Self 7 Flashcards
whats implicit self esteem?
- we evaluative ourselves in a spontaneous, automatic, or unconscious manner
- “a global self-evaluation that people are unable or unwilling to report”(Buhrmester)
- social desirability
- can be seen by signature size (Snyder)= showing self-worth
Implicit self-esteem measures include:
- Name letter preference– We prefer letters that occur in our name over letters not in our name (Nuttin)
- Self-esteem Implicit Association Test– looking at reaction time= indicating how fast you associate yourself with a specific word— its easier to make a response (fast response) when you see something that is inline with what you think about yourself
is there cultural differences in implicit self-e?
Falk & Heine
no significant cultural differences in implicit self-esteem
usefulness of Implicit self-esteem?– does it predict anything?
Spalding & Hardin
- Self-esteem IAT, but not explicit self-esteem= predicted nonverbal discomfort in interview situation
- letter preference is related to:
where people live, their occupation, partner’s
name (Pelhman et al)
- Signature size relates to
Coolness II (Dar-Nimrod) = we think things are cool when we like it, or we approve it
criticism of implicit self-esteem?
- Average correlation between 9 implicit and 7 explicit measures of self-esteem was= 0.03–.08 (Falk et al)– there should be a positive correlation
- shows poor convergent validity (between different implicit measures)
- poor predictors of well-being, depression, health outcomes (Boss et al)
whats self-esteem contingency?
- certain events will shape your self-e when you base self-worth on outcome of those events
- success or failure of situation= fluctuations of your self-e
- so if you put high self worth on a specific domain, and outcome of event was positive= boosts your self-esteem
- What areas do I care about?
- Domains of contingency may include acceptance, approval, family, self-reliance, morality (Crocker)
whats self-esteem stability
- the degree to which self-reported self-esteem varies
- Typically measured over several days (longitudinal)
- Related to self-esteem contingency= People with contingent self-esteem are more likely
to have unstable self-esteem– their self-esteem is more likely to fluctuate (larger SD)
experiment to show self-e contingency
Crocker + Wolfe
- Students applying to postgrad programs in the US
- sent many applications to diff unis
- tested if academic contingent self-e (high vs low) will affect how they react to responses from unis
- results:
- those who didn’t put so much self-worth
in being a good student (low academic contingent self-esteem)= not much difference in self-esteem for acceptance and rejection
- BUT
- those who put a lot of self-worth in being a good student (high academic contingent self-esteem)= can see fluctuation of self-e
- rejection= high drop of self esteem
- acceptance= high shoot of self esteem
= shows that self esteem (high or low) depends on how much self-worth you put in something
what does self-esteem stability interact with
- interacts with levels of global self-esteem
- People with high, unstable self-esteem
(“fragile” self-esteem)– contingent self-e
= more prone to anger and hostility (Kernis)
+ are more defensive (Kernis)
Why do people pursue self-esteem?: theory
Terror management theory (Greenberg)
- Death is a fundamental threat that people face
- Self-esteem functions to protect yourself from fear of death
Greenberg et al. (1992, Study 1):
- ps filled out questionnaire about themselves= personality test
- either received: positive or neutral feedback - watched a video about death or a neutral video
- reported their level of anxiety
results:
- when they watched neutral video= both feedbacks didn’t affect their level of anxiety
- BUT
- when they watched death video:
- when they got neutral feedback (no increase of self-esteem)= high anxiety
- when they got positive feedback (increase of self-e)= about same level of anxiety as those who watched neutral video
Why do people pursue self-esteem?: 2nd theory
Sociometer theory of self-e (Leary + Downs)
- We have fundamental need to associate with others
- Need to belong and be accepted= if people want you, like you= you feel better
- Evolutionary benefits of belonging to a
social group
- Self-esteem= psychological meter that monitors the quality of interpersonal relationships
- Self-esteem is a sociometer (social + meter):
- Monitors for cues of social inclusion vs. exclusion
- Motivates corrective action (affiliative behaviour) when inclusionary status is threatened– will i be kicked out of group?
- Note: ”Social exclusion”= umbrella term comprising rejection and ostracism
evidence for Sociometer theory: social exclusion and self-esteem
Social exclusion lowers STATE self-esteem (what im feeling just right now)
Leary et al. (1995)
- Manipulated:
- “Group and individual decision making”
- Personality Qs– tell others about yourself– seen by 4 others
- Rank order who you want to work with
- ps are told that they will either be working in groups or individually= testing social inclusion vs exclusion
- those who were working individually= either told: you’re working alone because you were ranked low (exclusion) or you’re working alone because of random draw
- Measured: state self-esteem
- results:
- when told that they were working independently becuase they were ranked low (group choice)= state self-e lower compared to those who included
- if person was working alone, but told that it was because of random draw= not different compared to those who were included due to random draw
cyberostracism: cyberball experiment
- A virtual ball toss game, supposedly played with two others in cyberspace
- Zadro
- human condition and computer condition
- when ps experienced ostracism in human condition= low state self-e
- when ps experienced ostracism in comp condition= low state self-e as well= same as human condition
= shows that ostracism is v strong
