Self-Esteem (Midterm #2) Flashcards
The Self-Esteem Crazy
1983: The Rise of John Vasconcellos
1986: Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem and Personal and Social Responsibility
1990: “Toward a State of Self-Esteem” Report release
What did the “Toward A State of Self-Esteem” report find?
High SE correlates with: Happiness, productivity, success, the state budget. Low SE correlates with: Crime, teen pregnancy, pollution.
Types of self-esteem: State vs Trait
State self-esteem: Current feelings about the self.
Trait self-esteem: Typical level of self-esteem across situations.
Types of self-esteem: Global vs Specific
Global: How the individual values the self
Specific: Self-evaluation in specific areas of life
Types of self-esteem: Implicit vs Explicit
Implicit: Unconscious evaluations of the self
Explicit: Conscious evaluations of the self
Individual Differences in Self-Esteem
High Trait Self-Esteem: Use confidence-building strategies. Strive to stand out in social situations.
Low Trait Self-Esteem: Use protective self-presentation. Seek to fit in. High on rejection-sensitivity.
Measuring Development: Why do some people have high vs low SE?
Little differences in SE before the age of 8 (Harter et al., 2006). Following adolescence, SE gradually rises and peaks around 60 before declining around 70 (Robins et al., 2002)
Measuring Development: Developmental Factors
Orth (2018) longitudinal study from ages 8-27. Quality of home environment is important. Quality of parenting, cognitive stimulation, physical home environment.
Correlation vs Causation
Is self-esteem reliably causing certain outcomes? Or is self-esteem simply correlated with some outcomes? What are the antecedents of self-esteem? We need a theory of self-esteem to explore these questions?
Self-Verification Theory
We use it to confirm whether we are aligning with how we see ourselves. Broad. Not the most popular theory because there are specific situations it doesn’t apply to.
Dominance Theory
Functions to signal dominance and status in a social group.
Terror Management Theory
Acts as an existential buffer to death and suffering. Everything we do culturally is to distract ourselves from death, and self-esteem is this measure of how well we’re doing at distracting ourselves.
Sociometer Theory
Fundamental desire to be accepted and belong to groups. Self esteem is a measure of relational value. SE is not a need but rather the output of a system that monitors and responds to events through acceptance/rejection.
Testing sociometer theory: Acceptance vs Rejection (Leary, 1995)
Does acceptance and rejection impact state self-esteem? Groups of five completed self-description questionnaires with other participants. Participants then received bogus feedback that they had either been assigned tow work with others or work alone. Told assignment was either based on preferences of others or a random procedure. Results: Not being chosen for the group significantly lowered state self-esteem, whereas being excluded for a random reason had no effect. 2009 meta-analysis found rejection resulted in lower self-esteem (effect size of .30).
Testing sociometer theory: Sociometer sensitivity (Early et al., 1998)
How does SE respond to a wider range of feedback beyond rejection and acceptance? Sociometer is bet at detecting subtle differences in treatment.
Testing sociometer theory: Social influence (Leary et al., 2003)
Do some people have SE that is immune to social influence? No
Testing sociometer theory: Trait self-esteem (Early & McDonald, 2003)
Does trait self-esteem also reflect people’s perceived relational value? Yes! Trait self-esteem correlates highly with people’s perceptions of the degree to which they are valued, accepted, and supported by others.
Correlation vs Causation: Establishing directionality (claims)
- Claim: High SE makes people physically attractive: Diener & Wolsic (1995) no significant correlation between ratings of attractiveness and self esteem, but self-reported physical attractiveness was strongly related to self-esteem.
- Claim: High SE leads to improved academic performance: Skaalvik & Hagtvet (1990) found that doing well in Schoo one year led to higher self-esteem the next year, whereas high self-esteem did not lead to performing well in school.
- Claim: High SE improves job performance: Weak positive correlations between job performance and self esteem. If High SE consistently improved performance in lab tasks, this would be easy to demonstrate.
Do you need to love yourself before loving others?
Claim: High SE results in social success. High self esteem individuals can sometimes be jerks in social situations, and this cn actually erode their social skills. One exception: Social initiative: the tendency to initiate interpersonal contact. Buhrmester at al (1988) found that high SE predicts speaking up and taking social initiative.
Conflict Research: The Dark Side of Self-ESteem
Theory that low SE leads to aggression and hostility. But, troubling link between high SE and aggression in past research. But, low SE individuals are less likely to take risks and stand out.
Conflicting Research: Aggression and High Self-Esteem - Criminals
Consistent findings suggest strong relationship between assaults and ego-threats. High (but unstable) SE reliably predicts violent offences (through ego threats).
Conflicting Research: Aggression and High Self-Esteem - Group differences
Men have higher SE and are more violent than women. Depressed people have low SE and are less violent that control. “Inflated favourable view of self” exhibited a high rate of antisocial behaviour (Calvin, Block, and Funder 1995).
Conflicting Research: Narcissism
High SE becomes an all-encompassing need: grandiosity and sense of entitlement, pursued through achieving power and status. Often linked to social problems: “Unmitigated agency”, hostility, aggression, mood swings. Grandiose vs Vulnerable: Positive association between grandiose narcissism (NG) and explicit self-esteem , negative association between vulnerable narcissism (NV) and explicit self-esteem , no correlation between NG/NV and implicit self-esteem.
Grandiose vs Vulnerable Narcissism
Grandiose: Actually feel like they are better and more accomplished.
Vulnerable: I deserve or feel like I should have all the success or attention but also feel like they’re failing in this domain.
Contingencies of self-worth
People tie self-esteem to success in specific domains. Where they ‘stake’ they self worth. Academic, relation, physical.
Motivation trade-off of contingencies of self-worth
Increased initiative but also higher emotional vulnerability. You can be more motivated than other people, but at the same time, if you don’t get a good grade you’re going to be more psychologically impacted than others.
The impact of contingencies
Adolescents are vulnerable to contingencies of self-worth. Study: Contingencies in adolescence (Burwell & Shirk, 2006). Participants self-rested on the extent of their self-worth across four domains. Found higher reliance on external validation predicts future depressive symptoms. Diathesis of social domain contingencies + social stressors predicting depressive symptoms.
Researcher Bias
Vasconcellos had his political career tied to his theory that increasing self-esteem will improve security. Task Force “The correlational findings are very positive and compelling…” “… the association between self-esteem and its expected consequences are mixed, insignificant or absent.”
Researcher Bias: When presented with mixed findings, Andrew Mecca stated
“I didn’t care… I thought it was beyond science. It was a leap of faith. And I think only a blind idiot wouldn’t believe that self-esteem isn’t central to one’s character and health and vitality.”
So what is self-esteem?
Baumeister’s review: Benefits of high SE: Initiative, feeling good. Limits of high SE: Potential link to violence and aggression. May be an outcome rather than antecedent. Does not necessarily correlate with success.
Fragile vs Stable Self-Esteem
Fragile: Can be high but fluctuates, attached to contingent domains. Stable: Rarely fluctuates. Stable low SE associated with low self-concept clarity (Campbell et al., 1996). Stable high SE associated with high SCC (Kernis, Paradise, et al., 2000).
Optimal self-esteem (Kernis)
Distinct from high SE. Self-esteem that is derived from a sense of authenticity. Authenticity: awareness, unbiased processing, action, and reaction.
“Non-contingent self-esteem”
Self-as-process vs self-as-object. Self-esteem is not salient. Successes and failures do not implicate self-worth.
Paths to Optimal Self-Esteem
Mindfulness. Flow activities. Increased SCC.
