PSYC 333 Study Guide PDF

The Self Duality of Self - "Me": The objective self, the sense of self as an object of reflection, including the material, social, and spiritual self. à Material Self: Physical entities that belong to a person (body, house, clothes, money). à Social Self: Shaped by and ex...

The Self Duality of Self - "Me": The objective self, the sense of self as an object of reflection, including the material, social, and spiritual self. à Material Self: Physical entities that belong to a person (body, house, clothes, money). à Social Self: Shaped by and expressed through interactions with others; we have as many selves as people we interact with. à Spiritual Self: The inner self, including personality, core values, and emotions. - "I": The subjective self, the part that thinks, experiences, and perceives (consciousness). à Provides a sense that experiences belong to us and continuity between past, present, and future self. Defining the Self: The self is both the "me" and the "I," a dynamic social identity and inner process. Self-Concept – a cognitive representation of the knowledge and beliefs we have about ourselves, including personality traits, abilities, social roles, values, goals, and physical characteristics. - Essentially, everything a person claims as "me" or "mine". - Shapes how we think, feel, and behave. Self-Concept as an Associative Network: Knowledge is organized as a network of interconnected cognitive concepts. - Some concepts are more central, and links vary in strength. Unitary Self-Concept vs. Working Self-Concept: - Self-concept implies a unitary, fixed idea about the self. - People have many ideas about themselves, sometimes contradictory. - Working Self-Concept – the subset of self-knowledge that is the current focus of awareness, created moment-to-moment. Contents of the Working Self-Concept: - Situational activation – different situations activate different self-knowledge, creating different working self-concepts. - Accessibility is determined by: à distinctiveness à relevance à frequency of activation. - Distinctiveness Theory – unique characteristics are more salient. Implications of Working Self-Concept: - The self-concept is malleable and context-dependent, meaning we have different versions of ourselves. - Non-central self-aspects can enter the working self-concept, allowing contradictory aspects to exist. - Influences behavior; explains why we behave differently in different situations.  - Study: Experimentally manipulated working self-concept (extroversion vs. introversion) and observed corresponding changes in behavior. Summary: The self-concept is organized as an associative network and is highly malleable; only a small subset is accessible at any given moment, forming the working self-concept. The True Self Elements of the True Self: - Natural endowment (often in the form of potential). - Feels authentic; actions consistent with internal states. - People naturally want to be true to themselves, leading to a fulfilling life. - It competes with external influences. Belief in the True Self: People believe following their true self is an important strategy for making satisfying decisions. - Subjective ease related to decision satisfaction when in the true self condition, but not in the actual self condition. Problems with the idea of a True Self: - Natural endowment is not provable. - Self-beliefs are often inaccurate. - The concept of a true self seems to be about social desirability rather than being in line with one's unique characteristics. Authenticity and the Big Five – authenticity was positively associated with acting extroverted, agreeable, conscientious, and emotionally stable, regardless of typical personality. True Self as Desired Reputation: The true self is more of a guide, reflecting what is valued by society and one's unique traits. Summary: The idea of a true self resonates, but has conceptual issues, and the "true self" reflects a desired reputation. Organization of the Self-Concept Self-Complexity: - Number of self-aspects and the degree to which these are distinct. - High self-complexity: many distinct self-aspects. - Low self-complexity: few overlapping self-aspects. Implications of Self-Complexity: - Affective Spillover – emotions associated with one self-aspect spillover to others, more so with low self-complexity. - Affect Extremity – low self-complexity causes greater emotional reactions to positive and negative events. - High self-complexity allows for more emotional stability.  - High self-complexity may serve as a stress buffer. Self-Complexity Studies: - Study 1: Low self-complexity showed larger mood changes after success/failure feedback. - Study 2: Low self-complexity associated with greater mood variation over time. - Study 3: High self-complexity buffered against negative health effects of stress. Mixed Evidence for Self-Complexity as a Stress Buffer: - Inconsistent findings across studies. - Differences in well-being measures, importance of the number of self-aspects vs. distinction, and the integration of self-aspects may be reasons for inconsistent results. Self-Concept Clarity (SCC) – extent to which self-concept is clearly defined, consistent, and stable. - Reflects how well you know who you are. Self-Complexity vs. SCC: - SCC is unrelated to self-complexity. - High self-complexity can be low in SCC, and vice-versa. SCC and Well-Being: - High SCC is associated with more emotional stability, less rumination, less loneliness, lower feelings of depression/stress, higher self-esteem, higher perception of meaning, and higher life-satisfaction. - High SCC people experienced fewer negative emotions at the start of COVID-19 pandemic. Factors Influencing SCC: - Age - Social roles - Academic/job changes - Relationship changes - Hobby changes. SCC and Role Transitions: - Role transitions can lead to lower SCC. If the person does not feel positive about the change. - SCC depends on the amount of self-change and the positivity of this change. Summary: Organization of the self-concept is understood through self-complexity and self- concept clarity, affecting emotional life and well-being. Building Self-Knowledge Intrapersonal Sources: - Self-Perception: Observing our overt behaviors and inferring what we are like.  - Introspection: Directing attention inward to internal states (thoughts, feelings). Prioritization of Internal States: People believe knowing internal states is better for understanding oneself than knowing behavior or interviewing others. Access to Others' Internal States: - Cognitive/affective interviews of strangers produce impressions most in line with the interviewee's self-ratings, suggesting that knowing thoughts and feelings is most useful. Implications: People prioritize awareness of thoughts/feelings to construct self-knowledge, believing it reveals the inner self. - Self-perception is useful when unclear about internal states. Accuracy of Introspection: - People don't have a genuine understanding of why they think/feel the way they do. - Introspection is better for describing internal states but not explaining why we have them. No Self without Others: Symbolic interactionism – the self-concept depends on social interactions. Social Comparison: - We compare ourselves to others to form conclusions about our relative standing. - Direction of comparison influences self-esteem (upward vs. downward). Looking-Glass Self – we construct self-concept based on how others see us. - We infer how others see us using direct feedback and behavior. Problems with the Looking-Glass Self: - No consistent relationship between self-reports and observer reports. - Strong positive relationship between self-reports and how people think they are perceived. - Others rarely provide full, honest feedback. - We dismiss or rationalize negative feedback. Implication: The self-concept is shaped by how we think others see us, not by how they actually see us. Social Groups We Belong To: - Social Identity Theory – we place ourselves into social groups, shaping self-concept. - Self-Stereotyping – we conform to the shared identity of a social group to be accepted. Evidence for Social Identity Theory: Faster reaction times for traits where self and ingroup are similar. Self-Concept as a Reaction to Outgroup: Self-knowledge forms as a rejection of elements associated with an outgroup.  Flexibility in Social Identity: Self-description is determined by expectations and unique strengths. Including Close Others in the Self: - In close relationships, we incorporate others' characteristics into our self-concepts. - People can confuse their partner's traits for their own, indicated by longer reaction times and more errors for traits that differ between self and spouse. Theories of Interpersonal Sources of Self-Knowledge point to routes to self-concept change such as social role changes, changing the looking-glass, and changes to who one is close to. Social Role Changes: Gains and losses of roles trigger self-concept changes; can cause self- concept confusion. Changes to Point of Comparison: Changing comparison groups can change our self-concept. Changing the Looking-Glass: People can initiate changes if they believe they are perceived undesirably, aligning with the importance of desired reputation. Changes to Who One is Close To: Self-concept will change as we become close to new people. Summary: - Each interpersonal theory implies different ways the self-concept can change. - Self-perception and introspection are intrapersonal sources; most self-knowledge depends on social interactions, comparison, how we think others perceive us, social groups, and loved ones. Culture and the Self Culture – system of ideas, practices, and social institutions that enable the coordination of behavior in a population. Cultural Differences in Social Orientation: - Individualistic Cultures (Western countries) – prioritizing the individual with behavior driven by internal states. - Collectivistic Cultures (East Asian countries) – prioritizing the group with behavior driven by external factors. Culture Shapes Self-Concept: - Individualistic Cultures: Foster an independent self-concept; focus on uniqueness and personal identity. - Collectivistic Cultures: Foster an interdependent self-concept; focus on fitting in and social roles.  How Culture Shapes the Individual: Culture provides guidance for what is normal, shaping our self-concept. Parenting Across Cultures: - Individualistic: Independence, early alone time, emotional expression. - Collectivistic: Obedience, co-sleeping, directive conversations. Origins of Differences Between Cultures: - Subsistence theory – the way people in a culture historically made a living influences culture. - Farming cultures are more interdependent and herding and fishing cultures are more independent. Cultural Differences in Cognition: - Individualistic Cultures: Analytic thinking: focus on individual components. - Collectivistic Cultures: Holistic thinking: focus on the whole and relationships. - Example: "Which two go together?" study (chicken, cow, grass). Field Dependence/Independence: - Field-dependent – more affected by context (East Asians). - Field-independent – less affected by context. Cultural Differences in Causal Attribution: - North Americans: attribute responsibility to the individual (disposition). - East Asians: attribute responsibility to the social collective (situation). - Study: Attribution of responsibility in newspaper articles. Cultural Differences in Emotion: - Western: Value expressing emotions, personal expression valued, focus on socially disengaging emotions (pride, self-esteem). - East Asian: Value emotional restraint, balance of positive/negative states, focus on socially engaging emotions (guilt, shame). Implications of Cultural Differences: Psychology focuses on WEIRD people; only 15% of the world is WEIRD. Independence vs Interdependence in Other Cultures: - Individualism and collectivism look different in different cultures. - Expressive interdependence in Latin culture. - Assertive interdependence in Arab culture. - Emotional experience in German culture. Multicultural Identity – sense of belonging to two or more cultural groups. Acculturation – process of learning and change from balancing two cultures. - Example: Emotional acculturation.  Individual Emotional Acculturation: Immigrant women fit more into mainstream American emotional norms the longer they live in the USA. Generational Emotional Acculturation: More contact a generation has with a new culture, the more emotional acculturation. Implications of Acculturation Findings: Minority individuals become psychologically similar to the majority culture; can new/heritage cultures co-exist? Cultural Frame Switching: - Multicultural individuals’ reactions are context-specific; depends on which cultural identity is activated. - Multicultural individuals can shift their behavior to fit the culture that is most salient in a given situation. - Example: Emotions of 2nd generation Turkish immigrants in work/school vs. at home. - Multicultural individuals engage in cultural frame switching in their self-descriptions. Implications of Cultural Frame Switching: Heritage and mainstream cultural identities can co-exist. Factors Affecting Multicultural Identity Strategy: - Encouragement to retain heritage - Exposure to mainstream - Similarity between cultures Multicultural Identity and Well-Being: Integration is associated with best psychological and sociocultural adaptation; marginalization is associated with the worst; separation is associated with better psychological adjustment than assimilation. Everyone is Multicultural: Cultural groups extend beyond ethnicity, nationality, and race. - Individualism vs. collectivism depends on mix of cultures and context. Individualism on the Rise: Individualism is increasing across countries, influenced by socioeconomic development. Summary: - Independence and interdependence are achieved differently in different cultures. - Individualistic cultures foster independent self-concepts, and collectivistic cultures foster interdependent self-concepts; cultural differences in cognition, attribution, and emotion. - People are reluctant to give up their heritage; retaining the heritage culture (integration) is beneficial for well-being. - Multicultural individuals show acculturation and frame switching; identity strategy affects well-being, with integration as the best strategy. Illusions About the Self  Self-Evaluation Motives: - Self-Assessment Motive – to see ourselves accurately. - Self-Enhancement Motive – to maximize how positively we see ourselves. Illusions About the Self: - Most people have illusions about themselves. - Overly positive self-evaluations. - Illusions of control. - Unrealistic optimism bias. Overly Positive Self-Evaluations: People use more positive traits to describe themselves, forget negative feedback, and engage in self-serving attributional bias. Direct Evidence for Illusory Self-Evaluations: - Better-than-Average Effect – most people rate their abilities as better than average, which is statistically impossible. à The more desirable a trait, the more people see themselves as better than average. - People rate themselves as better than objectively warranted. - Unskilled people overestimate ability. Is Self-Enhancement Individualistic? - Self-enhancement is more evident in individualistic societies (inconsistent with collectivistic values of belonging). Pancultural Self-Enhancement: - Self-enhancement is universal but looks different across cultures. - People self-enhance on traits consistent with cultural values. - Study: Americans self-enhanced on individualistic traits; Japanese on collectivistic traits. Self-Esteem as a Moderator: Self-enhancement looks different depending on self-esteem. - High self-esteem uses self-advancement. - Low self-esteem uses self-protection. Illusions of Personal Control: Personal control beliefs tend to be greater than justified. - Example: People believe they have control over dice if they throw them; people believe choosing own lottery tickets will lead to better outcomes. Unrealistic Optimism Bias: - People believe they are less likely to experience negative events and more likely to experience positive events than others. - Example: Smokers underestimate their risk of lung cancer. - Thinking about risk factors does not eliminate this optimism bias. Illusions and Adjustment: Positive illusions (self-esteem, personal control, optimism) lead to better adjustment to college.  Illusions and Men at Risk for AIDS: - HIV+ men showed more AIDS-specific optimism, associated with more active coping. - Men showing realistic acceptance of AIDS had a shorter estimated survival time. Illusions and Mental Health: Illusions positively impact adjustment to ups and downs of life. Knowledge Isn't Power: People believe they are less prone to biases, even though they are not. Cognitive Bias in Self-Perception: - Overly positive views could be due to inaccurate views of self or inaccurate views of others. - Feeling holier-than-thou is due to errors in judgements about the self, and not about judgements of others. Case-Based vs. Base-Rate Info: - Case-based – evidence relevant to a specific person. - Base-rate – evidence about the distribution of behavior in similar situations. Cognitive Bias in Self-Perception: - Base-rate fallacy: we assign greater value to case-based information. Base Rate Fallacy in Self-Perceptions: - People use case-based info for self-predictions, base-rate for others' predictions. - Base-rate info did not improve self-predictions. Using Case-Based Info to Judge a Specific Other: People ignore base-rate info for self and specific peer. Worse-Than-Average Effect – in some domains, people rate themselves as worse than average. One Mechanism, Two Effects: - Anchoring bias is responsible for both better-than and worse-than-average effects. Anchoring Bias – a common tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information that comes to mind when making a decision. - When comparing self and others, we first think about our own abilities, thus anchoring judgements on this. Better-Than-Average Effect and Difficulty: Difficulty of task affects whether people see themselves as better or worse than average. Why Biased View of Self: Self-enhancement motive and cognitive biases (base-rate fallacy, anchoring bias).  Positive Illusions Are Good: Better adjustment, more adaptive coping, and higher well-being. Positive Illusions are Bad: More boasting, interference with medical precautions, and unrealistically high goals. Meta-Analysis: - Positive illusions are good for personal adjustment. - Mixed effects for relationships, dependent on time knowing someone and type of traits. Implications: Helpful to come across as confident when interacting with strangers; if you want to be liked, enhance collectivistic traits; if you want to come across as competent, enhance individualistic traits. Summary: - We accurately predict others' behavior but incorrectly judge our own. Base-rate fallacy and anchoring bias lead to biased self-views - Search for self-knowledge is guided by self-assessment and self-enhancement; self- enhancement leads to illusions, which are generally adaptive. The Desire for a Consistent Self Self-Verification – the motive to confirm existing self-views, leading individuals to want others to see them as they see themselves. à this holds true even if these self-views are negative. Functions of Self-Verification: - Epistemic – fulfills the need for coherence. Stable self-views provide a sense of predictability and control. - Pragmatic – ensures smooth social interactions. Stable self-views foster consistent and predictable behavior, allowing others to know what to expect. Predictable behavior further stabilizes interactions as others respond predictably. How People Self-Verify: - Displaying Identity Cues: Using symbols, appearance, or communication styles to signal one's self-concept to others. This increases the likelihood of receiving feedback consistent with self-views. - Selective Interaction: Preferring to interact with others who see them in a way that aligns with their self-perception, even if it's negative. A study showed that people would rather interact with those who verify their self-views than those who like them but see them differently. - Interpersonal Prompts: Behaving in ways that elicit self-verifying feedback, such as explicitly asking for confirmation of self-view or guiding conversations to elicit self- verifying responses. These behaviors can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. - Symbolic Self-Completion: When receiving feedback inconsistent with self-views, individuals compensate by using symbols and behaviors that signal and intensify their identity to others and themselves. - Cognitive Biases:  à Selective attention: Paying more attention to feedback that confirms self-views. à Selective memory: Having a better memory for feedback that confirms self-views. For instance, likeable people are more likely to remember feedback that they were likeable, and vice versa. à Selective interpretation: Interpreting ambiguous feedback as consistent with self- views. High self-esteem individuals tend to remember feedback as more positive, while low self-esteem individuals remember it as more negative. Universality of Self-Verification: Self-verification is present across genders and cultures. East Asians, for example, are more likely to seek verification on contextualized self-views and less on global attributes. Implications of Self-Verification: - Self-views are resistant to change. - Cognitive biases explain why self-perceptions may not align with others' perceptions. - Generally adaptive as it makes the world predictable, increasing psychological comfort and is helpful interpersonally. - In the workplace, people feel more connected to colleagues that verify their self-views and tend to be more productive. - Harmful if people have unrealistically negative self-views, leading to choosing relationship partners that reinforce these negative views. Self-Enhancement vs. Self-Verification: - People generally prioritize self-enhancement. Self-assessment is prioritized when the stakes are low or when accurate information is critical for decision-making. - The preference for self-verification vs. self-enhancement depends on the kind of information accessible, the centrality of the self-view, and the length of the relationship. - Kind of Information Accessible: Self-verification relies on controlled, cognitive processing, while self-enhancement relies on more automatic, emotional processing. People prefer self-enhancement under cognitive load or when in a hurry. - Cognitive-Affective Crossfire: Conflict between cognition and emotion where people cognitively seek self-verifying feedback to maintain a consistent sense of self, but emotionally seek self-enhancing feedback to boost mood and self-esteem. People generally avoid this conflict but will tend to choose self-verification when it occurs. - Centrality of Self-View: For central, firmly held self-views, people tend to reject feedback that contradicts their self-view, even if positive. For less central, uncertain self- views, people are more accepting of feedback that contrasts with their self-view. - Importance of Relationship: People seek more self-verifying feedback in long-term relationships and prefer self-enhancement in short-term social interactions. Even those with negative self-views seek positive feedback on relationship-relevant qualities but self-verifying information on non-relationship relevant qualities