Lesson 4 The Self (1) PDF

THE SELF Lesson Outline Self-Concept Self-Esteem Basic Principles of Self-Perception Self-Regulation Self-Presentation The Self and its Development Carl Rogers viewed personality structure in terms of just one construct. He called this construct the self, although it is more wide...

THE SELF Lesson Outline Self-Concept Self-Esteem Basic Principles of Self-Perception Self-Regulation Self-Presentation The Self and its Development Carl Rogers viewed personality structure in terms of just one construct. He called this construct the self, although it is more widely known today as the self-concept. A self-concept is a collection of beliefs about one’s own nature, unique qualities, and typical behaviour. Your self-concept is your mental picture of yourself. It is a collection of self-perceptions. For example, a self- concept might include such beliefs as “I am easy-going” or “I am intelligent” or “I am hardworking”. The Nature of the Self-Concept Although we usually talk about the self- concept as a single entity, it is actually a multifaceted structure. The self-concept is a n organised collection of beliefs about the self. These beliefs, also known as self-schemas, are developed from past experience and are concerned with one’s personality traits, abilities, physical features, values, goals, and social roles. People have self-schemas on dimensions that are important to them, including both strengths and weaknesses. Each of these schemas is characterised by relatively distinct thoughts and feelings. Hazel Markus and the Working Self- Concept Contemporary psychologists argue that only a portion of the total self-concept operates at any one time. The self-concept that is currently accessible has been termed the working self-concept by Hazel Markus. Self-schemas have a dynamic quality and play an important role in processing self-relevant information. Ex, when a particular self-schema is operating, its attendant thoughts and feelings strongly influence the way individuals process information about that aspect of the self. Markus: Possible Selves Not only do beliefs about the self influence current behaviour, they also influence future behaviour. Markus uses the term possible selves to refer to one’s conceptions about the kind of person she or he might become in the future. If you have narrowed your career choices to personnel manager and psychologist, these represent two possible selves in the career realm. Possible selves are developed from past experiences, current behaviour, and future expectations. They make people attentive to goal-related information and role models and mindful of the need to practice goal-related skills. As such, they help individuals not only to envision desired future goals but also to achieve them. Negative/Positive Selves Interestingly, it has been found that, for individuals who have experienced traumatic events, psychological adjustment is best among those who are able to envision a variety of positive selves. Sometimes, possible selves are negative and represent what one fears one might become – such an alcoholic like your uncle or an adult without an intimate relationship. In this case, possible selves function as images to be avoided.  Individuals’ beliefs about themselves are not fixed – but neither are they easily changed. How fixed People are strongly motivated to maintain a consistent view of the self. are our Thus, once the self-concept is established, the individual has a beliefs tendency to preserve and defend it. about In the context of this stability, however, self-beliefs do have a certain dynamic quality. ourselves? Self-beliefs seem to be most susceptible to change when people shift form an important and familiar social setting to an unfamiliar one – for example, when moving from high school to college. This finding clearly underscores the social foundations of the self-concept. E. Tory Higgins: Self-Discrepancy Theory Some people perceive themselves pretty much the way they would like to see themselves. Others experience a gap between what they actually see and what they would like to see. Example a person who describes his/her actual self as shy, but his/her ideal self as outgoing. This mismatching of self-perceptions is termed self-discrepancy. Self-Discrepancy Individuals have several sets of self-perceptions: The actual self are qualities that you or others believe you actually possess; The ideal self are characteristics that you or others would like you to have; The ought self are traits that you or others believe you should possess. Although self-discrepancy theory is concerned with both self-perceptions and how significant others see one. In this lesson we will focus only on self- discrepancies emanating from one’s own self- perceptions. Self-Discrepancies and their Effects According to Higgins, when people live up to their personal standards (ideal or ought selves), they experience high self-esteem. When they don’t meet their own expectations, their self-esteem suffers. In addition, he says, certain types of self- discrepancies are associated with specific emotions. One type of self-discrepancy occurs when the actual self is at odds with the ideal self. These instances trigger dejection-related emotions (sadness, disappointment). Example Tiffany knows that she is attractive, but she is also overweight and would like to be thinner. Self-discrepancy theory would predict that she would feel dissatisfied and dejected. Research has shown an association between discrepant actual/ideal views of the body shape and eating disorders. Self-Discrepancies and their Effects A second type of discrepancy involves a mismatch between actual and ought selves. Perhaps you don’t stay in touch with your grandparents as often as you feel you should. As a result of this actual/ought self discrepancy, Higgins predicts that you would experience agitation-related emotions (irritability, anxiety, and guilt). Extreme discrepancies of this type can result in anxiety-related psychological disorders. Self-Discrepancies and their Effect Specific discrepancies do not always produce their predicted emotions. The expected outcomes are most likely to result when self-discrepancies are large, when the person is aware of them, when they matter, and when they are actually experienced rather than just imagined.  Everyone experiences self-discrepancies, yet most people manage to feel reasonably good about themselves. How is this possible? Three factors seem to be important: Self- 1. The amount of discrepancy you experience, Discrepancies 2. Your awareness of the discrepancy, 3. And whether the discrepancy is actually and their important to you. So the medical student who gets a C in Effect maths will probably feel a lot worse than a humanities student who gets a C in the same course.  Can individuals do anything to blunt the negative emotions and blows to self-esteem associated with self-discrepancies? People can change their behaviour to bring it more in line with their personal standards (ideal or ought selves). Example, if your ideal self is a person who gets above- average grades and your actual self just got a D on a test, you can study more effectively for the next test to improve your grade. But what about the times you can’t match your ideal Coping with standards? Perhaps you had your heart set on playing football with your Self- national team, but you did not make the cut. One way to ease the discomfort associated with such Discrepancy discrepancies is to bring your ideal self a bit more in line with your actual abilities. Another option is to blunt your self-awareness. You can do so by avoiding situations that increase your self-awareness – you don’t go to a party if you expect to spend a miserable evening talking to yourself. Example Some people use alcohol to blunt self-awareness. In one study, college students were first put into either a high or a low self-awareness group based on test scores. Then, both groups were given a brief version of an intelligence test as well as false feedback on their test performance. Half of the high self- awareness group were told that they had done quite well on the test and the other half were told that they had done quite poorly. Next, supposedly as part of a separate study, these participants were asked to taste and evaluate various wines for 15 minutes. The experimenters predicted that the high self- awareness participants who had been told that they had done poorly on the IQ test would drink more than the other groups, and this is precisely what the study found. Those who could not escape negative information about themselves drank more alcohol to reduce their self-awareness. Similarly, in the real world, it has been found that alcoholics who have high self- awareness and who experience negative or painful life events relapse more quickly and completely. Coping with Self- Discrepancy Heightened self-awareness does not always make people focus on self- discrepancies and negative aspects of the self. If that were true, most people would feel a lot worse about themselves than they actually do! Self-concepts are made up of numerous self-beliefs – many of them positive, some negative. Because individuals have a need to feel good about themselves, they tend to focus on their positive features rather than their negative ones. A variety of sources influence one’s self- Factors concept. Chief among them are one’s own observations, feedback from others and Shaping the cultural views. Self-Concept Factors Shaping the Self- Concept: Your Own Observations Your observations of your own behaviour are obviously a major source of information about what you are like. Individuals begin observing their own behaviour and drawing conclusions about themselves early in life. Young children will make statements about who is the tallest, who can run fastest, or who can swing the highest. Leon Festinger’s social comparison theory proposes that individuals compare themselves with others in order to assess their abilities and opinions. Although Festinger’s original theory claimed that people engage in social comparison for the purpose of accurately assessing their abilities, recent research suggests that they also engage in social comparison to maintain their self-image and to improve their skills. Factors Shaping the Self-Concept: Your Own Observations The reasons people engage in social comparison determine whom they choose for a point of comparison. A reference group is a set of people against whom individuals compare themselves. For example, what is the first thing you do if you want to know how you did on your first test of psychology? Ask your classmates. Your reference group in this case is the entire class. On the other hand, if you want to improve your tennis game, your reference group will probably be limited to those of superior ability, because their skills give you something to strive for. And if your self-esteem needs a boost, you will probably compare yourself to those whom you perceive to be worse off than you so you can feel better about yourself. Example The potential impact of such social comparisons was dramatically demonstrated in a study known as Mr Clean/Mr Dirty study. Subjects thought they were being interviewed for a job. Half the subjects met another applicant who was neatly dressed and who appeared to be very competent. The other half were exposed to a competitor who was unkempt and disorganised. All subjects filled out measures of self-esteem both before and after the fake job interviews. The results indicated that subjects who encountered the impressive competitor showed a decrease in self- esteem after the interview while those who met the unimpressive competitor showed increases in self- esteem. Thus, comparisons with others can have immediate effects on one’s self-concept. Subjectivity People’s observations of their own behaviour are not entirely objective. The general tendency is to distort reality in a positive direction. In other words, most people tend to evaluate themselves in a more positive light than they really merit. The strength of this tendency was highlighted in a large survey conducted as part of the Scholastic Aptitude Test of some 829,000 high school seniors. In this survey, 70% of the students rated themselves above average in ‘leadership ability’. Only 2% rated themselves below average. By definition, only 50% must be above average and 50% below. Nonetheless, with regard to ‘ability to get along with others’ 100% of students saw themselves as above average! Moreover, 25% of the respondents thought that they belonged in the top 1%. Negative Distortions about the Self Although the general tendency is to distort reality in a positive direction, most people tend to make both negative and positive distortions. Example: you might overrate your social skill, emotional stability, and intellectual ability while underrating your physical attractiveness. A minority of people consistently evaluate themselves in an unrealistically negative way. Thus, the tendency to see oneself in an overly favourable light is strong but not universal. Feedback from Others Your self-concept is shaped significantly by the feedback you get from other people about your behaviour. Of course, not everyone has equal influence in your life. Early on, your parents and other family members played a dominant role in providing you with feedback. As you grew older, the number of significant others who gave you feedback increased. Parents give their children a great deal of direct feedback. They constantly express approval or disapproval, saying such things as “I am so proud of you” or “you are a lazy bum, just like your Uncle”. Most people, especially when they are young, take this sort of feedback very seriously. Thus, it comes as no surprise that studies find an association between parents’ views of a child and the child’s self-concept. There is a strong link about children’s perceptions of their parents’ attitudes toward them and their own self-perceptions. Feedback from others is filtered through one’s social perception systems. As a consequence, it may be as distorted as one’s own self-observations.  Interestingly, people are not necessarily accurate when perceiving how specific people evaluate them. People are better at guessing how other How accurate people in general view them. are we in When individuals have access to “objective” information (course grades), their Perceiving perceptions of others’ judgements carry less how Others weighting than when they are evaluating themselves in areas such as physical Evaluate Us? attractiveness, where they must rely solely on socially defined standards. Cultural Values Your self-concept is also shaped by cultural values. The society in which you are brought up defines what is desirable and undesirable in personality and behaviour. Example: American culture puts a lot of emphasis on individuality, competitive success, strength, and skill. When individuals meet cultural expectations, they feel good about themselves and experience increases in self-esteem and vice versa. Cross-cultural studies have shown how different cultures shape different conceptions of the self. An important way in which cultures differ is on the dimension of individualism vs. collectivism. Individualism involves putting personal goals ahead of group goals and defining one’s identity in terms of personal attributes rather than group memberships. Children are taught to be independent, self-reliant and have high self-esteem. In contrast, collectivism involves putting group goals ahead of personal goals and defining one’s identity in terms of the groups one belongs to. Higher value on shared values and resources, cooperation, and concern for how one’s actions will affect other group members. Children taught to be obedient, reliable, and adopt proper behaviour.  Individuals reared in individualistic cultures usually have an independent view of the self, perceiving themselves Individualisti as unique, self-contained, and distinct from others. They are taught to maintain their sense c vs. of self as a separate person. Collectivistic In contrast, individuals reared in collectivist cultures typically have an Cultures interdependent view of the self. They see themselves as inextricably connected to others and believe the harmonious relationships with others are of utmost importance. Lesson Outline Self-Concept Self-Esteem Basic Principles of Self-Perception Self-Regulation Self-Presentation Self-esteem refers to one’s overall assessment of one’s worth as a person; it is the evaluative component of the self-concept. Self-esteem is a global self-evaluation that blends many specific evaluations about one’s adequacy as a student, an athlete, a worker, as pose, a parent, or whatever is personally relevant. Self- If you feel basically good about yourself, you probably have high self-esteem. Esteem Sometimes, the term positive self-concept is also used interchangeably for self-esteem.  The baseline self-esteem is relatively stable; however, the ups and downs of daily life can produce short-term How Stable fluctuations in self-esteem. is Self- People seem to vary in the degree to Esteem which self-esteem is experienced as stable. And those whose self-esteem fluctuates in response to daily experiences are highly responsive to feedback from others – they are more moved by praise and more sensitive to criticism.  Investigating self-esteem is difficult for several reasons. Firstly, It is difficult to obtain accurate measures of self-esteem. The problem is that researchers tend to rely on self-reports from subjects, which obviously may be biased since most individuals typically hold Investigatin unrealistically positive views about themselves. Moreover, some people may choose not to disclose their actual self- g Self- esteem on a questionnaire. Secondly, in evaluating self-esteem it is often Esteem quite difficult to separate cause from effect. A large volume of correlational data tell us that certain behavioural characteristics are associated with positive or negative self- esteem. Example: although self-esteem is a good predictor of happiness, it is hard to tell whether high self-esteem causes happiness or vice versa. Low Self-Esteem and Self- Fulfilling Prophecy People with low self-esteem are thought to hold strong negative views about themselves; however, some psychologists argue that people with low self-esteem are simply more confused and not more negative. They are confused on what they are able to achieve – their self-concept is not very clear. They are socially awkward and can be resentful. They can feel better by putting others down. Self-esteem effects our expectations, therefore low self-esteem may lead us to expect ourselves to perform badly. As a result (of the expectation of performing badly) people can feel anxious and not be able to fully prepare as well as they could (due to anxiety). This might in turn result in failure, which would inflict a further blow to the already depleted self-esteem. The opposite works for high self-esteem. High Self-Esteem and the Danger of Narcissism Although high self-esteem is generally a good thing to have, it can also lead to problems when people’s self-views are inflated and unrealistic. Narcissism is the tendency to regard oneself as grandiosely self- important. Narcissistic individuals passionately want to think positively of themselves. They are concerned with fantasies of success, believe that they deserve special treatment, and react aggressively when they experience threats to their self-views called ego threats. People who have high self-esteem but are realistic about their qualities are not susceptible to ego threats and are less likely to resort to hostility and aggression when faced with disagreement about themselves. Study has shown that narcissists who experience ego threats are likely to engage in aggression such as partner abuse, rape, gang violence, individual and group hate crimes, and political terrorism. Determinants of Self-Esteem The foundations for high or low self-esteem appear to be laid very early in life. Therefore, psychologists have focused a lot on parenting in self-esteem development. There is ample evidence that parental involvement, acceptance, support, and exposure to clearly defined limits have marked influence on children’s self-esteem. As children grow older, their peers begin to rival parents as a source of self-esteem. And by college age, peers have much more impact on self-esteem than parents. Children also make their own judgements about themselves in relation to others. A study showed that self-esteem is boosted by being a ‘big fish in a small pond’. Individuals compare themselves to others in their specific reference group (other students in their school), not to a general reference group (other students in the country). The fact that individuals with similar talents may vary in self-esteem, depending on their reference group, demonstrates the immense importance of social comparison in the development of self-esteem.  Because prejudice and discrimination are still pervasive in our societies, it has generally been assumed that members of minority groups have lower self-esteem than members of the dominant majority group. In fact, there is a good deal of evidence to the contrary. Ethnicity How is it that minority group members often have high self-esteem when it seems that they and Self- should not? Minority group members use a number of strategies to protect their self- esteem from the effects of being stigmatised. Esteem These include attributing negative appraisals to prejudice against their group in stead of to themselves, and devaluing those qualities on which their group fares poorly and valuing those attributes on which their group excels. In addition, minority group members use their own group as their dominant reference group, not the relatively advantaged majority group. Gender and Self-Esteem Although females are not a minority group, they resemble ethnic minorities in that they tend to have lower status and less power than males. Thus, it comes as no surprise that even here there is the assumption that females generally have lower self-esteem than males. Studies showed that, in fact, in general males score higher on self-esteem tests than females, although the differences were small for the most part. The largest difference occurred in 15-18 year-old age group. Factors that could easily contribute to gender differences in self-esteem include relatively few societal messages that support esteem building in girls, the overemphasis on physical appearance in girls and women, violence against girls and women, and low rates of athletic participation among girls. However, we should not undermine the high price boys and men pay for adhering to traditional male gender expectations. Males are always expected to be assertive, successful, ready to take on any opportunity, they need to be strong and show no weaknesses. Therefore, they are also less likely to report lower self-esteem. Lesson Outline Self-Concept Self-Esteem Basic Principles of Self-Perception Self-Regulation Self-Presentation Basic Principles of Self- Perception: Cognitive Processes People are faced with a large number of decisions on a daily basis. How do they keep from being overwhelmed? The key lies in how people process information. According to Shelly Taylor, people are ‘cognitive misers’. According to this model, cognitive resources (attention, memory) are limited, so the mind works to ‘hoard’ them by taking cognitive shortcuts. Example: you probably have the same morning routine: shower, drink coffee, read the newspaper while having breakfast, check e- mail etc… Because you do these things without a lot of thought, you can conserve your attentional, decision-making and memory capacity for important cognitive tasks. This example illustrates the default mode of handling information: automatic processing. Cognitive Processes Ellen Langer describes these two states as mindlessness and mindfulness respectively. In addition to guiding the processing of self-relevant information, these two modes of information processing operate in a variety of social situations. Another way that cognitive resources are protected is through selective attention, with high priority given to information pertaining to the self. Example: a phenomenon known as the ‘cocktail party effect’ – the ability to pick out one’s name in a roomful of chattering people. Another principle of self-cognition is that people strive to understand themselves. One way they do so, is by comparing themselves to others.  Another way of understanding oneself is to engage in attributional thinking. Example: you win a critical match for your school’s tennis team. To what do you attribute your success? Did you have the home court advantage? Perhaps your opponent was playing with a minor injury? Self- This example from every day life shows the nature of the self-attribution process. Attributions Self-attributions are inferences that people draw about the causes of their own behaviour. People routinely make attributions to make sense out of their experiences. These attributions involve inferences that ultimately represent guesswork on each person’s part. Self-Attributions Fritz Heider was the first to argue that people tend to locate the cause of a behaviour either within a person, attributing it to personal factors, or outside of a person, attributing it to environmental factors. He therefore established one of the crucial dimensions along which attributions are made.  Internal or External: explanations of behaviour and events can be categorised as internal or external attributions. Internal attributions ascribe the causes of behaviour to personal dispositions, traits, abilities, and feelings. External attributions ascribe the causes of behaviour to situational demands and Internal/ environmental constraints. Whether one’s self-attributions are internal or External external can have a tremendous impact on Attributions one’s personal adjustment. Lonely people tend to attribute the cause of their loneliness to stable, internal causes (I’m unlovable). Similarly, studies suggest that people who attribute their set backs to internal, personal causes while discounting external, situational explanations may be more prone to depression than people who display opposite tendencies. Stable/Unstable A second dimension people use in making causal attributions is the stability of the causes underlying behaviour. A stable cause is one that is more or less permanent and unlikely to change over time. A sense of humour and intelligence are stable internal causes of behaviour. Stable external causes of behaviour include such things as laws and rules (speed limits, no smoking areas). An unstable cause of behaviour is one that is variable or subject to change. Unstable internal causes of behaviour include such things as mood (good or bad) and motivation (strong or weak). Unstable external causes of behaviour could be the weather and the presence or absence of other people. Controllable/Uncontrollable A third dimension in the attribution process concerns the controllability of the causes underlying one’s actions. Example: the amount of effort you dedicate to a task is typically perceived as something under your control, whereas an aptitude for music is viewed as something you are born with (beyond your control). This dimension acknowledges the fact that sometimes events are under one’s control and sometimes they are not. Controllability can vary with each of the other two factors. These three dimensions appear to be the central ones in the attribution process. Research has documented that self-attributions can influence future expectations (success or failure) and emotions (pride, hopelessness, guilt), and these combine to influence subsequent performance.  Attributional style refers to the tendency to use similar causal explanations for a wide variety of events in one’s life. People tend to exhibit, to varying degrees, one of two attributional styles: an optimistic explanatory style or a pessimistic explanatory style. Attributional The person with an optimistic explanatory style Style usually attributes setbacks to external, unstable, and specific factors. Example a person who failed to get a desired job might attribute this misfortune to bad luck in the interview rather than to personal shortcomings. This style can help people discount their setbacks and thus maintain positive expectations for the future and a favourable self-image.  In contrast, people with a pessimistic explanatory style tend to attribute their setbacks to internal, stable, and global (or pervasive) factors. These attributions make them feel bad about themselves and pessimistic about their ability to handle challenges in the future. Such a style can foster passive behaviour and Attributional make people more vulnerable to learned helplessness and depression. Style Thankfully, several approaches to therapy appear to be successful in helping depressed individuals change a self-defeating attributional style. With these approaches, individuals learn to stop always blaming themselves for negative outcomes (especially when they cannot be avoided) and to take personal credit for positive outcomes.  Motives Guiding Self- Understanding Whether people go about evaluating themselves by social comparisons, attributional thinking, or other means, they are highly motivated to pursue self- understanding. In seeking self-understanding, people are driven by 3 main motives: accuracy, consistency and self- enhancement. Accuracy The accuracy motive is reflected in people’s desire for truthful information about themselves. Individuals seek accurate feedback about many types of information – their personal qualities, abilities, physical features, and so forth. It is obvious why people seek out accurate information. It helps them set realistic goals and behave in appropriate ways. Still the bald truth is not always welcome. Accordingly, people are also motivated by other concerns. Consistency The consistency motive drives people toward information that matches what they already know about themselves. This tendency to strive for a consistent self-image ensures that individuals’ self-concepts are relatively stable. Individuals maintain consistent self-perceptions in a number of subtle ways and are often unaware of doing so. Example: people maintain consistency between their past and present behaviour by erasing past memories that conflict with present ones. People who were once shy and who later became outgoing have been shown to recall memories about themselves that indicate that they perceive themselves as always having been outgoing. Consistency Another way people maintain self-consistency is by seeking out feedback and situations that will confirm their existing self-perceptions and avoiding potentially disconfirming situations or feedback. Self-verification theory refers to people that prefer to receive feedback from others that is consistent with their own self-views. This follows that those with positive self-concepts should prefer positive feedback from others and those with negative self-concepts should prefer negative feedback. Research found this to be the case. Self-Enhancement People are motivated by self-enhancement, or the tendency to maintain positive feelings about the self. Evidence of self-enhancement is widespread. Example: individuals exaggerate their control over life events, predict they will have a brighter future than others, and view themselves better than others. While self-enhancement is quite common, it is not universal. Individuals who have low self-esteem or who are depressed are less prone to self-enhancement than others. There are also cross-cultural differences in self-enhancement. Example: self- enhancement as been more pronounced in Western than in Eastern Cultures.  Methods of Self-Enhancement The self-enhancement motive drives individuals to seek positive (and reject negative) information about themselves. Cognitive strategies that people commonly use include: Downward Basking in Self- Self-serving comparison reflected handicappin bias s glory g We’ve already mentioned that people compare themselves to others as a means of learning more about themselves. However, once threat enters the picture people typically change their strategy and choose to compare themselves with someone who is worse off than they are. This defensive tendency to compare oneself with someone whose troubles are more serious than one’s own is termed downward social comparison. Downward Why do people switch strategies under threat? Comparisons It seems that downward social comparisons is associated with increase in both mood and self-esteem. Example: if you have ever been in a serious car accident in which your car was ‘totalled’ you probably reassured yourself by reflecting on the fact that at least no one was seriously injured. Suppose that you and 3 others have applied for a part-time job and you are selected for the position. How do you explain your good fortune? Chances are you tell yourself that you were hired because you were most qualified for the job. But how do the other 3 people interpret their negative outcome? Self- Do they tell themselves that you got the job because you were the most able? Unlikely! Instead, they probably attribute their loss to Serving Bias ‘bad luck’ or to not having had enough time to prepare for the interview. These different explanations for success and failure reflect the self-serving bias, or the tendency to attribute one’s success to personal factors and one’s failures to situational factors. Not everyone is so keen to take credit, however. Some may opt to be more modest, especially if they feel that boasting can cause others to dislike you – so this strategy still turns out to be self- serving.  When your favourite sports team won the national championship last year, did you make a point of wearing the team cap? Did you tell your friends: ‘we won the championship’, even though you are not part of the team? When your best friend won that special award, do you remember how often you told others the good news Basking in about your friend? Reflected If you played a role in someone’s success, it is understandable that you would want to share in the Glory recognition; however, people often want to share recognition even when they are on the side-lines of an outstanding achievement. Basking in reflected glory is the tendency to enhance one’s image by publicly announcing one’s association with those who are successful. Self-Handicapping When people fail at an important task, they need to save face. Example someone failed to get a job they wanted or did poorly on a big exam. In such instances, individuals can usually come up with a face-saving excuse, example, I had a terrible stomach ache during the interview/exam. Some people actually behave in a way that sets them up to fail so that they have a ready-made excuse for failure, should it occur. Self-handicapping is the tendency to sabotage one’s performance to provide an excuse for possible failure. Example: when there is a big test coming up and you put off studying until the last minute, or go out drinking the night before the test. If, as is likely, you don’t do well on the exam, you explain your poor performance by saying you did not prepare. People prefer that others believe their poor performance is attributed to lack of preparation than lack of ability.  The motives of accuracy, consistency, and self-enhancement permit flexibility in making self-evaluations. Although you would think that Which accurate information would be the most useful to people, that doesn’t motive is seem to be the case. In a series of studies that pitted the most used three motives against each other, the self-enhancement motive was found to make self- to be the strongest, the consistency motive a distant second, and the evaluations? accuracy motive an even more distant third. Lesson Outline Self-Concept Self-Esteem Basic Principles of Self-Perception Self-Regulation Self-Presentation  People are all the time trying to resist impulses and make themselves do things they do not Self- want to do. They also determine the various goals they want to pursue and how to reach them. Regulation This work of directing and controlling one’s behaviour is termed self-regulation. Clearly, the ability to manage and direct what you think how you feel, and how you behave is tied to success at work, in relationships, and in mental and physical health. Where would people be without the ability to delay gratification and focus their behaviour toward important personal goals? Self-regulation develops early in life and remains relatively stable. Self-efficacy is a key aspect of self-regulation, as well as self-defeating behaviour, a case of self- control failure. Self-Efficacy As already mentioned in theories of personality topic, self-efficacy refers to people’s conviction that they can achieve specific goals. According to Albert Bandura, efficacy beliefs vary according to the person’s skills. You may have high efficacy when it comes to making friends but low self-efficacy about speaking in front of a group. However, simply having a skill does not guarantee that you will be able to put it into practice; you must also believe that you are capable of doing so. Therefore, self-efficacy is concerned not with the skills you have, but with your beliefs about what you can do with these skills.  Studies show that self-efficacy affects individuals’ commitments to goals, their performance on tasks, and their persistence toward goals in the face of obstacles. In addition, people with high self-efficacy anticipate success in future outcomes and can tune out negative thoughts that can lead to failure. Correlates of Self-efficacy is related to academic success, career Self-Efficacy choice, health habits, and responses to stress. Self-efficacy is learned and can be changed. (Remember we did Bandura in behavioural approaches). Research shows that increasing self-efficacy is an effective way for treating psychological problems such as test anxiety, fear of sexual assault, PTSD, and drug addiction.  Self-efficacy plays a key role in the ability to Developing make commitments to goals and the ability to Self-Efficacy meet those goals. How do people acquire this characteristic? Bandura argues that there are four sources of self-efficacy: 1. Mastery experiences 2. Vicarious experiences 3. Persuasion and encouragement 4. Interpretation of emotional arousal  The most effective path to self-efficacy is through mastering new skills. Sometimes new skills come easily, like learning how to use the copy machine in the library. Some skills are harder to masters such as learning how to play the piano. In acquiring more difficult skills, people usually make mistakes. How they handle Mastery these failure experiences is the key to learning self-efficacy. Experiences If you give up when you make mistakes, your failure to succeed instils self-doubts or low self-efficacy. If you persist through failure experiences to eventual success, you learn the lesson of self-efficacy: I can do it! This approach to learn from mistakes and persevere until they succeed provides people with mastery experiences needed to build self-efficacy and approach future challenges with confidence.  Another way to improve self-efficacy is by watching others perform a skill you want to learn. It is important that you choose a model who is competent at the task, and it helps if they are similar to you (in age, gender, and ethnicity). Example: if you are shy about speaking up Vicarious for yourself, observing someone who is skilled at doing so can help you develop the Experiences confidence to do it yourself. It is important to pick successful role models – watching unsuccessful ones can undermine self-efficacy (if they did not succeed neither will I).  Although it is less effective than the first two approaches, a third way to develop self- efficacy is through the encouragement of others. Example: if you are having a hard time Persuasion and asking someone for a date, a friend’s Encouragement encouragement might give you just the push you need. Persuasion does not always work. And unless encouragement is accompanied by specific and concrete suggestions, this tactic is unlikely to be successful.  The physiological responses that accompany feelings and one’s interpretations of these responses are another source of self-efficacy. Example: you are sitting in class waiting for the instructor to distribute an exam. You notice that your palms are moist and your heart is pounding. Interpretation If you attribute these behaviours to fear, you can temporarily harm your of Emotional self-efficacy, thus decreasing your Arousal chances of doing well. Alternatively, if you interpret your sweaty palms and racing heart to the arousal everyone needs to perform well, you may be able to boost your self-efficacy and increase your chances of doing well.  Self-regulation does not always succeed. That is the case in self-defeating behaviour. It is reasonable for people to act in their own self-interest, and typically they do. But sometimes people knowingly do things that are bad for them, like completing important assignments at the last minute. Self- Self-defeating behaviours are seemingly intentional actions that Defeating goes against a person’s self- interest. Behaviour There are three categories of self- defeating behaviour: 1. Deliberate self-destruction 2. Trade-offs 3. Counterproductive strategies  In deliberate self-destruction, people want to harm themselves and they choose courses of action that will foreseeably lead to that result. Deliberate Although this type of behaviour may occur in individuals with psychological Self- disorders, deliberate self-destruction appears to be not very common in Destruction general.  In trade-offs, people foresee the possibility of harming themselves but accept it as a necessary accompaniment to achieving a desirable goal. Overeating, smoking, and drinking to excess are examples that come readily to mind. Other examples include the failure to follow prescribed health care advice (t’s easier now to Trade-offs slack off but doing so leads to future problems), shyness (avoiding social situations protects against anxiety but makes loneliness more likely), and self- handicapping (getting drunk before an example explains poor performance but increases chances of failure).  One common factor in self-defeating trad-offs is poor judgement. I.e. people choose immediate benefits (pleasant sensations, escape from painful thoughts or feelings) over long-term costs (heart disease, lung cancer, few intimate relationships). To bolster their choices, people usually ignore or downplay the long-term risks of their behaviour. Two other factors that are most likely to play a key role in trade-offs are emotional distress (anxiety) and high self-awareness. Because negative emotions are Trade-off distressing, people want a quick escape. Thus, they light a cigarette or have a drink to bring immediate relief, and they tune out the long-term negative consequences of their actions. In short, people engage in trade-offs because they bring immediate, positive, and reliable outcomes, not because they want to kill themselves.  In counterproductive strategies, a person pursues a desirable outcome but misguidedly uses an approach that is bound to fail. Of course, you cannot always know in advance if a strategy will pay off, so people must habitually use this strategy for it to qualify as self-defeating. Example: some people tend to persist in unproductive endeavours, such as pursuing an unreachable career goal or unrequited love. Such behaviour costs Counterproductive valuable time, generates painful emotions, and blocks the discovery of productive approaches. Strategies The key cause of counterproductive behaviour seems to be errors in judgement, such as misjudging one’s abilities or the actions required to produce a desired result. People persist in these behaviours because they believe they will be successful, not because they are intent on self-defeat. Lesson Outline Self-Concept Self-Esteem Basic Principles of Self-Perception Self-Regulation Self-Presentation Self-Presentation While your self-concept involves how you see yourself, your public self involves how you want others to see you. A public self is an image presented to others in social interactions. This presentation of a public self may sound deceitful, but it is perfectly normal, and everyone does it. Many self-presentations (ritual greetings, for example) take place automatically and without awareness. But when it really counts (job interviews, for example), people consciously strive to make the best possible impression. Typically, people have a number of public selves that are tied to certain situations and certain people. Example having one public self for your parents and another one for your peers. Do you remove your piercings or lengthen the skirt when you go home? Impression Management In presenting themselves to others, people normally strive to make a positive impression to be liked, respected, hired, and so forth. Impression management refers to usually conscious efforts by people to influence how others think of them. People are highly attentive to making a good impression in a job interview. Impression management also operates in everyday interactions, although individuals may be less aware of it. Impression Management Strategies One reason people engage in impression management is to claim a particular identity. Thus, you select a type of dress, hairstyle, and manner of speech to present a certain image of yourself. Tattoos and body piercings also serve this purpose. A second motive for impression management is to gain liking and approval from others – by editing what you say about yourself and by using various nonverbal cues such as smiles, gestures, and eye contact. Because self-presentation is practiced so often, people usually do it automatically. At other times, however, impression management may be used intentionally – to get a job, a date, a promotion, and so forth. Impression Management Strategies Strategies include the following: Ingratiation is behaving in ways to make oneself likeable to others. This is the most fundamental and most frequently used. Example giving compliments is effective, as long as you are sincere (people can sense if you are being dishonest). Doing favours for others, expressing liking for others, going along with others are other common tactics. Self-promotion: the motive behind self-promotion is to gain respect. You do so by playing up your strong points so you are perceived as competent. For instance, in a job interview, you find ways to mention that you earned high grades at school. But it is important not to overdo it otherwise you seem like you are bragging. Impression Management Strategies Exemplification: most people try to project an honest image, therefore, they have to demonstrate exemplary behaviour to claim special credit for integrity or character. Working in the military, for example, provides obvious opportunities to exemplify moral virtue. Behaving consistently according to high ethical standards is another way of exemplification. Intimidation: this strategy sends the message, “don’t mess with me”. Intimidation usually works only in nonvoluntary relationships – example, when it is hard for workers to find another employer or for an economically dependent spouse to leave a relationship. Intimidation tactics include threats or withholding of valuable resources ex salary increases, promotion. Usually self-presentation strategies work by creating a favourable impression; intimidation usually generates dislike. Nonetheless it can work. Supplication: this is usually the tactic of last resort. To get favours from others, individuals try to present themselves as weak and dependent. Perspectives on Impression Management Almost all research on self-presentation has been conducted on first meetings between strangers, yet the vast majority of actual social interactions take place between people who already know each other. Noting the gap between reality and research, Dianne Tice and her colleague investigated whether self-presentation varied in these two situations. They found that people strive to make positive impressions when they interact with strangers but shift toward modesty and neutral self-presentations when they are with friends. Why the difference? Because strangers do not know you, you want to give them positive information so they will form a good impression of you. Besides strangers have no way of knowing if you are bending the truth. On the other hand, your friends already know your positive qualities and it is not necessary to emphasise them. Perspectives on Impression Management Sometimes the need to project a positive public image can lead to dangerous practices. For instance, to avoid the embarrassment of buying condoms or talking with their sex partners, people practice unprotected sex and heighten their risk of contracting AIDS. In pursuit of an attractive tan, people spend hours in the sun, and increase their chances of getting skin cancer. To keep thin, many (especially women) use strong diet medications and develop full-blown eating disorders. To impress their peers, some adolescents take up drinking and smoking and even drug abuse. Finally, out of the desire to appear brave and daring, some people engage in reckless behaviour that ends in accidents and death. Self-Monitoring According to Mark Snyder, people vary in their awareness of how they are perceived by others. Self-monitoring refers to the degree to which people attend to and control the impressions they make on others. People who are high self-monitors are very sensitive to their impact on others. Low self-monitors are less concerned about impression management and behave more spontaneously. Compared to low self-monitors, high self-monitors actively seek information about how they are expected to behave and try to tailor their actions accordingly. They are sensitive to situational cues and skilled at deciphering what others wat to see, and they tend to act more in accordance with situational expectations than with their true feelings or attitudes. Self-Monitoring These two personality types view themselves differently. Low self-monitors see themselves as having strong principles and behave in line with them. High self-monitors perceive themselves as flexible and pragmatic. Because high self-monitors do not see a necessary connection between their private belies and their public actions, they are not troubled by discrepancies between beliefs and behaviour.