The Self

Study Notes

The self is a very complex construct that is formed and reshaped throughout our entire lives. How do we acquire information about ourselves? What cognitive structure does our self-concept take on? What factors motivate the self and what factors affect self-presentation? The authors attempt to explain such phenomena in this chapter, summarizing the key research findings in the area of "the self".

Self-concept is defined as a collection of beliefs we hold about ourselves. Self-esteem is the evaluation of this self-concept and the general value we place on the self. If high self-esteem exists, goals are set more appropriately, difficult situations are coped with more successfully and generally one thinks well of the self. If low self-esteem exists, difficult situations are coped with unsuccessfully, one does not think well of the self, and adverse reactions occur to negative feedback. How do we acquire knowledge about the self-concept and evaluate the self, affecting self-esteem?

One method through which we acquire self-knowledge is socialization. Individuals are treated in particular ways by others and participate in certain activities, which, if become regularities, can be internalized and come to be important aspects of the self-concept. If I regularly engage in sports, participating in leagues, pick-up games, etc. my self-concept may come to reflect an athletic-oriented individual. Such aspects of socialization can help define the self. We also gain information from reflected appraisal. By monitoring the reactions that other people have to us, we can gain knowledge about our selves. Similarly, other individuals, can give us direct feedback about our abilities, affecting our self-concept. Early in life parents' feedback can have a major impact on self-concept, while during adolescence, one's peers usually have a greater influence.

Not only do we gain information about the self from others, but from self-perception as well. We observe our own behaviour and can determine what activities we enjoy, what food we like, etc. from such observations. This usually applies to incidental information about the self, and not central, important ideas. Individuals also compare the self to other individuals in the environment in order to determine what elements makes one distinct from others, and in order to gain information about our abilities. Such social comparisons usually occur with comparisons of the self to similar others.

Another aspect of the self is one's social identity. This is the part of an individual's self-concept that derives from membership in a particular social group such as ethnicity or nationality. Once we acquire all this information about the self, how is it organized and represented cognitively?

The self is cognitively represented through self-schemas. A self-schema is a collection of dimensions along which one thinks about oneself. Individuals can have both positive and negative self-schemas. We not only hold schemas about what we presently are, but also hold conceptions of ourselves of what we may become in the future. These are labeled possible selves. Possible selves can help provide goals for the future and provide focus in our pursuits. One aspect of the self-schema that may cause discrepancies is the ideal self. The ideal self, or what we think we ideally ought to be, can cause discrepancies between this ideal and what we actually are. This can produce strong emotions and can even decrease self-esteem if the discrepancy involves an important attribute of the self.

With this number of possible selves and ideal selves, how do we control and direct our own actions? This is referred to as self-regulation. The aspect of the self-concept that is accessed in a particular situation to control and direct our actions is called the working self-concept. If a particular working self-concept is regularly accessed and becomes constant over time,it may be incorporated into the "stable" self-concept and become an important aspect of it. Individuals can vary with the amount of self-complexity they have. One can think of oneself in one or two predominant ways, or one can think of the self in a number of different ways. Linville (1985) found that individuals with simple self-concepts will be buoyed by success in that particular area, but will be vulnerable to failure in that area as well. On the other hand if one has a highly complex self-concept, this may buffer against failures since if failure occurs in one area, one can simply concentrate on another area that may be more successful in order to cope with the failure. Another factor that affects self-regulation is self-awareness. Self-regulation is affected by whether attention is directed in toward the self or out, toward the environment. If attention is directed inward, one can evaluate one's own behaviour and judge it against a standard, adjusting the behaviour to try to meet a standard. This evaluating and adjusting can continue until the standard has been met; this is referred to as the cybernetic theory of self-regulation.

A number of factors can motivate self-regulation. Individuals are generally motivated to obtain accurate self-concepts, consistent or stable self-concepts and positive self-concepts.

An accurate self-concept is necessary in order to be able to predict and control future outcomes. Trope found that we choose tasks that will be most informative about our abilities in order to gain accurate self-concepts. We also have the need for a consistent self-concept, needing to believe that we have certain intrinsic qualities that remain stable over time. We often seek out situations that confirm our self-concept and avoid situations that are at odds with our existing self-concept.

Another motivator of self-regulation is self-improvement. In order to self-improve we may compare ourselves to others who are more successful in a particular area, in order to learn how to improve. Similarly individuals have a need for self-enhancement. This need involves maintaining positive self-esteem on a day to day basis and generally feeling good about ourselves. This is illustrated by the fact that we remember positive information about ourselves better than negative information about ourselves. We also hold self-perceptions that are falsely positive and somewhat exaggerated; these are referred to as positive illusions. Two theories of self-enhancement attempt to explain why and how individuals enhance the self. First, Steale's theory of self-affirmation states that people will cope with threats to the self by affirming unrelated aspects of themselves. If I fail a test or exam in school, I may cope with this threat by affirming my athletic ability or by hi-lighting my social capabilities.

The second theory, Tesser's self-evaluation maintenance model states that the performance of other people in our social environments can affect our self evaluations, especially if we are psychologically close to them. When a person we are close to performs well, what will determine whether we will react positively or negatively to that behaviour? Our reaction will depend on whether the behaviour is relevant to our self-concept or not. If it is relevant to our self-definition, we are more likely to have feelings of envy and discomfort. If the behaviour is not relevant to our self-definition, we will have positive reactions and be more likely to take pride in the other's success.

Another theory that incorporates a number of motivating factors of self-regulation is Festinger's social comparison theory. Festinger states that we compare the self to others to get a sense of our own ability when objective information is not available. The goals of such comparisons are to gain accurate knowledge about the self, to self-enhance by making comparisons that put us in a favourable light, also known as downward comparisons, and to self-improve by making comparisons to others that are models of success, also known as upward comparisons. We can actively seek comparisons to other people, usually comparing ourselves to similar others, or we can engage in unsolicited comparisons that were not sought out.

An example of an unsolicited comparison is the classic experiment by Morse & Gergen. Subjects responded to what they thought was an ad for employment, and were given an application to fill out, along with a number of measures upon arrival. As they were filling out these forms, another applicant entered the room (actually a confederate to the experiment). The confederate was either well-groomed and confident --"Mr. Clean", or not well-groomed and disorganized --"Mr. Dirty". One of the measures taken was that of self-esteem. If the subject had encountered Mr. Dirty, they made an unsolicited downward comparison, consequently scoring higher on the self-esteem measure. The subjects who had encountered Mr. Clean, making an upward comparison, scored lower on the self-esteem measure.

Not only are we motivated to maintain positive, consistent, accurate self-concepts, but we are also motivated to present ourselves in a positive light. This self-presentation motive is a desire to manage the impression we make on others. This is often a deliberate activity, though it can become increasingly automatic in familiar situations.

In order to make a good impression, we can conform to the norms of the group, self-promote--convey positive information about ourselves, or use ingratiation--say positive things about the listener. Self-presentation is not always effective though, causing embarrassment and other negative emotions. In this situation we may use excuses in order to explain our poor performance. In other situations we may self-handicap if we do not believe we will succeed in a given situation. Self-handicapping involves actions that produce insurmountable obstacles to success. Later failures can then be attributed to the obstacle rather than to any lack of ability.

The extent to which we emphasize impression management is called self-monitoring. Snyder & colleagues developed a paper and pencil measure to assess the degree to which individuals self-monitor. High self-monitors are sensitive to situational cues about appropriate behaviour and may vary their behaviour more from situation to situation. Low self-monitors are less attuned to situational demands and control self-presentation more by inner attitudes and values.

The majority of the research and findings that have been described so far have been the result of mainly North American and Western research. Differences may exist though in the conception of the self between Western individualistic societies and Eastern collective societies. Individualistic cultures emphasize individuality and define the self as an independent structure, with boundaries and unique attributes.

Collectivist cultures appear to define the self in more interdependent terms, seeing the self as a part of an encompassing social relationship. Behaviour is determined by what is perceived to be the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others in the relationship. Abilities and opinions tend to be situation specific rather than considered as defining characteristics of the individual. Such differences may affect factors such as self-presentation, motives of self-knowledge and self-schemas themselves. Research is just beginning in the consideration of such factors and the generalizability of the Western findings on the self.