Exploring the Self The Benefits of Self-Esteem Self-Serving Bias

Possible Selves  The self organizes thinking, feelings, and actions and is a critical part of our personality.  One example of research on the self is the study of possible selves, first put forth by Hazel Markus. It explores people’s visions of the self they dream of becoming, or the self they fear becoming.  Such possible selves motivate us by laying out specific goals and calling forth the energy to work toward them. Research focuses on the different selves we possess. Some we dream and others we dread.

Spotlight Effect  While we may be motivated as a result of our self-focused perspective, research studies (like those done by Thomas Gilovich with students forced to wear Barry Manilow t-shirts) also show how it makes us overestimate others noticing and evaluating our appearance, performance, and blunders.  This tendency to believe that everyone is paying attention to and judging everything we do and every mistake we make is called the spotlight effect.

Self-Esteem  One’s feelings of high or low self- worth.

The Benefits of High Self- Esteem  Maslow and Rogers argued that a successful life results from a healthy self- image (self-esteem).  People who have high self-esteem  have fewer sleepless nights  are less conforming  are more persistent at difficult tasks  are less shy, anxious, and lonely  and are just plain happier.

The Destructive Effects of Low Self-Esteem  The following are reasons why low self-esteem results in personal problems.  When self-esteem is deflated, we view ourselves and others critically. “They will be more likely to disparage others or to express heightened racial prejudice. …Often become excessively critical, as if to impress others with their own brilliance” (585).  They are “thin-skinned and judgmental” (585).

So does that mean we should try to make everyone feel good about themselves no matter what?  Not necessarily.  Some researchers suggest that low self-esteem simply reflects reality, our failure in meeting challenges, or our failure in surmounting difficulties.  Thus, feeling good about oneself follows doing well.  According to this explanation, the best way to foster self-esteem in children is to help them meet challenges, not reward them despite their failures.  Watch Moving Images clip “Fostering Self-Esteem: The Hazards of Pride.” ( zg94_o) zg94_ohttp:// zg94_o

The Dark Side of Self- Esteem  In a Psychological Review article, Roy Baumeister and his colleagues draw the following provocative conclusion: “The societal pursuit of high self-esteem for everyone may literally end up doing considerable harm.”  In a massive interdisciplinary review of the literature on aggression, crime, and violence, the authors conclude that high (not low) self-esteem underlies violent behavior, particularly “favorable self-appraisals that may be inflated or ill-founded and that are confronted with an external evaluation that disputes them.”  In short, some people turn aggressive when they receive feedback that contradicts their favorable images of themselves.  For example…

The Dark Side of Self- Esteem, cont.  Studies of murder, rape, domestic abuse, and even terrorism show that violence occurs when a person with a high, often inflated, opinion of himself or herself is challenged by someone considered inferior.  Teenagers who do not feel they have received the respect they deserve are more likely to strike out than those who genuinely believe themselves unworthy.  One study of sexual offenders found that rapists sometimes choose a particular victim in order “to disabuse her of her sense of superiority. That is, the woman gave the man the impression that she thought she was better than he was and so he raped her as a way of proving her wrong.”

The Dark Side of Self- Esteem, cont.  Another interesting example of the relationship between high self-esteem and aggression involves racist violence.  Nazism includes an ideology of racial superiority that justifies violence against those deemed weak or inferior.  At its peak, the Ku Klux Klan was most violent toward two groups that challenged the idea of White supremacy, namely upwardly mobile Blacks and Whites who helped Blacks by treating them as equals.  One study of Whites belonging to hate groups indicated that those engaged in violent behavior actually were better educated and had higher career aspirations than the less violent members of such groups.  Many researchers now believe it is reasonable to conclude that both low self-esteem and narcissism can contribute to externalizing problems.

Do minorities have lower self-esteem if they’re not as “successful” as the majority group? NOT REALLY They value the things at which they excel. They attribute problems to prejudice. They compare themselves to their own group.

Culture & Self-Esteem People maintain their self-esteem even with a low status by valuing things they achieve and comparing themselves to people with similar positions.

Defensive vs. Secure Self- Esteem  Some kinds of self-esteem are healthier than others.  Defensive self-esteem is fragile and focuses on sustaining itself, which makes failure and criticism feel threatening. Like low self-esteem, defensive self-esteem correlates with antisocial behavior.  In contrast, secure self-esteem is less fragile because it depends less on external evaluations. Feeling accepted for who we are enables us to lose ourselves in relationships and purposes larger than self.

Handouts and Take a minute to answer the questions on these handouts.

Self-Serving Bias  Our readiness to perceive ourselves favorably  Evident in our tendency to accept more responsibility for good deeds than for bad  “Yes, I volunteered at the homeless shelter!”  Weren’t you only there because the court ordered you to fulfill community service hours for that bank you tried to rob?  “First of all, I didn’t rob any bank. But you couldn’t blame me even if I did, because it’s not like anyone is hiring for jobs right now.”  We also accept more responsibility for successes than for failures.  “I got an A on my AP test because I’m super smart and I studied really hard!”  “I got a D on my AP test because Mrs. Riek is stupid and she doesn’t know how to teach. That test was also really poorly written. Jerk.”

Self-Serving Bias, cont.  Most people also see themselves as better than average.  Look back at Handout Calculate your mean (average) rating for the 15 items. How many of you have a mean higher than 5.0?  The majority of people will rate themselves higher than their peers on a number of measures – intelligence, ethics, performance, etc. We can’t ALL be better than average, can we?? (Nope. Just me. )  There’s an extremely high correlation between our self-rating on a trait and its perceived importance to us.  Look back at Handout Do you see this trend in your own answers? How is this an example of a self-serving bias?  Ironically, most people even see themselves as more immune than others to self-serving bias.  Ha ha!  So much for Alfred Adler’s inferiority complexes!

Give Handout a try before we move on… It may seem like a silly task, but just give immediate first impressions. You don’t need to think too hard about it.

Back to Handout 13-24…  A different twist on the self-serving bias…  Research indicates that people think of the letters in their own name as better letters. This name-letter effect may be a specific example of the mere ownership effect — valuing objects that are part of oneself more than objects that are not.  Print your first and last name at the top of the handout.  IYFN represents “in your first name,” NIYFN stands for “not in your first name,” IYLN represents “in your last name,” and “NIYLN” stands for “not in your last name.”  Fill in the rating for each letter under the appropriate column and calculate the mean for each column.  How many of you had a higher average for letters in your first name than for letters not in your first name?  What about your last name?  The name-letter and mere-ownership effects have been found in over a dozen languages. Through careful research, psychologists have shown that the name-letter effect is not due to name letters being more frequent, to an attachment to letters first written, or to participants guessing the purpose of the research.