Self&Motivation Flashcards
Caveat 1 - multicultural minds
We all participate in multiple sociocultural contexts
- culture is more than just a nation
Caveat 2 - cultures are not monolithic
Differences in group averages do not explain individual experience
- we’re not talking about individuals, we’re talking about group averages
Caveat 3 - language matters
The way we talk about things, may make it sound stereotypical
We should say this (1) and not that (2)
Predominant settings in Korea elaborate on the values of being similar and fitting in (1) vs Koreans want to be like everybody else (2)
Twenty-statements test
Measures how people describe themselves (answer the question ‘Who am I?’)
Split in two parts:
1. abstract traits, stable characteristics that exist by themselves (independent self)
2. Relationships and roles, context-dependent behaviours (interdependent self)
Experiment showing intependent and interdependent selves
There are differences in how people describe themselves
- participants from Kenya and the US
- American and Nairobi undergrads don’t differ that much in how they describe themselves (both more in terms of independent self)
- Classification such as Africa/Kenya vs West/USA are too simplistic! There are substantial differences within countries (subcultures). Nairobi workers & undergraduates differ from Masai & Samburu.
- As we move from middle class to more working class, roles and membership become more salient
- Even more in two Kenyan tribes (Masai/Samburu) - the personal characteristics matter hardly at all
What is a possible explanation to the phenomena observed in the experiment with Kenyans and Americans on two views of self?
- Urbanization (living in the capital of the country)
- Westernization (tv, media)
- Lifestyle (not living within an extended family)
- Education (having received formal schooling)
Independent view of self
A model of self in which identity is thought to come from inner attributes that reflect a unique essence of the individual and that remain stable across situations and across the lifespan. Self is distinct from others.
What are the four key aspects of independent self?
Picture 1
- Self is experienced as distinct from others - circle of individual doesn’t overlap with others
2.Self-defining aspects are within the individual (large X= core attitudes, traits, abilities) - Self is stable (circle around self is solid; see also Entity Theory of Self, where abilities & traits are fixed and resistant to change)
- Ingroup boundaries are relatively permeable (still feel closer to ingroup but do not view outgroup as fundamentally distinct) → new relationships can be formed and old relationships can be dissolved without having a large impact on the person’s identity.
Interdependent view of self
A model of self in which identity is contingent upon relationships with ingroup members; individuals are perceived not as separate and distinct entities but as participants in a larger social unit (relational entity). Others are an extension of the self.
What are the four key aspects of interdependent self?
picture 2
- Self overlaps considerably with an individual’s significant relationships. –> Interdependent individuals’ identities are closely connected with others.
- Key aspects of the self (X) are based on significant relationships (roles). Roles govern how you feel, behave, not inner attributes. (X overalp with others)
- Self is a fluid identity, situation-dependent, unstable (see also Incremental theory of self, where abilities & traits malleable, likely to change across situations/lifetime)
- Solid ingroup – outgroup boarder (you do not easily become ingroup member, nor does ingroup dissolve easily. People might behave very differently towards outgroup members) → Obligations to others are an important part of ingroup relations.
What did research find out about the self-concept and its appearance in the brain?
Participants (English-speaking expats in China or Chinese-native) were instructed to consider how well certain traits characterized themselves or their mothers
Results: Chinese participants’ brain activation did not differ when thinking of themselves or their mothers: Chinese self-representations for themselves and their mothers are not that distinct and both reflect on their self-concept. So, significant others form a core part of the self-concept for those with interdependent selves (medial prefrontal cortex / MPFC has been linked to self-representations). For Western participants, different brain regions were activated → represent themselves and their mothers in distinct ways (independent self)
How do cullectivistic and individualistic cultural values shape the self?
The type of self-concept relates to the cultural values of the larger cultural context.
Collectivistic cultural values stress the importance of being connected with others through certain cultural practices (e.g., children co-sleeping with their parents, family deciding or having influence over your partner selection, etc.), which in turn nurture an interdependent view of self.
Individualistic cultural values stress the importance of being self-sufficient through certain cultural practices (e.g., elderly saving up for retirement homes, children having their own bedroom, students paying their tuition fees, etc.), which in turn nurture an independent view of self.
In this way, culture and psyche/self make each other up!
How is physical and social enviornment important in shaping of the self? Give an example of a study
However, apart from the dominant cultural values, what is also important for the formation of one’s self-concept is the constraints and affordances of the physical and social environment.
Physical environment: this study shows that rice-growing regions in China showed higher prevalence of interdependent thinking and holistic reasoning than wheat-growing regions that showed higher prevalence of independent thinking and analytic reasoning. Why? Because rice cultivation requires a lot of coordination and cooperation with others, whereas for wheat cultivation you don’t need to rely on others. This is an example of a distal cause of culture: initial differences that lead to effects over long periods of time and often through indirect relations.
Social environment: much research shows a correlation between individualism and education/ social class within the same country. Exposure to higher education can make you more independent. This is an example of a proximal cause of culture: a cause that has direct and immediate relation with its effect.
The independent self-concept is more stable and the interdependent self-concept is more fluid
↪ Self-concept has consequences on a variety of psychological processes, including emotion, motivation, thinking style (how people think about themselves + others), but also on implicit theories of self, self-consistency, and self-awareness.
What is the entity theory of self?
Aspects of the self are resistant to change across one’s life because they are innate - we are born with given traits are we’re supposed to discover them over our lifespan
↪ independent self-concept
↪ fixed mindset
What is Incremental theory of self?
Aspects of the self are malleable and can be improved because they depend on one’s efforts
↪ Interdependent self-concept
↪ Growth mindest
What are the implications of the different implicit theories of self on daily life?
- Our mindest affects our perfomrance
- Related to effort (is studying believed to make one more intelligent?)
- Related to reaction to & attribution of success vs. failure (attribution to inner ability & acceptance of failure vs. attribution to own efforts and strategies & react with extra training in the face of failure)
- people are extremely sensitive to the cues that we’re getting from our enviornment
Example: Is “studying hard” important for success in math?
60% of Chinese said Yes intelligence depends on effort; admission at the uni is based on knowledge (ability to learn large amounts of info)
25% of North-Americans said Yes intelligence is inborn; admission at uni is based on general IQ tests
What experiment shows self-concept and self-consistency?
American and japanese twenty statements test
Experiment set-up: who is sitting next to student when filling out the twenty-statement test.
Picture 3
Results:
USA: higher positive self-views & stable view of self across situations.
Japan: lower positive self-views & variance between situations (more self critical when authority present, most positive about self when alone) (but…stable within situations)!
↪ May be related to more incremental theory of self because when you’re thinking about the areas that you’re not good at, you can think of ways on how to improve them
Why is consistency important to people with independent self-views? In USA (internal) consistency is related to likability, well-being, & social skills but it is not in Korea
What is a second experiment studying self-concept and self-consistency?
The one with cognitive dissonance
Cognitive dissonance present in european canadians participants but not japanese - people with an independent self think of themselves as stable and consistent across situations but then when they act inconsistently with their beliefs, they have a need to fix it = cog. dissonance; for japanese people it’s not so unpleasant because they think about themselves more flexibly
However, in a follow up study they found that cognitive dissonance matters in japanese students when they think about choices they made for their friend
Consistency matters for a different aspect of their self depending on the culture
↪ researchers found that when ordering food for themselves versus for others, European Canadians show justification of their choices for themselves, but Japanese show justification of their choices for others (not for themselves)! (picture 4)
What is the difference between different types of self-awareness?
Subjective SA: when we consider our self as an Acting Agent: (attention directed outwards, self not consciously aware) → more 1st person memory, high self-esteem, not very accurate in predicting own behavior/
Objective SA: when we consider our Self as an Observed Object: (consider how you appear to others, evaluation apprehension) → more 3rd person memory, more self-critical, accurate in predicting own behavior
What was an experiment studying self-awarness?
What is the effect of self-enhancing stimuli (=mirror, video-camera) on judgements of discrepancy between ideal & actual self? If you are in the “I” modus, seeing yourself in a mirror forces a switch to “me” (goes hand in hand with a more critical evaluation of self: bigger discrepancy between ideal and actual self). Consistent with this, seeing oneself in mirror increases the gap btw ideal & actual self. Seeing self in mirror has little effect on Japanese but does have an effect on US-samples (cheat less, more self-critical, self-evaluation less positive/more similar to Japanese). Japanese chronically in “me-modus”.
Picture 5
The self as actor (“I”) vs. observed object (“me”)
Subjective self-awareness (“I”): attention outwards (more self critical when mirror present)
Objective self-awareness (“me”): attention inwards
What is the Big 5? How was it constructed?
Personality researcher perspective: The main assumption is that you only need 5 uncorrelated dimensions to adequately describe personality. These are the most basic building blocks of personality. It’s assumed that this is true globally across cultures
Many trait words out there (shy, quiet, introvert)…but lots of overlap. Allport & Odbert identified 18,000 traits. Costa & McCrae did a factor-analysis and proposed that all traits can be reduced to 5 factors.
Openness: wide range of interests, eagerness to experience new situations, experiencing unfamiliar without anxiety/with pleasure
Conscientiousness: control and inhibition of behaviour, task-orientation
Extraversion: seeking new contacts with energy, confidence, enthusiasm, tendency to experience things positively
Agreeableness: kindness, empathy vs cynicism, hostility
Neuroticism: emotional instability, proneness to experience fear/shame/anger.
But: We might have missed factors due to taking a Western perspective in creating the inventory in the first place
When factor-analysis was conducted in China what did they observe as the main personality traits?
Picture 6
CPAI (Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory) set up (Cheung et al., 1996): Made list of personality traits based on analysis of cultural messages (novels, proverbs, etc)/ put into questionnaire/ fill in by Chinese/ factor analysis.
Results:
4 factors emerged. Three have considerable overlap (in terms of correlations) with BIG 5
No overlap for Big 5 Openness & CPAI Interpersonal Relatedness. However Costa & McCrae had found them in China. What does this mean? Not (as) important in China? Differences in accessibility? Method bias?
Also, additional factor: interpersonal relatedness. replicated with Singaporeans & Hawaiians (Heung & Leung, 1998)
Openness to experience is the factor that emerges with the least consistency
How universal is the structure of personality? What are the main issues of personality tests?
Big 5 is fairly cross-culturlaly robust (at least in industrialised populations of students) but…
The main issues of personality tests is Equivalence and Bias:
1. Construct equivalence: is personality conceptualized in the same way (e.g., how can we talk about a stable personality when people with an interdependent self-view experience self as fluid)
2. Reference-group effect: People tend to compare themselves to local norms (e.g., “I am very punctual” means a different thing in Italy and in the UK.)
