250 words DQ

fivfee

02ch_feenstra_psychology.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >250 words DQ

Hemera/Thinkstock

Learning Objectives

By the end of the chapter you should be able to:

• Define self-schema and identify how self-schemas influence memory and behavior

• Explain how possible selves impact behavior

• Compare public self-awareness and private self-awareness

• Describe what self-esteem is and what we know about it

• Define self-efficacy

• Explain the concept of self-serving bias

• Identify why impression management is impor- tant and strategies people use for impression management

Studying the Self 2

• Discuss the power of roles

• Describe how self-regulation occurs

• Explain the difference between an internal and an external locus of control

• Describe how the self influences actions

Chapter Outline

2.1 Who Am I? • My Self • Awareness of the Self • Evaluating the Self: Self-Esteem • The Positive Self

2.2 The Acting Self • Presenting the Self • Regulating the Self • The Power of the Self

Chapter Summary

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 29 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Think back to your last job interview. What did the interviewer ask you? If you have been through a number of interviewers, have you noticed any common questions? Job applicants are often asked to describe themselves in an interview (Kennedy, 2008). Articulating strengths and weaknesses is also common (Powers, 2010). What do you think a job interviewer is trying to discover by asking these questions? How does your understanding and view of self impact how you answer these questions?

2.1 Who Am I?

Tell us about yourself” is a popular interviewer request. If you were asked the ques-tion “Who are you?” how would you answer it? Psychologists have long explored our views of our self and how we come to those views (James, 1890). Self-concept is the collection of things you know about yourself—such as your overall cognitive under- standing (beliefs, attitudes, and opinions) about yourself. When you answer the question “Who am I?” you are describing your self-concept.

My Self What we know about ourselves is not just a random collection of facts and beliefs. Human beings (or at least the brains of human beings) like organization and pattern. We naturally categorize and organize information that comes into our environment (Markus, 1977; Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994). These organized categories of information are called schemas. You may recognize this term if you have taken a developmental psychol- ogy course. Developmental psychologists investigate how children learn to sort through, recognize, and categorize information. Children do not know what a dog is when they come into the world—they must learn this concept. You know that dogs are furry, have four legs, and bark; your schema of a dog is a barking, four-legged, furry animal.

We have schemas about ourselves as well. Self-schemas are knowledge structures about the self. Although sometimes the terms self-schema and self-concept are used inter- changeably, self-schemas organize and help us use the vast amounts of information within the self-concept. Because they organize and help us use information about our- selves, self-schemas affect how we view the world (Markus, 1977). People tend to notice things in the world that are associated with their schema, and engage in behavior that fits with their self-schema. For example, would you describe yourself as an exerciser? Do you like to keep in shape, stay physically active, and work out regularly? If so, you have an exercise self-schema. Researchers consider schemas to be on a continuum, so if your responses to the preceding questions were “absolutely not,” you would have a nonexercise self-schema. Those in the middle researchers call aschematic in regard to a self-schema for exercise. Aschematic simply means “without schema.” In general, individuals who have a self-schema for exercise are quicker to respond to stimuli that pertains to their schema (energetic), are able to provide more examples of behaviors that relate to their schema (running), and are more likely to choose and do behaviors in accord with that schema (participate in an exercise program) (Kendzierski, 1990).

“

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 30 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

We have a tendency to better remember those things that are related to ourselves, some- thing called the self-reference effect (Rogers, Kuiper, & Kirker, 1977). For example, you might remember that Joelle has a blue car like yours, but not remember what color car Shana drives because it is different from yours. We often think about ourselves and relate things to ourselves, and this appears to be a good strategy for memory (Symons & Johnson, 1997; Yang, Truong, Fuss, & Bislimovic, 2012). Researchers have even located the area of the brain associated with the self-reference effect, an area of the prefrontal cortex, a part of the brain in the front of your head, behind your forehead (Leshikar & Duarte, 2012). Individuals with damage to this part of the brain do not engage in the self-reference effect (Philippi, Duff, Denburg, Tranel, & Radrauf, 2012). As you study, keeping the self- reference effect in mind may be helpful. Relate new material to your life, and when it is time to remember the material later, you will be more likely to be able to come up with it.

Possible Self Another popular interview question is “Where do you see yourself in 5 years?” Our conceptions of ourselves include not only what we currently are but also who we might become. Possible selves are the selves we hope to be and the selves we fear we might become (Erikson, 2007; Markus & Nurius, 1986). A job applicant, for example, might have a vision of herself as the inhabitant of the corner office, efficiently handling multiple tasks before attending a meeting where she gives a bril- liant sales presentation. Possible selves influence the choices we make (Markus and Nurius, 1986). For example, a job applicant with a “success- ful executive” possible self is likely to apply for jobs that will help her get closer to that possible self and work hard to prepare for job interviews. Possible selves also change the way we view our current circumstances. The applicant with the “successful executive” possible self is likely to be more upset by a rejection letter from a company where she could have moved into that executive position than would another applicant without that possible self. Possible selves, however, are more susceptible to change based on feedback from the environment than are other parts of the self. For example, after receiving several rejections, the job applicant may revise her “successful executive” possible self to a potentially more attainable “adequate sales manager” possible self.

We have possible selves for what we hope to become, but we also have possible selves for what we fear we may become. For example, someone may have a possible self that sits in front of a pile of bills, unemployed and broke. Such an image motivates a person to apply for jobs and prepare well for interviews. Motivation is highest when there is a balance between a feared possible self and a possible self in a positive and desired state.

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Our possible selves can influence our behaviors.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 31 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Delinquent youth have a feared self that continues involvement in delinquent activity but often that is not balanced out with an expected self that does well in school or gets a part-time job. Without a vision of themselves in a more positive role, these youth lack the motivation to do the things they might to put them on a more positive path (Oyserman & Markus, 1990). Possible selves do seem to become less important with time; perhaps because our possible selves become our current selves, and we let go of selves we will never become. Over the course of adulthood, possible selves play less of a role in self- motivation (Frazier, Barreto, & Newman, 2012).

Even without achieving a hoped for possible self, simply imagining a successful possible self can have a positive impact on our well-being (King, 2001). As might be expected, people who get closer to their hoped for possible selves and avoid feared possible selves during life transitions have more positive emotions and less depression (Manzi, Vignoles, & Regalia, 2010). That is not to say all of our hoped for possible selves need to be real- ized for us to lead full and satisfying lives. Possible selves that have been lost due to life circumstances or missed opportunities can lead to greater maturity and courage in facing life’s challenges (King & Hicks, 2007). A mother with a disabled child may have lost her “proud mother of valedictorian son at college graduation” possible self, but may also have learned to face each day with joy and courage in mourning the loss of that possible self.

Ought, Ideal, and Actual Self Possible selves can be categorized as a self that fulfills all responsibilities and obligations, and a self that achieves hopes, wishes, or dreams. An ought self is the self we feel we should be or others feel we should be, and includes obligations, responsibilities, and roles. The ideal self is the self we want to be or think others want us to be, and includes our hopes and dreams for ourselves in the future. The actual self is the self we believe we are today. Self-discrepancy theory proposes that differences between our actual selves and our ought selves or ideal selves lead to different emotions and motivations (Higgins, 1987). The ideal self and the ought self serve as guides for evaluating one’s behavior, called self-guides. For example if a person’s ideal self contains a dream of getting all As in college, then grades received in classes would be judged based on that standard for behavior.

Differences between the different selves bring about different emotions. A discrepancy between the actual self and the ideal self can bring about dejection-related emotions like disappointment, dissatisfaction, or hopelessness (Higgins, 1987). At the extreme, hopeless- ness contributes to depression and thoughts of suicide (Cornette, Strauman, Abramson, & Busch, 2009). When ideal selves are defined by others rather than by the self, a gap between the two will still result in dejection-related emotions, but those emotions may focus more on being ashamed or embarrassed. On the other hand, when the actual self and the ought self do not align, emotions of anxiety, nervousness, guilt, or fear may result (Higgins, 1987). A son who believes it is his duty to call his mother regularly but does not do so may feel anxious or guilty about that behavior. The discrepancies between our actual selves and our ideal or ought selves tend to be stable over time (Strauman, 1996). Although one may achieve a goal of the ideal self or do a duty of the ought self, other goals and duties tend to replace those that have been achieved, contributing to a stability in the way one sees oneself and approaches the world.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 32 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Awareness of the Self In answering a “Who am I?” question for an interviewer, we may answer to the best of our ability, but the degree to which we are aware of ourselves, or particular aspects of ourselves, can vary. Your awareness of your internal states—for example, your thoughts, feelings, or desires—is your private self-awareness. Knowing you are nervous for your interview is part of your private self-awareness. Awareness of how you appear to others is your public self-awareness. Knowing that the interviewer will be evaluating the profes- sional image you present, you dress carefully and try to smile.

Private self-awareness can make us more aware of our attitudes and values (Fejfar & Hoyle, 2000). When our behaviors do not match our attitudes or values (our standards), a discrepancy is created. Because we do not like discrepancies, we usually seek to change our behavior or avoid being self-aware (Gibbons, 1990; Silvia & Duval, 2001). A discrep- ancy could lead people to act in a more positive way, striving to live up to their values. In the case of the job interview, your awareness of your own deep desire for the job may motivate you to act in such a way that demonstrates your desire to the interviewer, rather than the casual or sarcastic way you may usually act. However, private self-awareness can also lead to destructive behaviors. Realizing their behavior on an interview did not match their high standards for that situation, someone might engage in binge eating, drug use, or have suicidal thoughts in an attempt to escape self-awareness (Tassava, & Ruderman, 1999). In one study of adolescent drinking, more negative self-schemas in teens predicted an earlier onset of drinking (Corte & Zucker, 2008). For these youth, getting drunk was a way to escape knowledge of the negative aspects of themselves (see Figure 2.1).

Test Yourself

• If you saw yourself as a gardener, gardening was part of your self-schema, how would that impact you?

Research suggests you would choose and do behaviors in line with your gardener self- schema: You might peruse seed catalogs rather than fashion catalogs in the winter, grow tomatoes and beans if you had space, or talk to others about gardening. The self-reference effect means you would likely know which of your neighbors were growing gardens.

• Sam has a feared possible self that includes being unemployed and depressed, but this is not balanced out by a possible self that is successful at a job and happy. Should we worry about Sam?

Yes. Lack of balance between a feared and a more positive possible self can be problem- atic. Without a positive vision to work toward, Sam may lack the motivation to work to avoid the feared possible self, because he is not working toward anything positive.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 33 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Figure 2.1: Drinking outcomes based on healthy or vulnerable self-concepts

The results of this study support the idea that private self-awareness can lead to destructive and dangerous behaviors.

Based on Corte, C. & Zucker, R. A. (2008). Self-concept disturbances: Cognitive vulnerability for early drinking and early drunkenness in adolescents at high risk for alcohol problems. Addictive Behavior, 33, 1282–1290. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.06.002

Public self-awareness is higher when we believe we are being observed. For example, if you knew you were being videotaped or saw yourself in a mirror, your public self- awareness would rise (George & Stopa, 2008). Children were less likely to steal Halloween candy when a mirror was placed behind the bowl (Beaman, Klentz, Diener, & Svanum, 1979). People with faith in God who believe God knows their thoughts and actions show greater self-awareness when reminded about God (Gervais & Norenzayan, 2012). We often have high public self-awareness on a job interview because we, rightly or wrongly, believe our every behavior is being watched. Public self-awareness can be problematic for individuals who are not as confident in their social abilities. Individuals who are socially anxious show higher public self-awareness when they are made aware of their public actions, contributing to their social anxiety (George & Stopa, 2008). When high in public self-awareness, individuals who do not believe in their ability to do well in social interac- tions retreat from such interactions and believe their interaction partners will like them less. Perhaps because of their nervous behavior their partners do like them less (Alden, Teschuk, & Tee, 1992).

Even those without social anxiety may have trouble processing incoming information when public self-awareness is high. When students with high public self-consciousness were asked to recall the names of people they met, they were less likely to be able to do it than those who were not high in public self-consciousness (Kimble, Hirt, & Arnold, 1985). You may have encountered such a phenomenon in a class or a meeting where

A g

e a

t fi

rs t

d ri

n k (

y e a rs

)

A g

e a

t fi

rs t

ti m

e b

e in

g d

ru n

k (

y e a rs

)

Self-Concept Healthy Vulnerable

Boys Girls

Self-Concept Healthy Vulnerable

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 34 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Test Yourself

Which of the following is likely to increase your public self-awareness? Which will increase your private self-awareness?

• You see a sign at the store that says you are being watched over closed circuit television.

Public self-awareness

• The therapist asks you about your hopes for the future.

Private self-awareness (continued)

everyone introduced themselves. Nervous about how you would appear when your turn came, you failed to catch the names of the people sitting around you. During public self-consciousness, when we are focused on the image we present, our ability to process new information is impaired.

Public self-awareness generally leads individuals to act in ways that satisfy social norms. One set of researchers measured how often women in a public restroom washed their hands (Munger & Harris, 1989). When someone else was in the restroom, increasing public self- awareness, 24 of the 31 women (77%) washed their hands. When the women believed they

were alone in the restroom—public self-awareness was relatively low— 11 of the 28 women (39%) washed their hands. However, public self- awareness may not always have a positive effect on behavior. In a study on cheating on an academic task and self-awareness, researchers found that participants with high public self-awareness were more likely to cheat because they were concerned about how their performance on a task would be viewed (Malcolm & Ng, 1989). High public self-awareness can also lead to compensatory behav- iors. College students with low evalu- ations of themselves who were high in public awareness friended more people on Facebook than those with low evaluations of themselves who

were low in public awareness (Lee, Moore, Park, & Park, 2012). When more aware of the image they might be showing the world, these students attempted to project an image of popularity with a high friend count on social media.

Belinda Images/SuperStock

Due to heightened public self-awareness, people are more likely to wash their hands if someone else is in the restroom.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 35 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Test Yourself (continued)

• You are told that Santa Claus is making a list, trying to figure out who is naughty and who is nice. Provided, of course, you believe in Santa Claus.

Public self-awareness

• You give a speech in front of 100 people.

Public self-awareness

• You write a journal entry about how you feel about the events of the day.

Private self-awareness

Evaluating the Self: Self-Esteem When meeting new people or going on a job interview, our descriptions of ourselves may include how we feel about ourselves and our abilities. Researchers are also interested in our evaluations of ourselves, both the qualities we believe we have and the actions we believe we can do. If you were to describe yourself to someone, it is likely you would list some things about yourself that you liked (I am helpful) and some things you didn’t like (I get angry easily). Your overall evaluation of these qualities or how you emotionally feel about or value yourself is your self-esteem. Self-esteem, at least theoretically, is on a con- tinuum from very high, individuals who think very well of themselves, to very low, indi- viduals who think very poorly of themselves. When large groups of people are given self-esteem evaluations, researchers find that most people feel pretty good about them- selves, and very few actually evaluate themselves negatively. Therefore, when researchers compare those with high self-esteem to those with lower levels of self-esteem, they gener- ally end up looking at those who simply feel okay about themselves, rather than those who evaluate themselves negatively (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003).

There are two different types of self-esteem: implicit and explicit. Explicit self-esteem pertains to the global evalua- tion of personal qualities that one is consciously aware of and can report on. However, some of our evaluations of our- selves are more deeply rooted; they are unconscious and auto- matic. This unconscious, auto- matic evaluation of the self is called implicit self-esteem (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000;

Koole, Dijksterhuis, & van Knippenberg, 2001). People with high explicit self-esteem are more likely to take initiative, speak up in social situations, make friends, and take risks (Baumeister et al., 2003). Individuals with low explicit self-esteem are more vulnerable to

Expand Your Knowledge: Test Your Self-Esteem

Wondering where you fall on the continuum of self-esteem? The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is a short measure of self-esteem and is widely used by researchers. Rosenberg originally tested the scale on high school juniors and seniors, but it has been used with various populations since its development. It tends to have good reliability and validity. The Rosen- berg Self-Esteem Scale can be found at http://www .bsos.umd.edu/socy/research/rosenberg.htm.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 36 7/16/13 9:57 AM

http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/research/rosenberg.htm

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

depression (Orth, Robins, Trzesniewski, Maes, & Schmitt, 2009). This vulnerability seems to be independent of the stressful events one experiences. Studies have shown that it is how you view the qualities you possess and how you value yourself that affects your tendency toward depression (Sowislo & Orth, 2013; Orth, Robins, & Meier, 2009).

Although it might be logically assumed that high implicit self-esteem, like high explicit self-esteem, would be related to more positive mental health, that has not reliably been the case (De Raedt, Schacht, Franck, & De Houwer, 2006; Franck, De Raedt, & De Houwer, 2007). Individuals whose implicit and explicit self-esteem does not match up have less positive physical and psychological health (Creemers, Scholte, Engels, Prinstein, & Wiers, 2012; Schroder-Abe, Rudolph, & Schutz, 2007). An individual whose outwardly stated evaluation is negative but whose automatic self-evaluation is positive would have a mis- match of explicit and implicit self-esteem. This person is likely to show more depressive symptoms and report feeling lonely. Similarly, high self-esteem does not have a univer- sally positive effect on people. Those with high self-esteem may take more risks, provid- ing them with opportunities for better jobs or more adventuresome travel experiences. But these risks can also include experimentation with drugs and risky sexual practices (Baumeister et al., 2003; Baumeister, Heatherton, & Tice, 1993).

Self-esteem influences how accurately we perceive ourselves. For example, people with high self-esteem believe they are smarter, more well-liked, and very attractive; but objec- tively they are not (Adams, Ryan, Ketsetzis, & Keating, 2000; Bowles, 1999; Gabriel, Critelli, & Ee, 1994). Researchers find that when people with high self-esteem are given IQ tests, their friends are surveyed, and their attractiveness is judged by others, none of these hold true. This inaccuracy is found for both those within the normal range of self-esteem and narcissists. Self-esteem does, however, give us a general idea of our social standing and tends to rise and fall with feelings of acceptance or rejection by others, an idea proposed by the sociometer theory (Leary, Tambor, Terdal, & Downs, 1995). Outward qualities that are more important to social acceptance like popularity and attractiveness are therefore more important to self-esteem than communal qualities like kindness, supportiveness, and honesty. People who view themselves as popular have higher self-esteem than if they believe they are unpopular, no matter what they believe about their kindness and honesty. This principle does not hold true for those in roles or cultures where communal qualities are more valued; in these cultures honesty, supportiveness, and kindness tend to rise in importance in determining self-esteem (Anthony, Holmes, & Wood, 2007).

Self-esteem has been found to correlate with academic success. Individuals with high self-esteem tend to have higher grades than those with lower self-esteem (Bachman & O’Malley, 1986). Does having a high self-esteem help one get better grades, or does getting better grades help raise one’s self-esteem? Remember, correlation is not causation. Just because self-esteem is related to academic success does not mean that raising one’s self- esteem causes a rise in grades. A child may have high self-esteem because of her success in school, or school success and self-esteem may both be related to other factors such as abil- ity or a supportive home environment (Bachman & O’Malley, 1986; Maruyama, Rubin, & Kingsbury, 1981). Raising or supporting self-esteem through encouragement may even be harmful to performance. Low-achieving college students that read a message bolstering their self-esteem along with review questions for tests did worse on subsequent tests than those who simply got the review questions (Forsyth, Lawrence, Burnette, & Baumeister, 2007). Interventions to raise academic achievement should focus on increasing capabilities rather than increasing self-esteem.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 37 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Narcissism Explicit self-esteem can be excessively positive and lead to an inflated view of self. This overly positive and grandiose view of self is called narcissism. People high in narcissism perceive themselves as deserving of special favors (Campbell, Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, & Bushman, 2004). Narcissists upload more photos of themselves on social media, and portray images that are more self-promoting and sexy. Narcissists also do more posting of status updates and update profile information more often than those low in narcis- sism (Carpenter, 2012; DeWall, Buffardi, Bonser, & Campbell, 2011). Although negative feedback may not change their inflated views, narcissists can react badly to this feedback. When narcissists feel as though particularly valued parts of themselves are being chal- lenged or mocked, they may respond with aggression toward the challenger (Konrath, Bushman, & Campbell, 2006).

Individuals with a strong need to maintain and present a positive image of themselves and to have others acknowledge and admire that image are said to be high in grandiose narcissism. Grandiose narcissists tend to be insensitive to negative feedback, maintain- ing a positive view of themselves despite evidence to the contrary (Campbell, Reeder, Sedikides, & Elliot, 2000; Zuckerman & O’Loughlin, 2009). At first acquaintance, grandi- ose narcissists tend to be liked. The attractive, warm, confident, and witty manner narcis- sists exhibit is designed to elicit admiration and tends to be appealing at first blush (Back, Schmukle, & Egloff, 2010; Paulhus, 1998). The self-promotion of grandiose narcissists is found beyond face-to-face interactions.

Another form of narcissism, called vulnerable narcissism, is associated with unstable or low self-esteem. Vulnerable narcissists have fantasies of greatness, but cycle between overly positive views of themselves and feelings of inferiority. These narcissists are vulner- able to negative feedback because of a fragile self-concept (Rohman, Neumann, Herner, & Bierhoff, 2012). In more extreme cases, narcissism can rise to the level of a disorder. Narcis- sistic personality disorder can be diagnosed when self-esteem is high, empathy is low, and the need for admiration leads the individual to manipulative and self-centered behavior.

Despite their attempts to portray themselves positively, the self-focused nature of narcis- sists’ beliefs and actions tends to turn people off once they become more acquainted (Paul- hus, 1998). Romantic relationships fall apart as the lure of the narcissist’s charm wears off and his or her selfishness, lack of commitment, and disinterest in intimacy becomes clear (Campbell, Foster, & Finkel, 2002; Foster, Shrira, & Campbell, 2006). Annoyed that they get blamed for failures while the narcissist takes credit for success while exhibiting hypercompetitiveness, friends at work become enemies (Campbell et al., 2000; Luchner, Houston, Walker, & Houston, 2011; Sedikides, Campbell, Reeder, Elliot, & Gregg, 2002). The increased likelihood of cheating in narcissists may at first allow them to succeed, but their cheating may eventually lead to academic failure or other negative consequences (Brunell, Staats, Barden, & Hupp, 2011). Narcissists may also suffer the consequences of overly ambitious risks combined with a failure to take responsibility for and correct the mistakes their behavior brought about (Campbell & Buffardi, 2008).

Self-efficacy While self-esteem involves an evaluation of the qualities one possesses, self-efficacy involves a person’s ability to perform particular tasks (Bandura, 1977, 2000). Have you

Image Source/Thinkstock

Self-efficacy, or a person’s evaluation of his ability to carry out tasks and goals, can vary between behaviors.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 38 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Test Yourself

• A person with high self-esteem is likely to show all of these characteristics EXCEPT

a. greater happiness b. lower depression c. academic success d. greater physical attractiveness

Correct answer: d

• Lisa gets an award in the mail for volunteering in the community. Marcia wins a contest where beauty and popularity were primary factors in winning. Lisa shows no rise in self- esteem, while Marcia’s self-esteem shows a big boost. What theory helps us explain the difference?

Sociometer theory of self-esteem. According to this theory, aspects of the self that are tied to social acceptance, like popularity, are more likely to determine self-esteem than aspects of the self like kindness.

(continued)

ever read the children’s book “The Little Engine That Could” (Piper & Long, 2005)? In this book, a small train engine pulling a train loaded with animals attempts to climb a mountain. As the engine puffs up the hill, she says, “I think I can, I think I can, I think I can.” This mantra is the essence of self-efficacy. People with high self-efficacy believe they are very capable, and this self-assurance generally has positive outcomes. Individuals with higher self-efficacy are more persistent, more produc- tive, and less depressed (Chemers, Hu, & Garcia, 2001; Cheung & Sun, 2000; Huang, 1998).

Self-efficacy beliefs can vary depending on the behavior. For example, someone might have high self-efficacy for academics, but low self-efficacy for athletics. Because we have a sense of self-efficacy for any behavior we might engage in, self-efficacy can be fairly specific. Researchers have studied everything from leadership self-efficacy (Ng, Ang, & Chan, 2008) to bicultural self-efficacy (David, Okazaki, & Saw, 2009), harm reduction self-efficacy in drug abusers (Phillips & Rosenberg, 2008), and driver competence self- efficacy (Sundstrom, 2008). In a job search it is likely that your job-search self-efficacy would come into play (Brown, Cober, Kane, Levy, & Shalhoop, 2006).

Self-efficacy While self-esteem involves an evaluation of the qualities one possesses, self-efficacy involves a person’s ability to perform particular tasks (Bandura, 1977, 2000). Have you

Image Source/Thinkstock

Self-efficacy, or a person’s evaluation of his ability to carry out tasks and goals, can vary between behaviors.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 39 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.1 Who Am I?

Test Yourself (continued)

• Are narcissists liked more than people with less inflated self-esteem?

At first narcissists are liked. They work hard to present a positive image, so they will be admired by others. Later their overly inflated self-esteem becomes difficult for others to deal with, so they are liked less over time.

• What effect does self-efficacy have on a person?

People with high self-efficacy tend to be more persistent at tasks, more productive in their work, and show less depression than those with lower self-efficacy.

The Positive Self When we think about ourselves, our instinctual desire is to view ourselves positively. For this reason, we may have a tendency to distort reality, noticing only the good things and largely ignoring the bad (Heider, 1976). This bias toward a positive view of self is called the self-serving bias. The self-serving bias means that when we succeed at something, we attribute that success to something about us or something we did; we more often attribute failure to things outside of ourselves. The self-serving bias is more likely to occur when we are thinking about and aware of ourselves (Duval & Silvia, 2002). For example, if you got an A on your last test, you might attribute it to your level of intelligence. If you got an F, you might attribute it to the fact that the teacher was unreasonable and the test was impossible. Although we have this tendency to attribute success to something inherent to the self, we may also attribute failure to ourselves when self-awareness is high, and the failure motivates us to improvement (Duval & Silvia, 2002). For example, if you misun- derstood what you would be tested on for your history test, you could attribute the failure to yourself, knowing that next time you will do better. The next time we do the task we would presumably improve, providing us with a boost in our positive sense of self.

As noted in the section on self-awareness, we are uncomfortable when there is a discrep- ancy between our behavior and attitudes—something that could lead to a self-serving bias. Who do people with high self-awareness blame when receiving a negative evalua- tion? If possible, they blame someone they do not like (Silvia & Duval, 2001). For example, if you were to fail a group project, you would likely blame that annoying group member you do not like rather than the friendly and fun group member you enjoyed working with. We also tend toward the self-serving bias when we feel a threat to our sense of self (Campbell & Sedikides, 1999). If someone were to question whether you are a good stu- dent, you would want to find evidence of your academic prowess, such as the good test score, and find an excuse for your failures.

Although the assumption might be that living with a skewed view of reality is not optimal for one’s mental health, the research suggests otherwise. Fully functioning self-serving bias is related to greater happiness and less depression (Abramson & Alloy, 1981; Kuiper, 1978; Rizley, 1978). For example, when depressed and non-depressed participants were given a word association task and told they either succeeded or failed, the non-depressed people tended to attribute their success to their own ability or effort and blamed failures

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 40 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

Test Yourself

• How does the self-serving bias serve the self?

By biasing us toward taking credit for success and eschewing responsibility for failure, the self-serving bias helps us to develop and retain a positive view of ourselves.

on luck or the difficulty of the task (Kuiper, 1978). When the self-serving bias is not at work, people are much more likely to show symptoms of depression (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, Burling, & Tibbs, 1992; Sweeney, Anderson, & Bailey, 1986). The self-serving bias is common across cultures, though its strength can vary. The effect is not as strong in people from Asia as it is in individuals from Western cultures (Mezulis, Abramson, Hyde, & Hankin, 2004). Western cultures, such as the United States, tend to put more value on individual effort and celebrate those who seem to have made it on their own. Because of this, people from such cultures may have more incentive for taking credit for success and passing off failure as something unrelated to themselves. More on cultural differences in views of the self will be discussed in the chapter on culture.

The self-serving bias may be in place partly because it is easier for our brains to process in a self-serving way and is therefore quite common. In a study looking at brain activ- ity while people made attributions, non-self-serving attributions required brain activity associated with self-control. Our self-serving attributions seem to occur more naturally, and only when we exert self-control do we make less self-serving judgments (Krusemark, Campbell, & Clementz, 2008). Do you engage in the self-serving bias? Students who learn about the self-serving bias believe they engage in the bias less often than others do, though this is logically improbable (Friedrich, 1996).

2.2 The Acting Self

From the previous section you know that this thing we call the self is something we think about and evaluate. But does the self affect our actions? We present ourselves to others in ways that promote an image we want others to have of us. The roles we play affect our actions. Applying self-regulation within situations has an effect on our future abilities to engage in actions. The beliefs we have about our own ability to act influ- ences how we act. The self may also affect where we live and the profession we pursue, sometimes in surprising ways.

Presenting the Self When going on a job interview, attending a party, or starting something new (new job, new school), we often pay special attention to our appearance. Why? In our interactions with others, we are interested in presenting a certain image of ourselves. Given the self- serving bias, we would expect that image we are trying to project to be positive, and it is. In a job interview, for example, people want to present a favorable image with the hope that the employer will give them a job. If you think back to the sociometer theory of self- esteem, you know that how others view you affects your self-esteem.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 41 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

In interactions we use a variety of tactics to influence the impressions others have of us. We might make excuses, justifications, or apologies for our actions—tactics that are defen- sive. An employee might provide an excuse for being late to a meeting as due to traffic or a phone call from a client. A friend might disarm our complaints about rude behavior by apologizing for the action and justifying it by describing his or her bad day. Defensive tac- tics are designed to protect or repair our image (Shaw, Wild, & Colquitt, 2003; Tata, 2002).

We might attempt to project a positive image through techniques that actively help con- struct a positive image—assertive techniques. One such assertive technique, ingratiation, involves some form of flattery, most often to someone of greater power. For example, one might compliment the boss on a new outfit or admire the supervisor’s ability to have accurately predicted a sports team win. When others have power over us, we engage in more impression management. For the employed, impression management tends to increase in times of employment insecurity (Kang, Gold, & Kim, 2012). At such times our employers have more power over us, so we react by presenting the best side of ourselves that we can.

In an attempt to influence others we may try to appear more attractive or professional. Manipulating the impression of our prestige, power, or credibility can influence a person’s view of us (Tedeschi & Melburg, 1984). Although such behavior may seem disingenuous, like we are faking an image, appropriate self-presentation is often expected and reveals that we know how to monitor and change our behavior to accurately suit the social situation (Jansen, Konig, Stadelmann, & Kleinmann, 2012). Some degree of impression management is anticipated by interviewers and is employed by most interviewees (Ellis, West, Ryan, & DeShon, 2002; Swider, Barrick,

Harris, & Stoverink, 2011).You might engage in some impression management during a job search—hopefully with positive results.

In trying to make an impression on others we do need to choose the impression we think is most important to portray in the context. The best strategy will depend on what needs to be portrayed (explain an employment gap or promote one’s special talents), when the information will be important (an immediate job opening or one in the future), and what is appropriate within the culture (modesty or self-promotion) (Konig, Hafsteinsson, Jansen, & Stadelmann, 2011; Mast, Frauendorfer, & Popovic, 2011; Proost, Germeys, & Schreurs, 2012; Tsai, Huang, Wu, & Lo, 2010). Sometimes positive images are in con- flict. For example, when people portray an image of competence, this often comes at the

Digital Vision/Thinkstock

An interviewer might see a well-dressed applicant as more qualified for a job than a casually dressed applicant.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 42 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

detriment of portraying an image of warmth (Holoien & Fiske, 2013). An applicant to a job as an administrative assistant may get high marks for friendliness, but this is likely to come at the expense of the interviewer’s belief in his competence for the position.

The image a person projects does matter. Interviewers need to make relatively quick deci- sions about hiring based on limited information. Impression management statements on a resume tend to lead to more positive impressions of an applicant’s hireability (Knouse, 1994). Impression management tactics in interviews also tend to be related to more posi- tive evaluations by an interviewer, provided they are not overly deceptive (Jansen et al., 2012; Swider et al., 2011; Tsai et al., 2010). Despite the hopes of many to the contrary, physi- cal appearance affects the rating of the interviewer for a job candidate more than other things a job candidate might have or do, such as agreeing with the interviewer (Barrick, Shaffer, & DeGrassi, 2009).

Self-presentation is a necessary part of social life, but it can create problems. A woman might take diet pills, smoke, or yo-yo diet to try to control weight, seriously damaging her health (Camp, Klesges, & Relyea, 1993; Gritz & Crane, 1991; Wang, Houshyar, & Prinstein, 2006). The same woman may avoid the gym or even the local jogging trails because of concerns about how she would look to others (Leary, Tchividjian, & Kraxberger, 1994). Some men might use steroids to assist in gaining or maintaining a mus- cular body, despite medical issues like heart problems and stunted growth and psycho- logical problems like depression and increased aggressiveness (Leary et al., 1994; Galli & Reel, 2009).

Martin and Leary (1999) conducted a clever study that investigated how far people would go to make sure another person had a favorable impression of them. A confederate offered the participant a drink out of his water bottle after the participant had tasted something unpleasant. Although the researchers used clean water bottles, it appeared to the par- ticipant that the confederate had already drunk out of the bottle, presumably making the transfer of germs a distinct possibility. Some of the participants were challenged by the confederate with the phrase “if you’re not worried about drinking out of the same bottle as me” (p. 1095). The challenge brought up self-presentation concerns in the participant, who did not want to be seen as overly cautious. The researchers found that those partici- pants who were challenged by the confederate drank more than those who were offered the water but not challenged. For these participants, concern about how they might look to others caused them to engage in a potentially risky behavior.

The cross-cultural research tradition uses the term face to describe the roles we play. When we inhabit different roles, we have different faces. The face exists by virtue of the position rather than the person. For example, by occupying the position of CEO one has a face as CEO, a face that must be maintained by performing the activities required by that role. When others judge that the individual occupying the role is not living up to requirements, that person can lose face. Loss of face makes it difficult for an individual to continue in a role (Hamamura & Heine, 2008). Face also requires others, with their own face, to respond appropriately. The manager face would require the person occupying that role to show some degree of deference and respect to the individual in the CEO position.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 43 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

At times, the self we present needs to become the self we are, such as when we move from an interviewee to an employee. Have you ever started a new job and felt out of place and awkward? This is not unusual. As we move into a new role there is a period of transition (Morrison, 1993). As we enter a role, it is as if we are actors learning a new part; we learn our lines and what is expected of us. Erving Goffman’s (1959) classic theory proposes that in everyday life we engage in a drama. It is as if we are on stage and must play a part. This approach to describing how we present ourselves is called the dramaturgical approach. The power of roles and the transition we must go through as we enter these roles was dramati- cally demonstrated in a study by Philip Zimbardo.

In 1973, Zimbardo and colleagues (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973) recruited 24 college men to participate in a simulated prison for two weeks. Half were randomly assigned the role of guard and half the role of prisoner. The prisoners were picked up by the local police, fingerprinted, and brought to a makeshift prison in the basement of the psychol- ogy building on campus. The guards were asked to maintain order but were not allowed to use physical force. Each participant wore a uniform appropriate for his role. Both pris- oners and guards quickly became engrossed in their roles. Guards were controlling and manipulative of the prisoners, some became verbally abusive. Prisoners acted in a passive way. Some prisoners became so distressed about their lack of power and control over their situation that they exhibited extreme emotional reactions, including symptoms of depres- sion, crying, anxiety, and rage. Conditions deteriorated and prisoners were in such misery that the experiment was stopped after 6 days. It would have been unethical to continue. This study demonstrates just how powerful roles can be in affecting our behavior.

In Season 9 of The Biggest Loser, one of the contestants, Daris, gained two pounds at the last weigh-in before the final episode. During his time at home before the weigh-in, he would binge-eat late at night (Barile, 2010). Knowing that the weigh-in was coming, why would he engage in such self-destructive behavior? There are a large number of factors at work here but one is self-handicapping. With self-handicapping, people create an excuse for a later failure by doing something that is likely to hinder their success. Public performance is particularly vulnerable. If Daris really tried his hardest to lose weight and failed, he would have no excuses to offer those watching. Sabotaging his own success failure was expected, and he could maintain, to himself and to others, that if he had really tried, he would have succeeded. When others are more confident in your success than you are, self-handicapping allows you to maintain that positive image others hold (Lupien, Seery, & Almonte, 2010).

Self-handicapping behaviors come in various forms. A student might get drunk or take drugs the night before a test or procrastinate studying until the last minute (Beck, Koons, & Milgram, 2000; Berglas & Jones, 1978; Higgins & Harris, 1988; Strunk & Steele, 2011). An employee might quit working on an important presentation before it is done, and an athlete might quit practicing before a skill is well-learned (Baumeister, Hamilton, & Tice, 1985; Hirt, Deppe, & Gordon, 1991; Hirt, McCrea, & Kimble, 2000). At times, self- handicapping is not a behavior, or lack thereof, but a claim of performance anxiety or negative mood (Baumgardner, Lake, & Arkin, 1985; Smith, Snyder, & Handelsman, 1982). When the student fails the test, the employee does not get the account, or the ath- lete misses the shot, they can point to the hangover, lack of preparation, or anxiety as the problem. This allows for maintenance of self-image in the eyes of others. If each of these individuals worked their hardest and still failed to do well on the test, get the big

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 44 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

Test Yourself

• After an adequate, but not stellar, sales presentation by his boss, Jeffery compliments her on a wonderful presentation. What impression management technique is he using?

Ingratiation. He is using flattery to attempt to make a good impression on his boss.

• Is the use of impression management techniques good or bad?

Both. Some level of impression management is expected in interview and professional situations. Use of such techniques helps people get jobs, deal well with people, and be appropriate to the social situation. But impression management can lead to nega- tive, self-destructive behaviors such as yo-yo dieting or drug use. People may also take unnecessary risks because they are trying to present a particular image.

• If it often results in negative outcomes (e.g., failure on a test, weight gain), how is self- handicapping helpful to people?

Self-handicapping gives people an excuse for the negative outcomes, so they can main- tain a positive view of themselves and present a positive image to others even when they fail. If they failed and had no excuse, they would not be able to keep their positive view of themselves or the positive image others have of them.

• What is the name of the approach that suggests we engage in a drama in everyday life, playing various roles?

Dramaturgical approach

• Why did Zimbardo quit his study involving a simulated prison early?

It would have been unethical for Zimbardo to continue. The students playing the role of guards were verbally abusive toward the prisoners; and the students who played the role of prisoners were showing extreme stress reactions such as crying, anger, and anxiety.

account, or make the shot, it might affect self-esteem or public image (Bailis, 2001; Feick & Rhodewalt, 1997). If they do well despite the handicapping, their success is even more remarkable (Feick & Rhodewalt, 1997; Tice, 1991).

Self-handicapping can occur rarely or it can become habitual. Individuals who often engage in self-handicapping, have a low self-worth and believe that abilities are fixed— they cannot be changed with practice or learning (Rhodewalt & Tragakis, 2002). Although self-handicapping may help some feel better about themselves over the short term, long term self-handicapping is related to lower well-being, lower satisfaction with one’s com- petence, and greater use of alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs (Zuckerman & Tsai, 2005). Generally, men are more likely to self-handicap than women as are those who have a less certain sense of identity (Chorba, Was, & Isaacson, 2012; Kimble & Hirt, 2004; Lucas & Lovaglia, 2005). Table 2.1 provides definitions and examples of each of the self terms in this section.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 45 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

Table 2.1: Self terms: Definitions and examples

Term Definition Example

Self-awareness Self-awareness involves being aware of particular aspects of one’s self- concept. There are two types: Private self-awareness is awareness of one’s internal states such as thoughts, feelings, or desires. Public self- awareness is awareness of how one appears to others.

Having been asked what she hopes to do after college, Brittany has an increase in private self-awareness. Standing in front of her colleagues at work, ready to give a speech, Selena has an increase in public self-awareness.

Self-concept The collection of things one knows about the self. This collection is large and diverse.

Elaine likes the color yellow, is good at math, can run a mile in 8 minutes, enjoys jazz, is a mother of two children, and wants to be a teacher.

Self-efficacy One’s evaluation of one’s ability to perform a particular task.

If Andy believes he can do differential calculus, he would be described as high in self-efficacy for differential calculus.

Self-esteem One’s evaluation of the qualities one possesses; how one values oneself.

Trina has an overall positive evaluation of herself, she has high self-esteem.

Self- handicapping

Creating an excuse for later poor performance by doing something that hinders success.

Shawna stays up late playing video games before taking the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), creating an excuse for her low scores.

Self-reference effect

The tendency to remember better those things related to the self.

Cindy remembers that her date takes his coffee with cream, like she does, but forgets that he told her he likes rock climbing, something she has no interest in.

Self-regulation Exerting control over your actions. Although they look good to him, John does not buy the donuts at the convenience store.

Self-schemas Knowledge structures about the self. Self-schemas organize the information within our self-concept and affect our processing of information and our ability to remember information.

Music is very important to Ed. He thinks of himself as a musician and a music lover.

Self-serving bias A bias toward viewing successes as something we can attribute to the self and failure owing to something outside the self, such as a difficult situation. The self-serving bias helps us maintain our self-schema and self- efficacy and influences our tendency to self-handicap and use impression management strategies.

Devon believes his success at selling used cars is due to his intelligence and charm. He blames his failure in his marriage on his ex-wife’s unreasonable demands and unpleasant personality.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 46 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

Regulating the Self Imagine you’ve signed up to be part of a study on taste perception. To prepare, you were asked not to eat anything for 3 hours. When you enter the room where the study will take place, you smell baking chocolate chip cookies. A plate of warm cookies and other choco- lates sits on a table, alongside a bowl of radishes. The researcher explains to you that for this study you will be eating one of two distinctive foods, radishes or chocolate. You have been assigned to the radish condition. You are asked to eat two or three radishes within the next 5 minutes. The experimenter leaves the room. Even though you would probably prefer the chocolate chip cookies, you dutifully eat three radishes before the researcher returns. While (supposedly) waiting for the sensory memory of the radishes to diminish, you are asked to do a task that the researcher presents as unrelated to the taste perception study. You are asked to work as long as you can on a task requiring you to trace a geomet- ric figure without lifting your pencil. Frustrated by your lack of success, you quit after only a couple minutes.

Unbeknownst to you, the researchers were very interested in how long you worked on those geometric figures. The geometric figures were unsolvable, and the researchers wanted to know how long you would persist without success. They believed you would work for a shorter period because you ate radishes rather than the chocolate (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Mauraven, & Tice, 1998). Any ideas on why that might be? Take a minute to think about it before reading on.

The researchers were studying something called ego depletion. In this context, ego refers to a resource that each of us has for volitional (chosen) action. The idea is that when you choose to do something, you use some of this resource, leav- ing less for future actions (Hagger, Wood, Stiff, & Chatzisarantis, 2010). While exerting control over yourself, you are doing what social psychol- ogists call self-regulation. By doing something you would rather not do, like eating radishes in the presence of chocolate, you use a lot of this resource, depleting it. Because you’ve depleted the ego, you are less able to work on other dif- ficult tasks. Think of the ego like a muscle. After lifting something very light, you have plenty of strength left for lifting again. If you lift some- thing very heavy, the muscle gets tired and you no longer have the strength to help your friend move that refrigerator.

Unless you are on a diet, you are not likely to spend much time eating radishes instead of choc- olate. It is also unlikely you would subject yourself to tracing geometric figures that are actually untraceable. So why does this matter? Baumeister and colleagues (1998) believe that we encounter such situations every day. When you are studying for social psychology rather than watching TV, you are depleting your ego. Ego depletion will make other tasks (mowing the lawn, cooking dinner) more difficult for you to get the energy to complete.

Creatas Images/Thinkstock

If you had just spent 3 hours at the library writing a term paper, you might be less able to do another difficult task. This is ego depletion.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 47 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

If you are on a diet, a student, have a tough job, or have household chores, this sounds like bad news. But there is good news. It is our perception of depletion more than actual depletion of this resource that seems to have the largest effect. When individuals engaged in a lot of self-regulation but perceived the task as not using much, they did better on later tasks (Clarkson, Hirt, Jia, & Alexander, 2010). Encouragement can also help us out when we are depleted. Students who wrote about a personal quality that was very important to them after they engaged in an ego-depleting activity did better at a later task than if they wrote about something that was not important to them and was therefore not self- affirming (Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009). Theoretically, you should also be able to work on increasing your ability to self-regulate by strengthening the ego. If the ego is like a muscle, the more you use it the more you will have in the future. You might exhaust the ego today, but day after day as you work and go to school and build relationships with friends and family, you will be building up strength for the future.

We may use self-regulation to do activities imposed on us by others, such as a job at work, but also might impose tasks on ourselves. One place such tasks originate is in our possible selves. Envisioning your future self speaking French at a business meeting for the French company you want to work for, you sign up for a French language class. Imagining turn- ing heads on the beach as you walk by this summer, you put yourself on a diet. The hoped for and feared possible selves give us an image that motivates us and influences our cur- rent self-regulatory behavior (Hoyle & Sherrill, 2006; van Dellen & Hoyle, 2008). Research- ers have found that specific parts of the prefrontal cortex contribute to self-regulation. Damage to this part of the brain inhibits self-regulation, and it is development in this part of the brain that increases self-regulation over childhood and adolescence (Berger, 2011; Heatherton, 2011).

Social Psychology in Depth: Testing our Self-Regulation

Is our capacity for self-regulation like a muscle, or is it a skill we develop? If self-regulation is like a muscle, it would tire as we use it. If self-regulation is a skill, using it should not affect later performance. The study by Baumeister and colleagues (1998) discussed earlier in the chapter involving chocolate chip cookies and radishes cleverly pitted these two possibilities against each other. After controlling their urge for freshly baked chocolate chip cookies and forcing themselves to eat radishes instead, research participants were less able to continue working on a frustrating task. Self-regulation, then, appears to work more like a muscle than skill set. When we engage in self-regulation, we deplete the ego, consume our limited store of self-regulatory strength, and have difficulty in the short term with tasks requiring more self-regulation.

Ego depletion can affect a number of behaviors. Ego depletion is related to greater aggres- sion. With ego depletion we are less able to inhibit our tendencies toward aggression (Stucke & Baumeister, 2006). Dieters asked to exhibit self-regulation in making a choice or in not showing emotion while watching a distressing movie clip later ate more than diet- ers who were not asked to exhibit self-regulation (Kahan, Polivy, & Herman, 2003; Vohs & Heatherton, 2000). Complex intellectual tasks and decision making also deteriorate with

(continued)

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 48 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

Test Yourself

• According to research on ego depletion, should you start a new exercise program in the middle of an intense time of preparation for presentations at work or school?

Doing two activities that both require self-regulation may be a problem because of ego depletion. These activities will use up all ego strength, and you are likely to have prob- lems continuing both at the same time.

• What does it mean to say that the ego is like a muscle in the context of self-regulation?

The ego is like a muscle in that in using it we exhaust it over the short term, but with continued use we can strengthen it over the long term.

Social Psychology in Depth: Testing our Self-Regulation (continued)

ego depletion. Tasks that require a great deal of mental energy and self-regulation such as logic, reasoning, decision making, and reading comprehension suffer when we are depleted while tasks requiring less from our systems such as simple memorization do not suffer (Sch- meichel, Vohs, & Baumeister, 2003; Zyphur, Warren, Landis, & Thoresen, 2007).

The effects of ego depletion are not irreversible, and a number of techniques can be used to avoid the effects. Ego depletion is short term. After a rest period, people regain their capac- ity for self-regulation. Distraction can be an effective counterstrategy. Even when ego is depleted, distracting individuals from what they are doing will lessen the decline in strength (Alberts, Martijn, Nievelstein, Jansen, & de Vries, 2008). Individuals who engaged in self- affirmation, focusing on a value that was important to them, showed more self-regulation after ego depletion than those who did not engage in self-affirmation (Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009). Inducing a positive emotion or reminding people of a persistent person also has positive effects for performance in the face of ego depletion (Martijn et al., 2007; Ren, Hu, Zhang, & Huang, 2010). Positions of leadership can motivate people to expend resources even when depleted. Leadership, it seems, induces people to engage in self-regulation, sometimes even beyond their capacities (DeWall, Baumeister, Mead, & Vohs, 2011). A sur- prising source of self-regulatory strength is sugar (glucose). Researchers have found that after a wide variety of acts of self-control, having people drink a sugary drink eliminates ego depletion (Gailliot et al. 2007). In fact, it seems that simply swishing a glucose/carbohydrate solution around in the mouth can improve self-regulation (Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2013; Molden et al., 2012). Above all, it is important to remember that practice can increase capacity for self-regulation (Hagger et al., 2010). As with physical activity, if you want to avoid straining a muscle in the short term, it is best to pace yourself in behavior involving self-regulation, but if you want to build up muscle over the long term, engaging in ego- depleting activities is good for your future strength.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 49 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

The Power of the Self How much control do you have over what happens to you? If you go to a job interview, to what extent do the results of that interview depend on you? Some people think that, for the most part, their behavior and decisions dictate the events that occur and the outcomes of those events. Others consider the things that happen to them as due to forces outside of their control. These two perspectives represent a difference in locus of control (Rotter, 1966). Individuals who believe that events and outcomes are primarily contingent on their own actions have an internal locus of control. Individuals who believe that the things that occur are due to something beyond their control have an external locus of control. For people with an external locus of control, the things that happen to them might be due to chance or due to powerful others (e.g., a boss, God) (Levenson, 1981).

Overall, people have greater life satisfaction and show fewer symptoms of depression when they believe they have some control over their lives (Cheng, Cheung, Chio, & Chan, 2013; Wang, Bowling, & Eschleman, 2010). College students with an external locus of control that attributed much to chance had higher stress levels (de Carvalho, Gadzella, Henley, & Ball, 2009). People who have an internal locus of control, either generally or focused specifically on health, are often healthier, at lower risk for developing dis- ease, and deal better with chronic diseases than those with an external locus of control (Gerstorf , Rocke, & Lachman, 2011; Hall, Chipperfield, Heckhausen, & Perry, 2011; Nabors, McGrady, & Kichler, 2010).

Part of the effect of locus of control is demonstrated by the behaviors someone engages in. If you believe that what you do will affect the outcome of your job interview, you are more likely to prepare carefully, answer thoughtfully, and be more engaged. An internal locus of control for health leads to better health behaviors such as exercise and preventative care (Grotz, Hapke, Lampert, & Baumeister, 2010; Rodin, 1986; Seeman, Unger, McAvay, & Mendes de Leon, 1999). However, there are circumstances where high internal control can be detrimental. A person dealing with a terminal disease, where nothing can be done to prolong life, may become frustrated and depressed when he attempts to gain control over the situation, blaming himself for his continued decline. Similarly, an addict who says she has control over her behavior (“I could quit drinking if I wanted to”) may avoid getting the help she needs to break the addiction, and that internal locus of control could set her up for failure (Shapiro, Schwartz, & Astin, 1996). When people believe they have control but are afraid they might fail, different behaviors can manifest.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 50 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Section 2.2 The Acting Self

Figure 2.2: Likelihood of living in a specific state as a function of one’s surname

Results from Pelham’s study show that implicit egotism can be present even in a person’s decision of where to live.

From Pelham, B. W., Mirenberg, M. C., & Jones, J. T. (2002). Why Susie sells seashells by the seashore: Implicit egotism and major life decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 469–487. Copyright © 2002 by the American Psychological Association. Reprinted with permission.

Researchers have found evidence that the effect of the self on decisions goes further than most people realize. For example, do you think your name has any relationship to where you live? Pelham, Mirenberg, and Jones (2002) argue that it does. These researchers looked at people’s first names and the city where they lived (see Figure 2.2). They found that statistically, with the data they were using, we would expect 288 people with the name of Jack in Jacksonville, but 436 Jacks call this city home. Similar results were found for surnames. We would expect 760 people with a surnames beginning with the letters Cali to be living in California, but 929 were in the telephone directory. Similarly, although we would expect only 7 entries for someone with a surname beginning with Texa in Texas, 34 are listed. This holds true for first names as well. There are more Florences in Florida, Georgias in Georgia, Louises in Louisiana, and Virginias in Virginia than we would expect by chance. Lest you think all the parents in Georgia have the brilliant idea to name their child Georgia after the state they live in, the researchers also found that Georgias move to Georgia at a greater rate than one would expect by chance. This unconscious attraction to things that are related to one’s self is called implicit egotism.

Implicit egotism interacts with self-esteem. Individuals with low self-esteem sat farther from other people sharing their initials than those with high self-esteem. When partici- pants with high self-esteem met someone who shared their initials, they sat closer (Kocan & Curtis, 2009). Feeling good about themselves, they wanted to associate with someone who was similar to themselves, even if that similarity was just in the initials of their name. People who have focused on their negative qualities and therefore need a self-esteem boost show greater social egotism than those who have been thinking about their positive qualities (Brownlow, Attea, Makransky, & Lopez, 2007). All of this is done without our conscious awareness. We are not being egocentric or selfish; our sense of self seems to compel us to respond in particular ways. Implicit egotism shows us just how important

Surname initial letter string

Note. States are listed in order of population. For the diagonal frequencies, in boldface type, expected values (rounded to the nearest whole number) appear in parentheses.

State

California Texas Florida Illinois Pennsylvania Ohio Michigan Georgia

Total

Cali

929 (760) 350 737 328 463 188 145 98

3,283

Penny

299 451 293 100 265 (302) 264 147 135

1,954

Total

2,233 1,245 1,903

847 1,471

750 712 358

9,519

Texa

3 0 4 0 2 1

34 (7)

Flori

357 170

172 266 130 182 42

1,790

471 (358)

Illi

155 68 95

201 40 67 20

713

67 (63)

Ohi

66 31 18 21 3 8 3

152

2 (12)

Michi

153 65 68 52

118 16

583

87 (44)

Georgi

264 76

218 107 151 110 74

1,035

35 (39)

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 51 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Chapter Summary

the self is, even to aspects of our lives we would never suspect being influenced by the self. Few Lauras would likely claim that their name helped attract them to the study of law, but the evidence is that this is so. If we unconsciously make choices in line with our self, how much more might our conscious sense of self influence our lives?

Test Yourself

• Why is an internal locus of control generally better for people?

People with an internal locus of control believe their actions make a difference, so they are more likely to do things that make a positive difference for them.

• Given the findings about social egotism, would we expect to find more people with the last name of Jones living on Jones Street or Richards living on Richard Street?

Yes. Researchers have found this to be true about first and last names and states and attraction to brands and professions that match one’s names. Logically, we should see similar findings for names and streets.

Conclusion Social psychologists are interested in who we are. We know a great deal about ourselves, and that knowledge affects how we process information and view the world around us. The self is a powerful force. The self affects how we feel, what we think we can do, and what we in fact do.

Chapter Summary

Who Am I? Self-concepts are the collection of things one knows about oneself. Self-schemas organize this information, affecting how one views the world and takes in information. Our sense of our selves is not just one based in the present, we also envision possible selves in the future. We vary in our awareness of aspects of ourselves. Private self-awareness is our focus on our internal thoughts, feelings, and desires, while public self-awareness is our awareness of how we appear to others.

Evaluating the qualities we associate with ourselves provides us with self-esteem. As a global evaluation of the self, self-esteem can influence our confidence and happiness. Individuals with high self-esteem report being better in many areas (e.g., they may believe they are smarter than their peers), but this belief seems to be a result of self-esteem, not a cause. According to the sociometer theory of self-esteem, our self-esteem is based in our social standing. Narcissism occurs when people have excessively high self-esteem. Our belief about our ability to do particular actions or tasks makes up our self-efficacy. Self- efficacy can be measured for very specific behaviors and tends to be related to persistence and performance of tasks related to those behaviors. To maintain positive views of our- selves we engage in the self-serving bias.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 52 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Key Terms

actual self Within self-discrepancy theory, the self a person believes he or she is presently.

ego depletion The diminished capacity for volitional action people experience after engaging in some other volitional action.

explicit self-esteem Conscious, global evaluation of the qualities people believe they possess. Contrast with implicit self-esteem.

external locus of control A sense that the things that occur are due to something beyond the individual’s control. Control may be held by chance or powerful others (e.g., boss).

The Acting Self People attempt to present certain images of themselves to others. We most often do this through presenting a positive side of ourselves (e.g., appearing more powerful or cred- ible), and it does affect the judgments others make of us. Although it takes us a bit to enter into new social roles, these roles have a powerful impact on our behaviors. In Zimbardo’s famous prison study, normal college men were quickly turned into defeated prisoners and power-hungry guards. In self-handicapping we engage in behaviors that hinder our suc- cess, allowing us an excuse when things do not turn out well or greater accolades when we succeed. Ego depletion describes what happens when we have used self-regulation and no longer have the willpower to perform in other actions. We can avoid ego depletion by perceiving that an action took less self-regulation, by engaging in self-affirmation, or by building up the ego through long-term use of self-regulation. When we have engaged in actions involving self-regulation, we find it more difficult to do other, seemingly unre- lated actions. We may differ in the control we believe we have over what happens to us. Some people believe they have control over outcomes, with an internal locus of control, while others believe what occurs is due to change or the actions of others, with an external locus of control. Our self can have an impact of which we are not even aware. Researchers have found that people live in places with names resembling their names at higher rates than would be expected by chance.

Critical Thinking Questions

1. Throughout the chapter, job interviews were used as an example of how we think about and encounter the self on a day-to-day basis. Are there other aspects of job interviews that you might apply to concepts from the chapter?

2. Where might narcissism come from? Why might people develop such inflated self-esteem?

3. How might high academic self-efficacy affect you? 4. If a friend of yours said that how she feels about herself is not important, that it

has no effect on her actions, how would you respond? Does the self affect every- day life?

5. How might your knowledge of ego depletion affect how you structure your activities?

Key Terms

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 53 7/16/13 9:57 AM

CHAPTER 2Key Terms

ideal self Within self-discrepancy theory, the self one wants to be or believes others want one to be, including hopes, wishes, and dreams.

implicit egotism An unconscious attrac- tion to things related to one’s self.

implicit self-esteem Unconscious, auto- matic evaluations of the self. Contrast with explicit self-esteem.

ingratiation Impression management strategy involving flattery.

internal locus of control A sense that events and outcomes are primarily contin- gent on the individual’s own actions.

narcissism An inflated, overly positive view of the self.

ought self Within self-discrepancy theory, the self one believes one should be or that others believe one should be, including obligations, responsibilities, and roles.

possible selves The selves we hope to be, and the selves we fear we might become

private self-awareness Your awareness of your internal states, for example, your thoughts, feelings, or desires.

public self-awareness Awareness of how you appear to others.

self-concept The collection of things you know about yourself.

self-discrepancy theory A theory that pro- poses that differences between one’s actual self and ideal self and one’s actual self and ought self will lead to different emotions and motivations.

self-efficacy Your evaluation of your abil- ity to perform particular tasks.

self-esteem Your overall evaluation of the qualities you associate with yourself.

self-guides Within self-discrepancy, the idea that ideal selves and ought selves serve as guides for evaluating behavior.

self-handicapping Creating an excuse for a later failure by doing something that is likely to hinder one’s success.

self-reference effect The tendency to bet- ter remember those things related to the self.

self-regulation Exerting control over your actions.

self-schemas Knowledge structures about the self.

self-serving bias A bias toward viewing successes as something we can attribute to ourselves and blaming failures as some- thing outside of the self. Overall, this bias allows for people to maintain a positive view of themselves.

fee85798_02_c02_029-054.indd 54 7/16/13 9:57 AM