书馆.
[3] 曹东勃. (2012). 通向犬儒之路:人类价值系统的现代嬗变. 现代哲学, 4, 14-21.
[4] 操奇. (2015). 启蒙的天敌:犬儒理性论略. 哲学研究, 6, 91-96.
[5] 丁桂凤. (2014). 解析职场中的犬儒主义: 基于心理学的视角. 南京师大学报(社会科学版), 6, 108-115.
[6] 孔明安. (2012). 犬儒主义为什么是一种意识形态? 现代哲学, 4, 7-13.
[7] 李艳霞, 梅燊. (2021). 现代犬儒主义概念解析: 思想溯源、本质属性与行为特征. 学习论坛, 1, 53-60.
[8] 李宗吾. (2010). 厚黑学全集. 百花洲文艺出版社..
[9] 刘伟. (2020). 政治效能感研究: 回顾与展望. 内蒙古大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 52(5), 65-71.
[10] 诺伦·格尔茨. (2022). 虚无主义 (张红军译).商务印书馆.
[11] 欧红蕾, 孙炳海, 张文海, 李伟健. (2020). 勿以恶小而为之:滑坡效应的心理机制及预防策略. 心理科学进展, 28(4), 650-660.
[12] 齐格蒙特·鲍曼. (2024). 生活艺术 (鲁擎雨, 姚晨辉译). 上海社会科学院出版社.
[13] 沈宝钢. (2021). 梳理与补遗:“犬儒主义”的历史回溯、中国传播和当下呈现. 江苏科技大学学报(社会科学版), 21(2), 16-22.
[14] 孙春晨. (2016). 犬儒主义病态道德文化剖析. 伦理学研究, 1, 11-15.
[15] 谭同学. (2020). 犬儒主义、阶层镜像与乡村振兴——基于青年心态的分析. 现代哲学,3, 48-54.
[16] 汤迪. (2021). 道德虚无主义的理论形态及其批判. 社会科学家, 2, 33-39.
[17] 汤舒俊. (2017). 中国人的马基雅弗利主义. 中国社会科学出版社..
[18] 肖祥. (2020). 当代犬儒主义的现实样态及其伦理矫治. 江西社会科学, 10, 5-13+254.
[19] 徐贲. (2015). 颓废与沉默:透视犬儒文化. 东方出版社.
[20] 徐贲. (2018). 犬儒与玩笑:假面社会的政治幽默. 牛津大学出版社.
[21] 徐贲. (2019). 人文的互联网:数码时代的读写与知识. 北京大学出版社.
[22] 徐贲. (2021). 批判性思维的认知与伦理. 北京大学出版社..
[23] 许燕. (2022). 社会心理研究(下册).华东师范大学出版社..
[24] 许燕. (2024). 社会健康与社会善治的心理学研究. 人民论坛·学术前沿, 3, 94-103.
[25] 晏渝, 冯明, 张勇. (2024). 职场“佛系”:中国组织情境下的理论构建与实证检验. 心理学报, 56(5), 594-611.
[26] 杨继平, 王兴超, 高玲. (2010). 道德推脱的概念、测量及相关变量. 心理科学进展, 18(4), 671-678.
[27] 杨沈龙, 郭永玉, 喻丰, 饶婷婷, 赵靓, 许丽颖. (2018). 系统合理化何以形成——三种不同的解释视角. 心理科学进展, 26(12), 2238-2248.
[28] 杨越, 谢员, 秦晨曦. (2016). 野心家取向:概念、测量、成因与影响. 心理科学进展, 24(3), 410-421.
[29] 左路平,吴学琴. (2020). 社会现代犬儒主义的中国样态及其应对. 思想教育研究, 10, 98-102.
[30] Abraham, R. (2000). Organizational cynicism: Bases and consequences. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 126(3), 269-292.
[31] Archimi C., L S. Reynaud E., Yasin H. M., & Bhatti Z. A. (2018). How perceived corporate social responsibility affects employee cynicism: The mediating role of organizational trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 907-921.
[32] Bedeian, A. G. (2007). Even if the tower is "ivory," It isn't "white:"Understanding the consequences of faculty cynicism. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6(1), 9-32
[33] Bok, S. (1989). Secrets: On the ethics of concealment and revelation. Vintage.
[34] Berman, E. M. (1997). Dealing with cynical citizens. Public Administration Review, 57(2), 105-112.
[35] Bunde, J., & Suls, J. (2006). A quantitative analysis of the relationship between the Cook-Medley Hostility Scale and traditional coronary artery disease risk factors. Health Psychology, 25(4), 493-500.
[36] Cook, W. W., & Medley, D. M. (1954). Proposed hostility and pharisaic-virtue scales for the MMPI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38(6), 414-418.
[37] Craig S. C., Niemi R. G., & Silver G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12(3), 289-314.
[38] Crandall, C. S., & Cohen, C. (1994). The personality of the stigmatizer: Cultural world view, conventionalism, and self-esteem. Journal of Research in Personality, 28(4), 461-480.
[39] Cichocka, A., & Jost, J. T. (2014). Stripped of illusions? Exploring system justification processes in capitalist and post-communist societies. International Journal of Psychology, 49(1), 6-29.
[40] Corcoran K. E., Pettinicchio D., & Young J. T. (2015). Perceptions of structural injustice and efficacy: Participation in low/moderate/high-cost forms of collective action. Sociological Inquiry, 85(3), 429-461.
[41] Citrin, J., & Stoker, L. (2018). Political trust in a cynical age. Annual Review of Political Science, 21, 49-70.
[42] Dancey, L. (2012). The consequences of political cynicism: How cynicism shapes citizens’ reactions to political scandals. Political Behavior, 34(3), 411-423.
[43] Durrah O., Chaudhary M., & Gharib M. (2019). Organizational cynicism and its impact on organizational pride in industrial organizations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(7), 1203-1219.
[44] Eisinger, P. (2000). The politics of bread and circuses: Building the city for the visitor class. Urban Affairs Review, 35(3), 316-333.
[45] Greenglass, E. R., & Julkunen, J. (1989). Construct validity and sex differences in Cook-Medley hostility. Personality and Individual Differences, 10(2), 209-218.
[46] Gert, B. (2001). Avoiding moral cynicism. Teaching Ethics, 1(1), 1-17.
[47] Gallo, L. C., & Matthews, K. A. (2003). Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and physical health: Do negative emotions play a role? Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 10-51.
[48] Gelade G. A., Dobson P., & Gilbert P. (2006). National differences in organizational commitment: Effect of economy, product of personality, or consequence of culture? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(5), 542-556.
[49] Gino, F., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). When misconduct goes unnoticed: The acceptability of gradual erosion in others'unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 708-719.
[50] Hochwarter W. A., James M., Johnson D., & Ferris G. R. (2004). The interactive effects of politics perceptions and trait cynicism on work outcomes. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 10(4), 44-57.
[51] Jolley D., Douglas K. M., & Sutton R. M. (2018). Blaming a few bad apples to save a threatened barrel: The system-justifying function of conspiracy theories. Political Psychology, 39(2), 465-478.
[52] Jost, J. T. (2015). Resistance to change: A social psychological perspective. Social Research, 82(3), 607-636.
[53] Jost, J. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 263-314.
[54] Kim S., Jung K., Noh G., & Kang L. K. (2019). What makes employees cynical in public organizations? Antecedents of organizational cynicism. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 47(6), 1-10.
[55] Leung K., Bond M. H., de Carrasquel S. R., Muñoz C., Hernández M., Murakami F., & Singelis T. M. (2002). Social axioms: The search for universal dimensions of general beliefs about how the world functions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(3), 286-302.
[56] Laurin K., Shepherd S., & Kay A. C. (2010). Restricted emigration, system inescapability, and defense of the status quo: System-justifying consequences of restricted exit opportunities. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1075-1082.
[57] Leung K., Li F., & Zhou F. (2012). Sex differences in social cynicism across societies: The role of men's higher competitiveness and male dominance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(7), 1152-1166.
[58] Laurin K., Kay A. C., Proudfoot D., & Fitzsimons G. J. (2013). Response to restrictive policies: Reconciling system justification and psychological reactance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122(2), 152-162.
[59] Miller T. Q., Smith T. W., Turner C. W., Guijarro M. L., & Hallet A. J. (1996). A meta-analytic review of research on hostility and physical health. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 322-348.
[60] Mazar N., Amir O., & Ariely D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 633-644.
[61] Marien, S., & Hooghe, M. (2011). Does political trust matter? An empirical investigation into the relation between political trust and support for law compliance. European Journal of Political Research, 50(2), 267-291.
[62] Moore C., Detert J. R., Klebe Treviño L., Baker V. L., & Mayer D. M. (2012). Why employees do bad things: Moral disengagement and unethical organizational behavior. Personnel Psychology, 65(1), 1-48.
[63] Mensah, I. K., & Adams, S. (2020). A comparative analysis of the impact of political trust on the adoption of E-Government services. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(8), 682-696.
[64] Mirvis, P., & Kanter, D. L. (1989). Combating cynicism in the workplace. National Productivity Review, 8(4), 377-394.
[65] Nafei, W. A., & Kaifi, B. A. (2013). The impact of organizational cynicism on organizational commitment: An applied study on teaching hospitals in Egypt. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), 131-147.
[66] Nelson T. L., Palmer R. F., & Pedersen N. L. (2004). The metabolic syndrome mediates the relationship between cynical hostility and cardiovascular disease. Experimental Aging Research, 30(2), 163-177.
[67] Nivette A., Eisner M., & Ribeaud D. (2020). Evaluating the shared and unique predictors of legal cynicism and police legitimacy from adolescence into early adulthood. Criminology, 58(1), 70-100.
[68] O'Boyle E. H., Jr., Forsyth D. R., Banks G. C., & McDaniel M. A. (2012). A meta-analysis of the dark triad and work behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 557-579.
[69] Osborne D., Yogeeswaran K., & Sibley C. G. (2015). Hidden consequences of political efficacy: Testing an efficacy-apathy model of political mobilization. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(4), 533-540.
[70] Pattyn S., van Hiel A., Dhont K., & Onraet E. (2012). Stripping the political cynic: A psychological exploration of the concept of political cynicism. European Journal of Personality, 26(6), 566-579.
[71] Pfrombeck J., Doden W., Grote G., & Feierabend A. (2020). A study of organizational cynicism and how it is affected by social exchange relationships at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93(3), 578-604.
[72] Rosenberg, M. (1956). Misanthropy and political ideology. American Sociological Review, 21(6), 690-695.
[73] Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press..
[74] Reijseger G., Peeters M. C., Taris T. W., & Schaufeli W. B. (2017). From motivation to activation: Why engaged workers are better performers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(2), 117-130.
[75] Smith, T. W. (1992). Hostility and health: Current status of a psychosomatic hypothesis. Health Psychology, 11(3), 139-150.
[76] Smith T. W., Glazer K., Ruiz J. M., & Gallo L. C. (2004). Hostility, anger, aggressiveness, and coronary heart disease: An interpersonal perspective on personality, emotion, and health. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1217-1270.
[77] Sampson R. J.(2015). Continuity and change in neighborhood culture: Toward a structurally embedded theory of social altruism and moral cynicism. In O. Patterson & N. Fosse (Eds.), The cultural matrix: understanding black youth (pp. 201-228). Harvard University Press.
[78] Stavrova, O., & Ehlebracht, D. (2016). Cynical beliefs about human nature and income: Longitudinal and cross-cultural analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(1), 116-132.
[79] Sirin Y. E., Aydin Ö., & Bilir F. P. (2018). Transformational-transactional leadership and organizational cynicism perception: Physical education and sport teachers sample. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(9), 2008-2018.
[80] Stavrova O., Ehlebracht D., & Vohs K. D. (2020). Victims, perpetrators, or both? The vicious cycle of disrespect and cynical beliefs about human nature. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(9), 1736-1754.
[81] Schraff, D. (2021). Political trust during the Covid-19 pandemic: Rally around the flag or lockdown effects? European Journal of Political Research, 60(4), 1007-1017.
[82] Turner, J. H., & Valentine, S. R. (2001). Cynicism as a fundamental dimension of moral decision-making: A scale development. Journal of Business Ethics, 34(2), 123-136.
[83] Taris T. W., Ybema J. F., & van Beek I. (2017). Burnout and engagement: Identical twins or just close relatives? Burnout Research, 5, 3-11.
[84] Thielmann, I., & Hilbig, B. E. (2023). Generalized dispositional distrust as the common core of populism and conspiracy mentality. Political Psychology, 44(4), 789-805.
[85] van der Toorn, J., & Jost, J. T. (2014). Twenty years of system justification theory: Introduction to the special issue on "Ideology and system justification processes". Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 17(4), 413-419.
[86] Vice, S. (2011). Cynicism and morality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 14(2), 169-184.
[87] Wei X., Wang R., & Macdonald E. (2015). Exploring the relations between student cynicism and student burnout. Psychological Reports, 117(1), 103-115.
[88] Wrightsman, L. S., Jr. (1964). Measurement of philosophies of human nature. Psychological Reports, 14(3), 743-751.
[89] Wakslak C. J., Jost J. T., & Bauer P. (2011). Spreading rationalization: Increased support for large-scale and small-scale social systems following system threat. Social Cognition, 29(3), 288-302.
[90] Zhou F., Leung K., & Bond M. H. (2009). Social axioms and achievement across cultures: The influence of reward for application and fate control. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(3), 366-371.
PDF(677 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/