I&G week 8 perceiving oneself Flashcards
What is self perception theory?
Self-perception theory is an account of attitude formation developed by psychologist Daryl Bem. It asserts that people develop their attitudes by observing their own behavior and concluding what attitudes must have caused it.
How can self- perception be carried out?
Self-perception can be subtle, automatic
and implicit, rather than conscious.
Not always deliberate-can be subtle things we do- e.g. body language & facial expressions- and may interpret them without being aware.
What studies are there on embodied social cognition?
Changing facial expressions 🡪 changing emotions (Laird, 1974; Lewis, 2012) (e.g. if you smile- you may feel happier)
Making a fist 🡪 feeling assertive and powerful (Schubert & Koole, 2009 [but only among men])
Open posture 🡪 feelings of power (Carney, Cuddy, & Yap, 2010 [but hormones and risk tolerance not replicated])
How accurate are we on perceptions?
Generally, people are not very accurate
Self-evaluations of ability correlate “moderately” with performance outcomes: mean r = .29 (Zell & Krizan, 2014)
Self-perceptions share ~8.4% of variance with objective measures. For many dimensions, accuracy cannot be
defined.
Self perception effects
When are the effects on the self- concept the strongest?
- when behaviour interpreted as freely chosen
- when prior self-concept weak or uncertain
- when behaviour observed by an audience
- when one expects to meet the audience again
(for evidence, see Fazio, 1987; Tice, 1992)
Self-serving attributions
What did Heider (1958) claim about attributions?
People selectively tend to attribute their successes internally and their failures externally (= “self-serving bias”).
When they do well - its due to their internal characteristics- whereas if they don’t do well- its due to external reasons.
What is a self- serving bias?
Any cognitive or perceptual process that is distorted by the need to maintain and enhance self-esteem, or the tendency to perceive oneself in an overly favorable manner.
Who was Social Comparison Theory introduced by?
(Festinger, 1954)
What is social comparison theory (Festinger)?
What has further research discovered?
We try to evaluate our opinions and abilities accurately
If no objective means, we compare with similar others.
People often seem to prefer downward comparisons, especially after “ego threat” (Wills, 1981)- compare to individuals who are worse than us.
Comparing upward can be threatening (e.g. comparing with unrealistic media images: Clay et al., 2005)
But upward comparisons can be fine, if we assimilate or we expect to improve in future (Collins, 1996)
What is the better than average effect?
The tendency for people to perceive their abilities, attributes, and personality traits as superior compared with their average peer.
What are some examples of the better than average effect?
88% of US and 77% of Swedish college students rated selves above 50th percentile on driving safety (Svenson, 1981)
85% of 1m US students rated selves above median in “ability to get along well with others” (College Board, 1976-1977)
94% of University of Nebraska faculty rated selves above average in teaching ability (Cross, 1977)
Research participants in three studies even rated themselves as less biased than average (Pronin et al., 2002)
Who is the better than average effect stronger/ weaker in?
Effect- Weaker among East Asians than among European/North Americans but only for individualistic traits (+ little research in other groups)
Better than average effect- what should you remember ?
Many people will be above average if you define it as the median- then 50% are above average.
Some cultures- average has negative connotations- people don’t want to be described as this.
What is Basking in Reflected Glory?
Self-serving cognition whereby an individual associates themselves with known successful others such that the winner’s success becomes the individual’s own accomplishment.
The affiliation of another’s success is enough to stimulate self glory.
Basking in reflected glory- what is an example of a study on this?
“Three (football) field studies”
Study 1: Introductory psychology students at 7 large universities were “covertly monitored” in lectures over 5-8 weeks during college football season.
~40% more students wore “school apparel” on Mondays after a football win than after a loss or draw
Studies 2 and 3 tested students’ use of language to describe wins and losses by the college team
General pattern: “WE won” but “THEY lost”—especially in situations of “public image threat”
(Cialdini et al., 1976)
What is positive group distinctiveness?
Means that through the process of social comparison, we attempt to make our in-group distinct from the out-groups.
The in-group also attempts to make that difference favorable (i.e. positive) for the in-group. This is essentially in-group bias.
Positive group distinctiveness
What did Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) state?
People strive for positive group distinctiveness
(i.e., perceiving your group as better than relevant out-groups, similar to downward comparison)
Routes to positive group distinctiveness include
Individual mobility – move to a better group
Social competition –compete with other groups so our group wins- try to improve group’s status
Social creativity – look at things differently - (e.g. we aren’t as rich as them- but are nicer people)
(for empirical support see, e.g., Ellemers, 1993;
Mummendey et al., 1999; van Rijswijk et al., 2006)
Memory for self- relevant information
What is mnemic neglect?
Describes a pattern of selective forgetting, in which people tend to be poorer at recalling information that is negative with their self-concept, while being unimpaired at recalling information that is positive with their self-concept.
(Sedikides et al., 2016)
Mnemic neglect
How do participants remember the information/ process it?
Threatening feedback processed more shallowly.
They avoid the feedback
Effects are weaker- when the traits are modifiable/ can change
Sedikides et al., 2016
What are self enhancement strategies?
Strategies that make you feel more positive about yourself.
What are the different functions of self- enhancement strategies?
Self-promotion function
Greater among high SE people
Self-protection function
Especially when SE (self esteem) is threatened- then we do the strategies more.
Subject to plausibility constraints
‘Strategic’ self-enhancement (we use them flexibly & as much as we can.)
(Sedikides & Gregg, 2003)
What other things do we do do when perceiving ourselves- others than wanting to see ourselves as positively?
Self assessment: (see ourselves as accurately)
Self- enhancement: See ourselves as positively
Self- consistency: (see ourselves as consistent over time- we are resistant to changing our evaluations of ourselves)
Self-improvement: We want to self improve
(Taylor, Neter & Wayment, 1995)
What are the 4 motives when evaluating ourselves?
What are they dependent on?
Self- Consistency:
Self- Enhancement:
Self- Assessment:
Self- improvement:
May be elicited under different circumstances.
Satisfied by different information sources.
Self- enhancement vs self consistency
(Swann et al., 1987)
What does this predict?
Self-enhancement predicts people will prefer positive feedback regardless of their self-views
Self-consistency predicts people with negative self-views will prefer negative feedback
Experiments with 2 (self-view: positive/negative) x 2 (feedback: positive/negative) design
Predictions diverge for negative self-views
Cognitive- affective crossfire
(Swann et al., 1987)
When do people feel better about feedback?
What do cognitive reactions depend on?
The more positive it is- feel less depressed, less anxious, less hostility, attraction to evaluator.
Cognitive reactions- depend on how consistent the feedback was with how they feel about themselves- perceived accuracy of the feedback, competence of evaluator, suitability of evaluation technique, attributions about the feedback.
Self enhancement vs self assessment
How accurate are we at evaluating ourselves?
Does self assessment beat self enhancement or self consistency?
what are some exceptions?
Not accurate!
Self-assessment rarely beats self-enhancement or self-consistency when pitted against each other (e.g., Sedikides, 1993)
Some exceptions where trait is modifiable
Self-assessment 🡪 self-improvement (more receptive to negative feedback- if its changeable)
Or temporary flaws are just less threatening
When are people more receptive to negative feedback?
If its changeable.
What model is made by (Sedikides & Strube, 1997)?
Self concept enhancing tactician model
What is in the Self Concept Enhancing Tactician model?
The main purpose of self evaluation is to feel positive about ourselves (self- enhancement)
Self improvement, self assessment & self consistency = indirect routes towards seeing ourselves as positively.
Culture & Self- esteem
What did Heine 1999 in a review paper say?
Is there a universal need for positive self-regard?
Evidence for self-criticism rather than self-enhancement effects among East Asian populations (see e.g. Kitayama, Markus, Matsumoto & Norasakkunkit, 1997)
East Asian populations show lower levels of self-esteem than do North Americans
Self esteem across cultures
On the Rosenburg self-esteem scale- Where did European Canadians see themselves?
Most see themselves on the positive sides compared to the neutral side.
Those who see themselves as negatively- may have mental health issues/ suffer depression etc.Seen as not a good place to be in Canadian culture.
Self esteem across scales
How did Japanese adults view themselves?
Almost a perfectly symmetrical distribution.
Almost half the sample see themselves as negative on the scale.
Does this mean the population are suffering from depression?
Its argued maybe japanese people don’t need to see themselves as positively as canadians do.
Pancultural self enhancement
What did Sedikides, Gaertner & Toguchi (2003) study?
Studied self-enhancement (better-than-average effect) for positively valued traits among American and Japanese students (in the US)
Two separate groups of traits:
Individualistic traits (e.g., free, independent, original, self-reliant, unconstrained, unique)
Collectivistic traits (e.g., agreeable, compromising, loyal, patient, respectful, self-sacrificing)
Pancultural self enhancement
What were the results of the study? Sedikides, Gaertner & Toguchi (2003)
Americans showed a stronger better than average effect for individualistic traits- weaker for collectivist traits.
Japanese individuals showed opposite.
This shows it depends on whats positively valued!
Indirect self enhancement
Muramoto (2003) studied attributions for success and failure among 118 Japanese undergraduates
What happened in the study?
Japanese undergraduates- showed modest not self serving pattern of attributions- if they did something good (down to situation) if did something bad (their fault) - opposite of Americans!
Rather than self-serving bias, participants typically made self-effacing (modest) attributions
Expected close others (family and close friends) to make supportive attributions.
Believed close others understood them well
Belief others understood them correlated with expecting supportive attributions
Modesty in Chinese culture Cai et al. (2011)
What happened in studies 1 & 2 & 3
Studies 1 & 2:
Self-rated modesty correlated negatively with explicit self-esteem in China and US
Self-rated modesty correlated positively with implicit self-esteem in China, but not in US
Study 3:
After describing selves modestly, Chinese (but not Americans) showed increased implicit self-esteem
After describing selves immodestly, Chinese (but not Americans) showed reduced implicit self-esteem
Modestly is a root to seeing yourself as positively at a subtle not explicit level- in context of a culture where modesty is valued.
Self evaluation across cultures
What does culture moderate?
Culture moderates self evaluation
- Culture affects what is positively valued.
- Culture prescribes appropriate ways of maintaining &
enhancing self-esteem.
Evidence- still lacks from most of the world’s cultural groups.
What did Sarah Hampson come up with?
Social Construction of Personality
What was Sarahs social construction of personality?
To understand personalities- we need to look at 3 areas (that are traditionally different areas of research)
Actor: Someone who behaves in a certain way.
Observer: Someone watching the actor & forming a perspective.
Self observer: We observe ourselves & form beliefs about our own characteristics.
Social construction of personality
What is the actor?
Characteristics ‘residing in the individual’
Domain of personality psychology
Single trait theories
Multiple trait theories
Hereditary and environmental influences
Social construction of personality
What do we think of with the observer?
How person is perceived/judged by others
Domain of social psychology
Person perception
Attribution theories
Impression formation
Social construction of personality
What do we think of with the self-observer?
Person’s beliefs about own characteristics
Domain of social and clinical psychology
Self-perception
Self-concept
Identity
Self-evaluation
Behavioural conformation
What dimensions was it replicated in?
When do effects persist?
Extraversion (Fazio et al., 1981)
Gender stereotypes (Skrypnek & Snyder, 1982)
Age and task difficulty (Musser & Graziano, 1991)
Ethnic stereotypes (Chen & Bargh, 1997)
Basketball ability (Weaver et al., 2016)
when behaviour attributed to disposition
when target alters self-concept
What theory did Swann (2005) come up with?
Self- verification theory
What was Self verification theory (Swann)?
He describes how we work hard to verify self conceptions- which include:
Cognitive strategies: Self-consistent feedback 🡪 more attention, better memory and more trusted
Selective interaction: spending time with others who see us as we see ourselves (even negatively)
Identity cues: clothing choices, possessions, e-mail signatures, bodily alterations (> if identity insecure)
Interpersonal prompts: emphasise self-consistent behaviour (> after inconsistent feedback)
Up to slide 38
