Lecture 18: Self II Flashcards
How do we know who we are: other people
- see ourselves through how people see us (Cooley)– their reactions can tell us who we are
- social comparison theory:
- learn about our own abilities by comparing ourselves to
other people - theory revolves around 2 q’s:
- when do you engage in social comparison?
- who do you choose to compare yourself with?
- learn about our own abilities by comparing ourselves to
when do we engage in social comparison?
- when theres no objective standard to measure yourself against– ex how much money should you donate to charity?
- when you experience uncertainty about yourself in specific area– ex you got 15/20 on test= is this good?
automaticity of social comparisons (who?)
gilbert, giesler, morris)
- making social comparison might be: spontaneous, automatic process
- means that we sometimes make social comparisons even if its inappropriate to do so= but we can undo them, if we have sufficient cog resources to do so
who do we choose to compare ourselves to?
festinger
- we compare ourselves to people who are similar to ourselves
- because we’re motivated to see ourselves accurately
meta analysis of 55 studies
- ps preferred comparison targets who were better than they were on a particular dimension (average)= we try to understand the best we can be
if you wanna know top level to which you can aspire, you engage in…
(if you wanna challenge yourself)
upward social comparison
= compare yourself to people who are BETTER than you are on a specific ability
if you wanna feel better about yourself, you engage in…
downward social comparison
= compare yourself to people who are WORSE than you on specific ability
what is a self-motive?
tendency that is aimed towards establishing specific state of self-awareness, self-representation, or self-evaluation
what are the types of self motives?
- accuracy perception
- self verification
- self-enhancement
- accuracy perception
motivated to have accurate info about yourself
- self verification
motivated to confirm what we already know about yourself
- self-enhancement
motivated to maintain positivity of self, desire to protect, enhance your self-image
demonstration of self-enhancement (5)
- we’re better than average
- we’re better toady than we were in past
- we make biased attributions
- engage in self-handicapping
- sometimes sabotage other people
self-enhancing social comparisons: better than average effect
- we think we’re “better than average”
- we think we’re above average on: getting along with others, happiness
- people exaggerate their skills to think well of themselves
self-enhancing comparisons: temporal self-comparisons
- temporal self-appraised theory
- past selves–> provide opportunity for downward comparison
- ps–> randomly assigned to rate self or acquaintance:
- or - traits (ex. socially skilled, self-confident vs. immature, narrow-minded)
- now, and in past
- results:
- ratings of self and acquaintances in present and past:
- past: Self= 5.8 Acq: 5.9
- present: Self= 6.25 Acq: 5.91
- show derogation of past for self, not acquaintances= self-enhancement
- in your mind: everyone doesn’t get better, only me
biased attributions (who?)
Lau + Russell
- newspaper quotes from winners + losers
- coded player’s and manager’s explanations for outcome
results:
- % making internal attributions
- 80% of winners
- 53% of losers
self-serving category definitions + trait definitions (who?)
Dunning
- self-enhancement motive can influence…how we define concepts
- we define categories + traits in self-serving ways
- if you’re always on time (your trait)= you tend to say: being dependable means being on time
- whatever we are: dependable, dutiful, obedient vs. thoughtful, loving, caring
= can fit to what YOU are= “what does it mean to be good son”
self-handicapping
- creating obstacles to success to protect self
- avoid negative internal stuff
- simply don’t try
- don’t sleep / drink alcohol
- ex. drink a lot before day of exam
- in case you fail= you won’t feel bad about it, because you can blame it on the fact that you drank a lot
- even if you did well on test= increases glory of success
- win win situation
experiment on proving automaticity of social comparison
Gilbert et al
- ps watched vid of model doing test
- model either performed poorly or well
- ps were told that model’s performance was staged= so not meaningful
- ps were made cognitively busy or not
- all ps did test= were given ambiguous feedback: 10/18
- ps rated their own competence at task
- when you’re cognitively busy= context of model’s performance not considered= so you tend to make automatic comparisons
- when you’re not busy= context taken into account= self-ratings are not sig influenced by model
= social comparison is automatic, but only when you’re under cognitive load– TAKES EFFORT to undo them– you can undo it when you’re not busy
what decides when we are comparing ourselves to other people?
motive– depends on our motive
self-handicapping experiment
Berglas + Jones
