4 ms·
This may explain only the one direction of the equivalences: "low status" => "insecurity" => "condescending feedback", not the inverse. We can all come up with
by reinhardt 16y ago
This may explain only the one direction of the equivalences: "low status" => "insecurity" => "condescending feedback", not the inverse. We can all come up with examples of high status individuals demonstrating condescending behaviour.
- vecter 16y agoYou're right, but you can't "prove" condescension implies insecurity in any rigor. I think it's reasoning along the lines of A => B, we see lots of B, so probably A.