1. Self-Esteem

2. Definitions Global (Trait) Self-Esteem is the way we generally feel about or evaluate ourselves. State Self-Esteem is how we feel about or evaluate ourselves at a given point in time. Self-Evaluations are how we feel about or evaluate specific dimensions of self (e.g., appearance, intelligence, social skills, etc.)

3. Measures of Self-Esteem Rosenberg (1965) –10 item self-report measure of global self- esteem. –most commonly used measure. Heatherton & Polivy (1991) –State self-esteem scale –Sensitive to experimental manipulations and clinical treatments

4. Origins of Self-Esteem A.Cognitive views –“Add ‘em up” model –“Add ‘em up” and weight by importance model These models both predict global self- esteem –Appearance is the most predictive factor (Harter, 2003)

5. Self-Evaluation as a Function of Self- Esteem Brown (1993) AttributeHSELSE Athletic5.64.8 Attractive5.24.4 Capable6.25.6 Smart5.75.0 Incompetent1.52.2 Phony1.52.0 Uncoordinated1.62.3 Unpopular1.92.7 Scale: 1(not at all true of me) to 7(very true of me). All SE differences significant, p <.05.

6. A Cognitive-Developmental Perspective (Harter, 2003) Cognitive ability to integrate self- evaluations into a global representation of self does not develop until middle childhood (8 yrs old). Therefore, children do not have global self-esteem until this point.

7. Harter, continued AgeSelf-RepresentationSelf-Evaluation 2-4Concrete, observable, compartmentalized Unrealistically + 5-7Able to group similar attributes together, but all or none thinking Typically + (except with abusive parents) 8-11Higher-order generalizations (key for global self-esteem), able to integrate + and - attributes + and -, more accurate 12-14Further abstraction of trait labels, but difficulty integrating seemingly contradictory characteristics Unstable 15-16Recognition of inconsistencies, increased introspection Vacillating 17+Deal with inconsistencies, recognition that it’s normal More balanced, stable

8. Affective Models Self-Esteem based on feelings of: –Belonging –Mastery –These come from early childhood experiences

9. Attachment A close emotional relationship among two persons characterized by: proximity- strive to be near one another selectivity- not just anybody will do

10. Attachment Theory Based on interaction with caregivers, infants develop an “internal working model” of self as good and worthy of love or bad and unworthy of love. This may be the basis for self-esteem.

11. Individual Differences in Attachment Style Strange situations test reveals: Secure Insecure –Anxious/Ambivalent –Avoidant

12. Attachment and Self-Esteem Attachment in infancy predicts self-esteem in preschool and kindergarten (Cassidy, 1990). Childhood parental attachment is correlated with adult romantic attachment (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Adult romantic attachment is correlated with adult self-esteem (Bylsma et al., 1997). Does infant attachment predict adult SE?

13. Comparison of Cognitive and Affective Models Cognitive has more empirical support –But this may be because it is easier to test and existing measures were developed by cognitive theorists. Cognitive has problems with directionality Affective fits better with evidence that global self-esteem is stable

14. Consequences of Self-Esteem Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness or healthier lifestyles? Baumeister et al. (2003).

15. Consequences of Self-Esteem Problems with self-esteem research: Directionality Heterogeneity Self-report

16. Consequences of Self-Esteem Performance: SE and school performance are correlated, but no causal relationship. SE has little impact on work performance. Aggression: Not related to SE (but is related to narcissism).

17. Consequences of Self-Esteem Happiness Strongly related to SE. LSE related to depression. Health: Smoking, alcohol use, drug use, early sexual activity, and teen pregnancy are unrelated to SE. LSE is a risk factor for eating disorders.

18. Consequences of Self-Esteem Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness or healthier lifestyles? Answers: No, No, Probably, Sporadically. Baumeister et al. (2003).

19. Functions of Self-Esteem Self-Esteem as an Interpersonal Monitor (Leary et al., 1995) Self-Esteem as an Anxiety Buffer (Greenberg et al., 1997)

20. Sociometer Model SE is an interpersonal monitor –Evolutionary adaptation Inclusion causes (state) SE to increase; exclusion causes (state) SE to decrease.

21. Leary et al. (1995) Studies 1 & 2: Feelings of inclusion vs. exclusion were strongly correlated with feelings of self-worth.

22. Leary et al. (1995) Studies 1 & 2: Feelings of inclusion vs. exclusion were strongly correlated with feelings of self-worth. Studies 3 & 4: Inclusion feedback led to more positive feelings than exclusion feedback.

23. Leary et al. (1995) Study 3

24. Leary et al. (1995) Studies 1 & 2: Feelings of inclusion vs. exclusion were strongly correlated with feelings of self-worth. Studies 3 & 4: Inclusion feedback led to more positive feelings than exclusion feedback. Study 5: Feelings of inclusion were strongly correlated with global self-esteem (r =.55)

25. Terror Management Theory Self-Esteem buffers people against existential terror.

26. Evolutionary Adaptations Desire for Self- Preservation (shared with other animals) Cognitive Abilities (unique to humans) Annihilation anxietyAwareness of the inevitability of death POTENTIAL TERROR

27. Terror is controlled by: Immersion in a cultural worldview “a shared conception of reality that imbues life with meaning, order, and permanence and the promise of safety and death transcendence to those who meet the prescribed standards of value” “The belief that one is living up to those standards of value (self-esteem).”

28. Basic Implications Self-esteem buffers anxiety The cultural worldview must be defended when threatened

29. Self-Esteem as an Anxiety Buffer