The Self Under Threat (Midterm #2) Flashcards
Self-integrity
The perception of oneself as morally and adaptively good. We have a need to maintain adequate self-esteem and think that we are overall decent people.
Psychological threat
The perception of environmental challenge to one’s self-integrity. Since our self concept is partially derived from important people in our life, even when people close to us do something bad, that can also be a threat to our self integrity.
Defensive reaction
Negative, hostile, or distorted reaction to anything bad about the self to protect self-integrity. Denial and minimization, compensatory conviction (doubling down on beliefs or behaviours to defend identity), symbolic self-completion, self-serving bias, blaming others, rationalization, avoidance, aggression.
Function of Defensive Reactions
Benefit: Allow us to maintain positive self-views and restore self-integrity. Limitations: Get in the way of learning from the challenge / setback.
Self-Affirmation Theory
We are motivated to maintain self-integrity, thus when this integrity is threatened, we are motivated to repair it. We can repair self-integrity by engaging in self-affirmation (an act that demonstrates one’s adequacy).
Key Principles of Self-Affirmation Theory
- We are motivated to maintain overall, global self-integrity, rather than integrity in a specific domain. Means that self-integrity is flexible, and we can affirm a role or identity in an important, domain unrelated to the threat to repair self-integrity.
- Our motive is to be “good enough” rather than excellent / superior. Self affirmation needs to only foster a sense of adequacy in a personally valued domain, not a perception of overall excellence.
- Self-integrity is maintained/restored by demonstrating integrity through meaningful acts or reminders of such acts. Praising oneself in the absence of “evidence” will not work.
Examples of Self-Affirmations
Accomplishments (praise, trophy, award). Engaging in meaningful activities. Reflecting on personal values and strengths (most often used in research settings, participants are asked to identify and write an essay about important values.
Self-Affirmation vs. Symbolic Self-Completion
Both symbolic self-completion and self-affirmation help people cope with self-threats. Symbolic self-completion:Engaging in activities that will bolster the specific self-aspect that was threatened (“complete” the threatened identity”). Usually defensive and involves superficial signals to prove the threatened self-aspect. More likely if the threatened domain is central to self-concept.
Self-affirmation: We compensate for threats to the self by engaging in activities that will bolster our global sense of self-integrity. More likely if the threatened domain is less central.
Self-affirmation can reduce thinned for symbolic self-completion.
Why is Self-Affirmation Helpful?
Self-affirmations lifts barriers to learning from threat by: Buffering against threat (self-affirmations reassure people that they have integrity and help them to see themselves in a broader way). Reducing defensiveness.
Three examples of the Effects of Self-Affirmation
- Stereotype threat in education (Self-affirmation can improve minority students’ academic outcomes)
- Prejudice as a reaction to self-threat (Self-affirmation reduces stereotyping of outgroup members)
- Mortality salience and worldview protection (Self-affirmation eliminates defensive worldview protection when confronted with own mortality)
Stereotype Threat
When individuals fear that they will confirm a negative stereotype about their social group, which leads to increased anxiety, reduced performance, and disengagement from the domain. Helps explain why students from minority groups show an achievement gap compared to students from majority groups (e.g. research shows that when race is emphasized before a test, minority students perform worse than when race is not mentioned).
Self-Affirmation Educational Interventions - Study methods (Sherman et al, 2003)
Can self affirmation reduce the achievement gap of minority students by reducing stereotype threat? Method: Longitudinal study in White and Latino middle school students. Completed experimental manipulation 4 times over the school year before a test. Experimental manipulation: Self affirmation: write about a particular value that is most important to you. Control: Write about why a particular value that is not important to you may be important to someone else. Monitored GPA.
Self-Affirmation Educational Interventions - Study results (Sherman et al, 2003)
Self-affirmation (vs. control) improved the GPA of minority students but not White students, thus closing the achievement gap. Follow-up study showed that the benefits of the self-affirmation intervention persisted after 2 years. Suggests that self-affirmations can improve the academic performance of minority students.
Understanding the Longevity of Affirmation
Self-affirmation can create long lasting positive change by setting off a positive feedback loop between self-perceptions, positive outcomes, and the social environment.
Self-Affirming Feedback Loop
- Self-affirmation leads to better GOA
- Better GPA reinforces self-integrity
- Because the students got a better GPA, teachers expect more of them.
- Higher expectations draw out better performance.
- Others reinforce self-integrity through positive feedback.
- The student alters the social world in ways other than through better outcomes, like asking for help and selecting challenging courses.
Prejudice as a Reaction to Self-Threat
Threats to the self may lead people to endorse prejudicial attitudes in an attempt to restore self-integrity. When a personal feels bad about themselves. Hypothesis: Providing people with another way to self-affirm should reduce prejudicial attitudes.
Study 1: Do threats to self increase prejudice? (Fein & Spencer, 1997)
Method: Participants told they would complete 2-part study. Part 1: Intelligence test. Experimental manipulation: Threat to self - negative feedback. No threat - positive feedback. Assessed state self-esteem.
Part 2: “How employees evaluate candidates in hiring process”. Evaluated job candidates based on work experience, academic record, skills, photo. Experimental manipulation: Some participants led to believe the candidate is Jewish. Others led to believe the candidate is Italian. Rate how favourably they viewed the candidate. Re-assessed state self-esteem.
Study 1: Do threats to self increase prejudice? (Fein & Spencer, 1997) - Results
Threat to self led to prejudicial attitude against outgroup member (Jewish candidate) and subsequent increase in self-esteem. Suggests that prejudice partly stems from a desire to restore self-integrity.
Study 2: Does affirming the self reduce prejudice? (Fein & Spencer, 1997)
Method: Participants told they would complete 2-part study. Part 1: All participants threatened with negative feedback on intelligence test. Experimental manipulation: Self-affirmation: Write about a particular value that is most important to you. Control: Write about why a particular value that is not important to you may be important to someone else.
Part 2: “How employees evaluate candidates in hiring process”. Same as Study 1.
Study 2: Does affirming the self reduce prejudice? (Fein & Spencer, 1997) - Results
Self-affirmation eliminated prejudicial attitudes.
Terror Management Theory
Awareness that we will die some day creates terror. To manage this terror, we cling to our cultural worldviews, self-esteem, and close relationships. Allow us to see ourselves as a person of value living in a meaningful world. Allow us to symbolically live forever.
Effects of Mortality Salience
Mortality salience, being reminded of one’s mortality, leads to worldview protection. More negative evaluations of people that criticize culture and more positive evaluations of people that praise it. More in-group bias. More aggression towards those that have a different worldview. Greater support for violent solutions to ethnic, religious, and international conflicts. Preference for less risky activities.
Does self-affirmation eliminate negative effects of mortality salience? (Schmeichel & Martens, 2005)
Method: Recruited American University students as participants. Mortality salience manipulation: Mortality salience: Answered questions about own death. Control: Answered questions about dental plan. Affirmation manipulation: Self-affirmation: wrote about an important value. No affirmation: Wrote about less important value. Read and evaluated anti-American essay.
Does self-affirmation eliminate negative effects of mortality salience? (Schmeichel & Martens, 2005) - Results
Self-affirmation eliminated typical terror management defence strategy of derogating people that don’t share worldview.
