{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02212576113824079, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012509796828841863, 'mean_word_length': 5.214874484825778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Factors Affecting Diffusion of Entitlement in Consumption of Scarce Commodities: A Psychological Approach

This research examined factors affecting Diffusion of Entitlement to identify the most likely individual to be prone to Diffusion of Entitlement. This was explored by considering 3 key factors; Self-esteem, Emotional Intelligence and Culture Orientation. An online survey of a cross sectional correlational design was conducted on 96 undergraduate students (21 males and 75 females, mean age = 21.1, SD = 4.72) from Coventry University, UK. 3 scales measuring the 3 independent variables along with a decision vignette to measure if an individual was prone to Diffusion of Entitlement or not was provided. The results were analyzed to show a high significance value for High Emotional Intelligence predicting Diffusion of Entitlement and no prediction from Self Esteem and Culture Orientation.


INTRODUCTION:
In numerous situations, a societal norm designates people to equal sized shared commodities; for example, equal pay for men and women doing similar work. This norm of equality can affect some individual's views on correctness when it comes to scarce consumable commodities and could lead to an individual inhibiting their consumption to feed the others (van Dijk et al., 1999; van Dijk and Wilke, 1995; Allison et al., 1992). It is worthwhile noticing that while this norm is valid in situations, some individual's react to a surge of scarcity in commodities caused by hindered supply or increase in demand by delaying or inhibiting consumption (Effron and Miller, 2011). Even during the circumstance of equally shared commodities, some individuals may delay the amount they intake to meet the necessities of equality. Conversely, some scarce commodities are problematic to share equally (Effron and Miller, 2011). This includes objects and privileges; for example, taking a seat in overcrowded public transport, causing equal division to be difficult. Understanding why individuals respond to scarcity of indivisible commodities in different manners, for example; some individuals inhibiting intake and some not doing so; and what the differences in these individuals are, is the focus of the current paper. Past concepts and studies shows that scarcity heightens consumption in a situation where equal partition is not possible (Young, 1995;Jang et al., 2015). al., 1996;Young, 1995;Allison and Messick, 1990). It is also shown that scarcity increases attractiveness in commodities because they are anticipated by others signified by higher demand (Brock and Brannon 1992;Lynn, 1999;and Cialdini, 1988). Scarcity messages put up by companies for advertising implement two messages involving limited time and limited quantity (Cialdini, 2008;Balachander and Stock, 2009;Gierl and Huettl, 2010). This makes purchasers feel that the commodities are valuable and unique. Thus, having a good influence on the evaluation of the commodity (Aggarwal et al., 2011). This sums up to when an individual is free from the equality norm and there is higher demand caused by a lower supply, in turn increasing attraction and consumption making the commodity more desirable. However, it has been investigated that the underlying motive for people to increase using a commodity is to evoke emotional gratification (Wiedmann et al., 2009). Displaying emotions and other internal factors show a significant role in commodity consumption and appeal.

An Inhibitory Effect of Scarcity on Consumption: Diffusion of Entitlement
There are situations in which the equality norm is still applicable and equal division continues to be impossible and as a result scarcity reduces consumption (Effron and Miller, 2011). Considering a social gathering including appetizers in which, as the number of guests increase the more uncomfortable guests feel to serve themselves the appetizers and to violate the equality norm (Effron and Miller, 2011). They state that even when a commodity can be equally divided, the shortage in supply will interrupt consumption by constraining people from serving for themselves. This is described as Diffusion of Entitlement (Effron and Miller, 2011). Entitlement meaning common understanding of the social legality or suitability of performing such an action. Diffusion of Entitlement describes a situation where the number of individuals wanting an undividable, desirable commodity heightens in relation to the number of people who can have it. Therefore, the less allowed or entitled an individual will feel to serve themselves and more time taken before someone consumes the commodity (Effron and Miller, 2011). This phenomenon in terms of scarce consumable commodities is where an individual does not feel privileged or commendable to have the last portion of commodities available, varying from a slice of appetizer to a drink (Effron and Miller, 2011). The last one will remain untouched by all the willing by standers at an adult get-together or occasion. The principles in economics state that limited quantity increases the demand (Chendroyaperumal and Chendrayan, 2010) and this is regularly benefitted by advertisers as 'limited edition, till stocks last', but Diffusion of Entitlement befalls when limited supply is to be observed and so the demand reduces (Jang et al 2015). Effron and Miller, (2011) did a progression of examinations on Diffusion of Entitlement. The findings illustrated that when consumable commodities were low in supply the demand gradually reduced in comparison to the unlimited supply condition. The less supply or the more interest for a product, the more individuals needed to have it. Simultaneously, they were less inclined to take it. It was also shown that individuals were less accepting of another individual when they served themselves the consumable commodity in a limited supply condition (Effron and Miller, 2011). This information adds to research demonstrating that regularly we are less egotistical and care more for the result of others. However, it is unclear why only some people are prone to Diffusion of Entitlement and what the differences in these individuals are, due to the lack of research in this area. If a commodity is free, every individual should be feeling equally entitled to obtain the commodity?

Self Esteem and Entitlement
Studies done in the recent past have noted that there is a negative relationship with entitlement and selfesteem and the highest association being with academic self-esteem (Greenberger et al., 2008;Chowning and Campbell, 2009). Soon after Kopp et al. (2011) questioned past findings by using a measurement scale that found a positive association between entitlement and self-esteem. Previous research has also touched upon an individual not feeling worthy to own the last piece (Effron and Miller, 2011). This could conceivably be because of an individual's selfesteem; confidence in one's own worth (Lessard, Greenberger and Chen, 2016). It was observed in a series of studies done by Effron and Miller, (2011) that when participants were given the feeling of enti-tlement, by making them feel like they deserved the commodity more than their peers, they were less likely to be affected by Diffusion of Entitlement. The feeling of entitlement provided to them made them gain confidence in their self-worth which led to consumption of the scarce commodity (Effron and Miller, 2011). This would have been clearer if the level of self-esteem before and after the feeling of entitlement and non-entitlement was measured. However, there could be many more factors affecting this situation depending on the individual. Recent research has discovered that individuals instinctively consider small packages to reduce and limit caloric intake ( (Herman, 2015). In this case, these factors go against Social Facilitation. Social Facilitation is the consequence of social context on behavior. In terms of eating behavior, it has been studied that individuals consume more when with other people than being alone. However, this is not the case when it comes to scarce commodities; individuals tend to be affected by other social and personal influences which vary individuals' behavior in such situations, like selfesteem. In view of the previous literature discussed, the present study will aim to explore out predictions between Self Esteem and the extent of Diffusion of Entitlement.

Emotional Intelligence and Entitlement
Emotional intelligence is defined as the ability to monitor one's own or others' emotions and putting themselves in another person's situation (Austin, 2007). There are several types of skills involved in Emotional Intelligence (Davies et al., 1998;Goleman 1998, Gardner, 1993. One such skill involves recognition of others' emotions. Empathy is an ability that shows emotional awareness. This includes recognizing others' feelings and interpreting the cause for the feelings whilst contributing in the emotional experience without involved in the situation (Keen 2007 (Leiberg, 2006). There have been numerous studies conducted on Empathy and Emotional Intelligence in the past. Research have found correlations between Entitlement and Emotional Intelligence (Jackson et al., 2011) and Social Obligation (Greenberger et al., 2008), this is where individuals feel like they are responsible for others' wellbeing. Individual's displaying less Social Obligation showed lower Emotional Intelligence in terms of empathy (Jackson et al., 2011). A study done by Barasch et al. (2014) shows that individual with a low Emotional Intelligence can behave in selfish manners and engage in less altruistic behavior. Coherent with this concept, there is experimental confirmation that supports the demonstration of individuals experiencing a substantial cost to them when it comes to helping others (Camerer and Thaler, 1995;Batson, 1991). However, even in large gatherings in which people cannot earn social benefits or materials, one may be motivated towards the good deeds ambitious by selfish desires instead of being motivated to reduce an individual's suffering. For example, hunger; individuals may be motivated intrinsically, such as feeling good for empathizing for another person. This motivation allows an individual with high emotional intelligence to resist commodities and so to behave in an entitled manner (Arménio, 2010; Andreoni, 1990;Cialdini et al., 1987). However, due to the lack of evidence it is unclear whether there is a relationship between the level of emotional intelligence and the affect it has on Diffusion of Entitlement in consumption of scarce commodities. Nevertheless, studies done on emotional intelligence which includes a lab setting has drawbacks. Individuals will tend to be dishonest when answering the questionnaires as they are uncomfortable to answer truthfully, if the answers are not socially desirable (Andreoni, 1990). This causes unreliable results. Taking into consideration previous literature, this study will aim to explore out predictions between Emotional Intelligence and the extent of Diffusion of Entitlement.

Culture and Entitlement
Research also highlights the differences in culture and contribution to the different levels in entitlement (Achacoso, 2002). An individual from an individualistic culture is more likely to focus on the rights and concerns of each person, whereas a collectivistic culture stresses on the significance of community (Parks and Vu, 1994). When in social situations, culture can have varying effects on individuals in their behavior including eating behavior. People's consumption behaviors are different when they are with other people compared to when eating alone. Norms of suitable behavior are arranged by the behavior of other individuals as well as shared cultural experiences and cultural etiquettes (Higgs, 2015). Individuals are quick to follow norms if it is perceived to be suitable based on social comparisons. However, this depends on other factors such as, how concerned an individual is on social acceptance and judgments (Vartanian, 2015). There is clear evidence that there are differences in individuals from collectivistic and individualistic cultures, in wanting to be socially accepted and liked (Vartanian, 2015). Instead, people in individualistic cultures show more independent attitudes (Parks and Vu, 1994) and less consideration on social acceptance. Taarof is known as an Iranian etiquette and an Old Persian tradition. This explains Iranian behavior when they lower themselves in order to put others needs first as a sign of respect (Pana, 2020). From very small days' Iranian kids are taught to share. However, when equal divisibility becomes problematic they engage in self-lowering to respect the other person (Pana, 2020). Even when equal divisibility is possible the cultural norm is such that they refuse to eat anything offered till everyone else has their chance (Pana, 2020). The German word and standreste or Höflichkeitsgesteis used to refer to Diffusion of Entitlement in a German cultural setting. It phrases as the piece which out of decency one does not take or the polite piece (Mumford, 2020; Presbyterian Blues, 2020). This is referred to as trivselbit in the Swedish community, meaning the comfort and security piece (Mumford, 2020; Presbyterian Blues, 2020). In countries like Hong Kong and Chile an individual does not take the final piece due to superstitious beliefs. It is believed that unmarried people will be cursed to certainly not marry if one takes the last piece (Presbyterian Blues, 2020). Furthermore, Minnesotans believe this etiquette strongly, in fact small children are punished if seen reaching for the last piece (Mumford, 2020). Cultural studies seem to state such varying behavior and norms, yet there is no direct evidence as to where it all began. The roots to such behavior have been attended to be traced down by evolutionary psychologists, wherein they show altruism and empathy as attractive and desirable traits when in a group which leads to higher number of sexual partners and mating (University of Nottingham, 2008). The human brain triggers when it comes to the cost of raising children so it would have been considerably important for ancestors to choose mates who are considerate about others which lead to superstitious beliefs in the current world. In view of the previous literature on different norms being discussed, the present study aims to explore out predictions between Culture orientation and the extent of Diffusion of Entitlement.

Current Study
The present study is looking to expand the currently underdeveloped research area into factors affecting Diffusion of Entitlement in an individual. The current study seeks to explore out respondents' attitudes towards Diffusion of Entitlement and whether emotional intelligence, self-esteem and culture orientation can predict outcomes related to Diffusion of Entitlement through analysis of validated scales responded by undergraduate students in an online survey. The inhibitory effect of this case in scarcity prevents commodities from being used efficiently. This identified gap in research helps understand behavior to recognize factors related to Diffusion of Entitlement which can benefit to guide social marketing for behavior change in areas such as climate change focused on food wastage and obesity. Based on literature discussed the final analysis of the scales will hypothesize that: 3) Collectivistic cultures will significantly predict Diffusion of Entitlement as individuals in collectivistic cultures are individuals brought up midst the thought of "we" rather than "I" (Parks and Vu, 1994). They work as a community and are taught to put others needs before theirs, thus more likely to resist taking scarce commodities.

Design
The current study used a cross sectional correlational design. This study looked into the relationships between variables with 3 separate constructs of interest, these Independent Variables (IV) were; the scores on Emotional Intelligence, Self Esteem and Culture Orientation. The Dependent Variable (DV) was a measure of the number of participants who were affected by Diffusion of Entitlement when answering the decision vignette. To control any response bias; which arose when respondents did not wish to answer the questions frankly; the survey was conducted anonymously, and non-leading questions were used in the vignette.

Sample and Procedures
Respondents were recruited via opportunity sampling on SONA system in exchange of 30 research credits as well as through volunteer sampling for non-psychology students on Bristol Online Surveys. 96 Coventry University undergraduate students; 21 males and 75 females, (mean age = 21.1, SD = 4.72) was included for the data analysis of the study. The frequencies and percentages of respondents' ethnicities can be viewed in Appendix A. The exclusion criteria for the present study were that respondents should be above 18 years of age. Prior to data collection, ethical approval by the Coventry University ethics committee was obtained.
All materials were administered digitally via Bristol Online Survey, in which scales and questions were presented in order. At the start of the online survey, respondents were presented with the participant information sheet and informed consent. In which complete anonymity was confirmed as well as their right to withdraw was explained with instructions. The respondents were deceived by the aim of the study in the participant information sheet; this was to prevent them from providing biased, unreliable results. However, upon completion of the survey respondents were provided with a debrief sheet explaining why they have been deceived. If they felt uncomfortable, they were given information on how to withdraw their responses by quitting the survey at any given occasion.
The lead researcher's and supervisor's email address was mentioned for any queries or complaints. This survey had no risks to the respondents. The respondent was then presented with the demographic sheet followed by the first scale; The Schulte Self Report Emotional Intelligence Test (SSREI) structured by Salovey and Mayer, (1990) testing Emotional Intelligence. This was then followed by the Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale and the Triandis Culture Orientation scale respectively. At the end of the survey the respondent was provided with a vignette on a dilemma scenario and allowing the respondent to choose which scenario he or she is more likely to agree with; this measured Diffusion of Entitlement.

Measures
Firstly, respondents completed a basic demographic questionnaire, obtaining information on their age, gender, and ethnicity and whether they study psychology or not. Due to the study's focus being on Diffusion of Entitlement in adult gatherings, the exclusion criteria was 18 years and less. Data from any respondent under 18 years of age was removed by the researcher due to exclusion criteria. Gender was included to observe any relationship among gender and the extent of Diffusion of Entitlement as an internal factor affecting the results and as there is a known relationship between emotional intelligence in terms of empathy and gender (King, 1999;Sutarso, 1999;Wing and Love, 2001;and Singh, 2002).
Ethnicity was included to differentiate out the individualistic and collectivistic countries that have taken part in the study to find significance in the third aim; to predict outcomes of Diffusion of Entitlement through Culture orientation. In order to measure biases, the objectives of the study were guessed, it was important to know the frequency of respondents who studied psychology. The Schutte Self Report questionnaire (SSREI) consists of a 5 point Likert type scale of 33 questions from 1 being strongly agree to 5 being strongly disagree for example, "When I experience a positive emotion, I know how to make it last"  The vignette used, describes a simple and relatable scenario that eliminated gender and name biases as well as food preferences to make sure such variables will not be interfering. The scenarios contrasted between a high demands low supply situations to arise Diffusion of Entitlement and then provided with three possible reactions. The final reaction which "serving regardless the situation" was aimed at respondents who have an average score in self-esteem and emotional intelligence. The vignette is a replica of the vignette used by Effron and Miller, (2011) in their study to measure Diffusion of Entitlement.

Data Analysis
The current study comprised of an Emotional Intelligence scale which provided outputs of low and high emotional intelligence, Self Esteem scale which was analyzed on raw scores to provide more power over the analysis and Culture Orientation which provided raw scores for each of the sub categories; Horizontal collectivism (HC), Horizontal Individualism (HI), Vertical Collectivism (VC) and Vertical Individualism (VI).
The DV measurement vignette provided binary output as to whether the respondent was affected by Diffusion of Entitlement or not. Hence a Binomial Logistics Regression was conducted on the screened data.

Assumptions
Prior to conducting Binomial Logistics Regression, 4 assumptions were tested. Testing of assumptions showed that DV is measured on a dichotomous scale, current model has more than one IV, data has independence of observations whilst being mutually exclusive and in exhaustive categories. The Box Tidwell Test conducted to test the model interactions between continuous predictors and logs showed ( Table  1) that neither of the interaction terms are significant thus not violating linearity (p)>0.05.

Inferential Statistics
Direct Binary Logistic Regression was implemented to assess the impact of a number of factors on the likelihood that respondents would report being prone to Diffusion of Entitlement. The model contained three independent variables (Emotional Intelligence, Self Esteem and Culture Orientation).  The present study has discovered significant prediction between High Emotional Intelligence and Diffusion of Entitlement, each of which has various levels of support from literature as well as implications for intervention and future research.

Self Esteem and Diffusion of Entitlement
The first hypothesis of the present study was not supported by the study's research findings; there was no significant prediction of low self-esteem on Diffusion of Entitlement. This implies that feelings of entitlement do not come along with an individual's self-worth (Lessard et al., 2016). This differs with previous research which suggested a negative relation-ship with self-esteem and entitlement in general (Greenberger et al., 2008;Chowning and Campbell, 2009). However, even in a more practical study done by Effron and Miller, (2011) it was reported that when individuals were given the feeling of entitlement they were less affected by Diffusion of Entitlement. If this is the case, this could mean that feelings of entitlement could be affected by other factors. For example, size of the commodity affecting self-esteem in a social situation and not depend ending solely on self-esteem. Another factor could also be instability of self-esteem (Jordan and Hill, 2013;Islam, 2020). This is a situation in which an individual does not have consistent selfesteem. Self Esteem seems to fluctuate from context specific situations. This can be affected by factors such as body image, knowledge, social skills and much more (Jordan and Hill, 2013).  In this case, the respondent may have had instability in self-esteem and when answering the vignette the level of self-esteem they previously had may have changed.
Since the measurement of Diffusion of Entitlement was done online as a response for a vignette situation, it would have caused the results to be much different in comparison to a real-life situation. This could be explained by the theory Person Situation Interactionism. This explains how behavior occurs in response to the meaning of a stimulus and uses active cognitive processes. Without being exposed to the situation in person with the context and cues it could be difficult to measure a decision and thus the respondent would have behaved in a different manner in comparison to what the respondent thought would have happened.

High Emotional Intelligence and Diffusion of Entitlement
Strong predictions between High Emotional Intelligence and Diffusion of Entitlement is consistent with previously stated research showing reference to individuals being faster to pick up social signals (Leigberg, 2006). The faster individuals are to pick up social signals in social situations the more likely they are to understand the scarcity of commodities which inhibits from feeding everyone and thus being prone to Diffusion of Entitlement. Furthermore, this situation could be explained by Social obligation as stated previously (Greenberger et al., 2008). When individuals feel like they are responsible for others wellbeing they are likely to display high emotional intelligence. In addition to this, they will also act responsibly for others wellbeing. This shows that they would avoid taking scarce commodities in such a situation because others would not be able to have the commodities (Greenberger et al., 2008). At the same time individuals showing low emotional intelligence also displayed less social obligation (Jackson et al., 2011).
According to the analysis it can also be observed that a higher percentage of women reported higher scores in emotional intelligence that was in turn affected by Diffusion of Entitlement; thus, selected to consume from the situation with less demand than more demand. As previous studies report females having higher emotional intelligence than males; this could mean that more females will be affected by Diffusion of Entitlement than males. This questions a possibility of the significance of this variable; gender, as the sample was high in the number of females in comparison to the number of males.

Culture Orientation and Diffusion of Entitlement
The third hypothesis of the present study was not supported by the study's research findings; there was no significant prediction of collectivistic culture on Diffusion of Entitlement. This implies that culture does not affect an individual's feelings of collectivism and individualism in a certain situation. Nevertheless, there was a very close significance for vertical collectivism and the prediction on Diffusion of Entitlement.
To refresh, vertical collectivism refers to considering the self as a part of a collectivistic culture and being willing to acknowledge hierarchy and inequity within that collective. Due to perceived hierarchy and knowledge that everyone is not treated the same; such individuals are more affected by Diffusion of Entitlement. They are more prone to avoid equal division during scarcity of commodities. Furthermore, individuals who have scored higher on vertical collectivism are mostly individuals from Asian ethnicities and a few from European ethnicities. This shows close resemblance of rituals from collectivistic cultures such as from Hong Kong, Japan, Iran and some parts of Germany. As a whole, explanation of the insignificance could be due to absence of a realistic situation or even effects from parental upbringing regardless of the country they are born in and nurture effects.

Limitations and Strengths
The current study's findings must be considered in line with some limitations. Firstly, the sample consists of a majority of Psychology students who are familiar with the scales and the scoring. This could have resulted in avoiding honesty due to knowledge of the outcome and being effected by social desirability bias when responding to the questionnaires. Even though the scales might have been familiar the ultimate outcome would have been hard to guess. This was aided by deception of the aim as well as an identified strength of the current study, which was originality; this research is the first to study factors affecting Diffusion of Entitlement. Diffusion of Entitlement being a novel concept in the research world and society must have made it difficult to guess the aim to provide bias responses.
Furthermore, the sample collected is Gynocentric; this causes the results to be less generalizable to the male population. Furthermore, there could be gender differences in the scores provided by the varying scales. Even though, this was one internal variable which was ought to be measured, the limited sample size from males restricted the analysis from making an effective comparison. However, the sample size of 96 respondents makes the study generalizable to a whole population. Thirdly, decisions made in the vignette can change when faced in the same situation but in the real world due to situation specificity and social cues provided in the context (Patry, 2011).
This means a covert observation in such a situation would be the most effective technique to achieve an unbiased result. Even though conducting an online survey causes reduction in ecological validity, respondents are more comfortable when responding to the scales due to lack of social pressure around them or having any biases such as social desirability bias. Participants submitted their responses in complete anonymity which saves them from social desirability biases. Furthermore, the study was planned in a manner where participants will not display any order effects such as fatigue effect therefore, the study was kept short and provided them with their own time and space to respond to the questions. Biases that could have affected the decision in the vignette was removed such as a name for the individual which reveals gender and any specific food type that could create preferences in food. The vignette was of the same format and situation as Effron and Miller, (2011). All this increasing reliability of the study, furthermore, the study analyzed raw data scores to gain greater power over the data. However, this was not the case in all the variables as they were categorical. The study could be developed using greater power of interval data to gain more control over the data.

Future Research and Practical Implications
In light of the strengths and limitations, the current study is able to successfully give future research some direction when exploring Diffusion of Entitlement. Using a scale of higher reliability to measure culture orientation as well as conducting a covert Observation to measure real life decisions in such situations will make the results much valid by eliminating biases. It will also be interesting to see if there is a relationship between conformity and Diffusion of Entitlement in individuals. This would suggest that social marketing simply benefits from conformity. This research helps identify the individuals who are more likely to be affected by Diffusion of Entitlement. Thus, enabling Social Psychologists to make these individuals aware of the specific characteristic that leads to this behavior.
The inhibitory effect of this case in scarcity prevents commodities from being used efficiently. This is when the last few portions are being thrown away when none of the hungry guests consumes them. Therefore, this research hopes to contribute towards the betterment of the environment by helping to understand factors related to Diffusion of Entitlement which can help to guide social marketing for behavior change in areas such as climate change. Food wastage is a rising issue in the growing world (Reynolds et al., 2020; Moreno et al., 2020) especially the ongoing situation of the great food waste which has been reported in Paris (Shaw, 2019).
This study will help individuals who are more likely to not serve for themselves in social gatherings to be aware of their behavior and reduce food wastage. Food waste worldwide emits greenhouse gases and favors climate change. As the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change reported that humans are been given 12 years to save the planet from a complete climate change (McGrath, 2019) it is essential that research helps deplete the situation arising. Further to this, this research helps understand typical unattended human behavior to understand why people behave the ways they do in order develop the field of Social Psychology and Social marketing.

CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the current study aimed to find a significant prediction on High Emotional Intelligence and Diffusion of Entitlement. The results from this study reveal otherwise, as Self Esteem and Culture Orientation are not able to predict behavior shown by Diffusion of Entitlement, thus failing to explain why some individuals are affected by Diffusion of Entitlement and some are not. Future researchers are encouraged to develop this topic by extending the current study's findings and considering the suggestions made, in order to potentially help improve social marketing and help deplete the current food wastage crisis leading to global warming.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:
The author declares there's no conflict of interest in the present study.