The Self

1. context effects
2. developmental diffs
3. cultural attributes
4. internal attributes
5. values, worldviews
6. important group memberships
7. impacts self-esteem
8. changes from childhood to adulthood
9. Campbell et al (1996): ppl w/ low self-concept clarity tend to be neurotic, have low self-esteem

1. Sense of self-identity
2. INDIVIDUALISTIC
   1. eat your carrots, they're good for you
3. COLLECTIVISTIC
   1. eat your carrots, think of the farmer who grew them for us
4. Independent vs Interdependent
   1. Independent - focus on yourself, autonomous
   2. Interdependent - focus on others, rely on others more
5. the more self-aware you are, the more you behave in line with your INTERAL SELF
   1. Diener & Wallbom study
      1. see if p/s would CHEAT
      2. one group had mirror while doing test
      3. other group did not

         Nota:

         • 70% continued to answer questions after timer told them to stop doing test!
         1. this group cheated more!!
6. "knower" and "I" - aware of yourself as an object of your thoughts
7. STATE OF AWARENESS
   1. cues from environment
   2. personality disposition
   3. look for SELF-DISCREPANCIES
      1. no need to change behaviour/attitude
      2. change behaviour to match set standards
      3. reduce self-awareness so no need to change

1. limited accessibility
   1. only parts of you shown at certain times/places
2. selective memory
   1. reconstruct our memory to fit our view of self
3. attribution
   1. inconsistencies to situational factors

1. use our own behaviour to infer smth about ourselves
2. evaluation of past behaviour

1. EXTRINSIC: do it becuz there's smth in it for us
2. INTRINSIC: do it becuz we want to!
   1. CULTURAL influences
      1. collectivistic child does the best for puzzles his mother picked for him
      2. individualistic child does the best for puzzles he picked for himself
3. OVERJUSTIFICATION
   1. giving rewards to things that would normally have intrinsic motivation
   2. this may lead person to change from intrinsic to extrinsic!
   3. Mark Leppers study with MARKERS
      1. Children play with markers on their own
      2. those given reward for playing markers no longer played markers unless they got reward
   4. Green-for-grade programs
      1. for low SES youth - seems to be quite a good motivator!
   5. POSITIVE EFFECTS
      1. study showed that ppl who imposed earlier deadlines than the actual one on themselves felt more task enjoyment

1. people evaluate personal qualities by comparing themselves to others
2. people most close/similar to you are prob useful sources of info about yourself!
3. SELF-EVALUATION MAINTENANCE MODEL (TESSER)
   1. Impact of comparison depends on:
      1. 1. closeness of person being compared to
      2. 2. Importance of attribute
   2. CLOSE PERSON + IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTE = FEEL BAD
   3. CLOSE PERSON + UNIMPORTANT = BIRG

      Nota:

      • BIRG = basking in reflected glory
      1. UNI FOOTBALL TEAM WON: 32% said "we won"
      2. UNI FOOTBALL TEAM LOST: 18% said "we lost"
   4. DISTANT PERSON + IMPORTANT = NOT PLEASANT
   5. DISTANT PERSON + UNIMPORTANT = DON'T CARE
4. UPWARD COMPARISON
5. DOWNWARD COMPARISON
6. SILVER medalist feels worse than BRONZE medalist
7. GOOD comparisons??
   1. study on college students
      1. SUPERSTAR student was INSPIRATION for freshmen
   2. upward comparisons can be good if they are RELEVANT + ATTAINABLE

Adjunto:

• The Self - Self-Discrepancy Theory

1. IDEAL SELVES
   1. focus = positive outcomes
   2. hopes, aspirations, dreams
2. OUGHT SELVES
   1. focus = negative outcomes
   2. duties, obligations, responsibilities
3. EXAMPLE: STAYING MARRIED
   1. ideal:be happy in marriage
   2. ought: avoid divorce!
4. REGULATORY FOCUS
   1. How prevention/promotion-focused are you?
   2. Regulatory Focus Questionnaire - Higgins et al 2001
5. we don't think about it if we don't pay attention to it!

Adjunto:

• The Self - Game on TV

1. direct behaviour to proper goals
2. depends on APPRAISAL OF EVENT
   1. this depends on CONTEXT

1. Key attributions (Weiner)
   1. Stability
      1. Is event STABLE OR NOT?
   2. Control
      1. Was there smth you could have done?
   3. Internal / External
      1. Smth that YOU caused or smth that wasn't in your control?
2. Easier to deal with events you have CONTROL over
   1. ILLUSION OF CONTROL
3. LEARNED HELPLESSNESS
   1. uncontrollable, external cause
4. DEPRESSION
   1. uncontrollable, internal cause
5. transformed into a CHALLENGE!!
   1. we have confidence to control outcome!!!

1. mismembering - very biased memories
2. false-consensus - idea that people are more or less THE SAME as us for bad behaviour
3. false-uniqueness - see ourselves as MORE UNQUE than we really are for good behaviours
4. unrealistic optimism - better than average effect, overconfident judgments
5. self-serving comparison - make favourable/downward comparisons
6. self-handicapping - doing smth to make you perform bad so you have excuse if you do perform bad!

1. Narcissism
   1. no evidence to show we are any more narcissistic than we were a century ago!
2. act as buffer against negative situations
3. balance ACCURACY and OPTIMISM!
4. cultural diffs
   1. INDEPENDENT: self-enhancement is natural
   2. INTERDEPENDENT: self is connected with others hence self-criticism is natural!

1. SELF-EXPRESSION: behave in special way to express who you really are
2. SELF-PROMOTION: influence others' perceptions about you
3. INGRATIATION: attempt to be more attractive/likeable to target
4. SELF-VERIFICATION THEORY
   1. people seek confirmation of self-concept even if it is negative!

1. HIGH = adjust behaviour to protect image
2. LOW = behave in ways that express true attitudes regardless of who's around
3. MANAGING ONLINE IDENTITIES:
   1. we are much more involved in impression/image management
4. HIGH self-monitoring males go for attractive + unlikeable females
5. LOW self-monitoring males go for unattractive + likeable females

1. interpersonal tool
   1. stable identity to interact w/ others
2. decision-maker
   1. reflects goals, values
3. regulatory system
   1. maintain self

1. radishes and chocolate study
   1. 1. 2 dishes = radishes or choc
   2. 2. 2 groups - 1 given taster of radishes, 1 given taster of choc
   3. group who had taster of choc managed to solve puzzle for 8.5 mins only!
   4. 3. then had to solve puzzle
   5. group given taster of radishes lasted 19 mins!

1. smile - feel happier
2. sitting straight - more pride
3. clenched fists - more anger
4. body movements create physio changes in brain

1. self-serving strategies
2. be careful not to be too self-confident tho!
3. CIALDINI: "we avoid shadow of defeat and bask in glory of victory even if its reflected glory we still get a tan"
4. benefits of DOWNWARD comparisons - choosing partners for comparing to make us feel better about oursevles
   1. Friendships: upward comparisons can be damaging to friendship - competitiveness!
   2. Relationship: upward comparisons can be good - see your partner like your ideal self!
5. SELF-HANDICAPPING: BERGLAS & JONES (1978)
   1. 1. given anagrams that were either solvable or not
   2. 2. gave them praise - told some the reason while others were not told why
   3. 3. then could choose to take performance-inhibiting drug or not
   4. RESULTS: only 13% of those told why decided to take drug but 70% of those who were NOT told why took the drug!
6. SELF-PROMOTION: strategy to make others think of you as competent in some way

1. AMERICANS
   1. +ve events more likely to happen to them than siblings
   2. -ve events more likely to happen to siblings than themselves
2. JAPANESE
   1. +ve events equally likely to happen to them and siblings
   2. -ve events more likely to happen to them
3. BUT RMB ECOLOGICAL FALLACY - error assuming that r/s between variables at group level are same as those at individual level!!