Do comparative self-appraisals during young adulthood predict adult personality?

Archival data from the University of North Carolina Alumni Heart Study were used to assess whether positive, neutral, and negative social comparisons assessed during college predicted the expression of personality during adulthood. College students in 1966 rated themselves relative to peers on several personal attributes. For men and women, these attributes produced 3 similar yet distinct variables reflecting gregariousness, achievement striving, and expressiveness. These students were contacted 20 years later and completed the NEO Personality Inventory and M. Rosenberg's (1965) self-esteem measure. In general, persons with comparatively positive self-evaluations during college viewed themselves as possessing more positive and less negative personality traits during adulthood and were also less likely to report poorer self-esteem during middle adulthood. The implications of social comparison processes for personality development are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and organization of valenced information about others: The "Jekyll and Hyde"-ing of relationship partners.

The authors theorize that individuals with high self-esteem functionally integrate positive and negative partner information in memory, whereas those low in self-esteem segregate such information. The authors obtained support for this view in 7 studies. In a first set, participants judged whether positive and negative traits presented in an alternating or nonalternating order applied to a partner. Low but not high self-esteem individuals were slowed by the alternating order when judging relationship partners (but not inanimate objects). In a 2nd set, participants answered questions tapping integrated thinking, self-esteem, and other attributes. Higher self-esteem was associated with more integrated thinking when other attributes were controlled. In a final study, anxiously attached individuals were more labile in rating their spouse over a 5-day period. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Feminine self-esteem, self-ratings of competence, and maternal career commitment.

Conducted a study with 71 college females to examine the relationship between self-esteem (as measured by Coopersmith's Self-Esteem Inventory) and self-ratings of competence on Rosenkrantz's Sex-Role Stereotype Questionnaire. Comparisons were made of Ss whose mothers differed in work history and attitudes toward careers. Higher self-esteem was predicted for Ss who rated themselves highly on competence-related traits; this hypothesis was supported. Higher self-esteem and higher self-ratings on competence were expected for Ss whose mothers worked and Ss whose mothers desired a career. Findings were that maternal preference for a career had a positive effect upon Ss' self-esteem and evaluations of their own competence; maternal employment did not. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and the cognitive accessibility of strengths and weaknesses after failure

People with high self-esteem (HSEs) respond less negatively to failure than people with low self-esteem (LSEs). This difference may occur because HSEs overcome the natural tendency to focus on negative thoughts after failure, and instead focus on their strengths. In 2 experiments, participants with high and low self-esteem received failure, success, or no feedback. Accessibility of strengths and weaknesses was measured by response latency on an unrelated task. Results confirmed that although strengths were typically more accessible than weaknesses for both groups, the discrepancy was larger for HSEs after failure feedback than after no feedback. This heightened discrepancy appears to result from HSEs recruiting their strengths and suppressing their weaknesses. In contrast, LSEs' weaknesses appeared to become especially accessible after failure. These results have implications for the mood-congruent cognition and self-esteem literatures.     

Construal processes and trait ambiguity: Implications for self-peer agreement in personality judgment.

The relationship between trait ambiguity and self–peer agreement in personality judgment was examined. In Study 1, self–peer agreement was lower on ambiguous traits (those with many behavioral referents) than on unambiguous ones (those with few behavioral referents). This finding was partially moderated by the level of friendship between peers. These results suggest that people disagree in their judgments because they use idiosyncratic trait definitions when making judgments on ambiguous traits. Study 2 tested this explanation by exploring self–peer agreement when participant pairs were forced to use the same trait definition versus different ones when judging themselves and each other. Forcing participants to use the same trait definition increased the degree to which their judgments covaried with one another. Discussion centers on the cognitive and motivational forces that can influence the degree to which personality judgments differ. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

More human than you: Attributing humanness to self and others.

People typically evaluate their in-groups more favorably than out-groups and themselves more favorably than others. Research on infrahumanization also suggests a preferential attribution of the "human essence" to in-groups, independent of in-group favoritism. The authors propose a corresponding phenomenon in interpersonal comparisons: People attribute greater humanness to themselves than to others, independent of self-enhancement. Study 1 and a pilot study demonstrated 2 distinct understandings of humanness--traits representing human nature and those that are uniquely human--and showed that only the former traits are understood as inhering essences. In Study 2, participants rated themselves higher than their peers on human nature traits but not on uniquely human traits, independent of self-enhancement. Study 3 replicated this "self-humanization" effect and indicated that it is partially mediated by attribution of greater depth to self versus others. Study 4 replicated the effect experimentally. Thus, people perceive themselves to be more essentially human than others. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Explaining the relations among children's actual and perceived performances and self-esteem: A comparison of several causal models.

Used structural equation methods to compare various causal models of the relation between children's performances and self-esteem. Analysis was based on cross-sectional data collected from 415 children from 6th–8th grades. Ss' GPA, athletic performance, self-esteem, perceptions of academic ability, perceptions of sociometric status, and lists of peers they liked were analyzed. Models in which self-esteem affected perceptions of popularity fit the data better than models in which the reverse or reciprocal effects were posited. It appears that for ambiguous attributes, such as popularity, a self-consistency bias operates whereby children's self-esteem affects how popular they think they are. For more verifiable attributes (i.e., academic and athletic achievement), perceptions of achievement are more strongly related to actual achievement, and they are more likely to affect self-esteem rather than the reverse. (45 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

More than words: Reframing compliments from romantic partners fosters security in low self-esteem individuals.

Although people with low self-esteem (LSEs) doubt their value to their romantic partners, they tend to resist positive feedback from their partners. This resistance undermines their relationships and has been difficult to overcome in past research. The authors investigated whether LSEs could be induced to take their partners' kind words to heart by manipulating how abstractly they described a recent compliment. In 3 studies, LSEs felt more positively about the compliments, about themselves, and about their relationships--as positively as people with high self-esteem (HSEs) felt--when they were encouraged to describe the meaning and significance of the compliments. The effects of this abstract meaning manipulation were still evident 2 weeks later. Thus, when prompted, LSEs can reframe affirmations from their partners to be as meaningful as HSEs generally believe them to be and, consequently, can feel just as secure and satisfied with their romantic relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

The affective consequences of social comparison: Either direction has its ups and downs.

Research on social comparison processes has assumed that a comparison in a given direction (upward or downward) will lead to a particular affective reaction. In contrast, the present 2 studies proposed and found that a comparison can produce either positive or negative feelings about oneself, independent of its direction. Several factors moderated the tendency to derive positive or negative affect from upward and downward comparisons. In Study 1, cancer patients low in self-esteem and with low perceived control over their symptoms and illness were more likely to see downward comparisons as having negative implications for themselves. Those low in self-esteem were also more likely to perceive upward comparisons as negative. In Study 2, individuals with high marital dissatisfaction and those who felt uncertain about their marital relationship were more likely to experience negative affect from upward and downward comparisons. The implications of these findings for social comparison theory and for the coping and adaptation literature are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Snatching Defeat From the Jaws of Victory: Self-Esteem Differences in the Experience and Anticipation of Success.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 90(6) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2007-16792-001). There are typographical errors in Table 2 (certain values should not have been in bold face). The corrected table is provided in the erratum.] Successes--defined broadly as meeting important standards or receiving positive evaluations--are widely assumed to be enjoyed equally by people with high self-esteem (HSEs) and low self-esteem (LSEs). Three studies examined the contradictory hypothesis that HSEs react more favorably to success than do LSEs and that success brings about certain unfavorable consequences for LSEs. Undergraduate participants reacted to a laboratory-manipulated success (Studies 1 and 2) or imagined highly positive events in the future (Study 3). Self-esteem differences emerged in anxiety, thoughts about the self, and (in Study 3) thoughts about non-self-related aspects of the event. LSEs were more anxious than HSEs after succeeding, success improved HSEs' self-relevant thoughts but not LSEs', and LSEs focused more on success's negative aspects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem, mood, and self-evaluation: Changes in mood and the way you see you.

Three studies found that self-esteem moderates the relation between mood and self-evaluation. In Study 1, a standard mood-induction procedure was used to induce positive, negative, or neutral moods in low self-esteem (LSE) Ss and high self-esteem Ss. Afterward, Ss evaluated their specific qualities and characteristics (e.g., How smart are you? How kind are you?). Both self-esteem groups evaluated themselves favorably in a positive mood, but LSE Ss were more apt to lower their self-evaluations in a negative mood. Study 2 found a similar, though weaker, pattern using a noncognitive, musical mood induction; Study 3 found that these effects occur with variations in naturally occurring mood over a 6-wk period. The authors suggest that the tendency for LSE people to respond to negative mood with self-depreciation contributes to psychological distress. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Some self-reported correlates of runaway behavior in adolescent females.

The responses of 52 White female runaways (aged 14 yrs 5 mo to 17 yrs 11 mo) were contrasted with those of 51 White age-matched female nonrunaways on measures of family interaction, social self-esteem, and desirable and undesirable agentic and communal traits. As predicted, nonrunaways described their parents as supportive and restrictive and themselves as having social self-esteem to a significantly greater extent than did their runaway peers. Runaways endorsed socially undesirable agentic traits to a significantly greater degree and socially desirable communal traits to a significantly lesser degree than did nonrunaway counterparts. (4 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Children's peer selection: Experimental examination of the role of self-perceptions.

Although previous studies have examined characteristics of children selected as friends, little research has examined the role played by characteristics of the selecting child. In 2 experimental studies that examined the role of self-perceptions in peer selection, participants (91 seventh graders in Study 1 and 83 third graders in Study 2) viewed various evaluations of themselves. Participants either believed evaluations were written by unfamiliar peers (Study 1) or were asked to imagine that the views of puppets were views of unfamiliar peers (Study 2). Participants were asked to select the pees they wished to meet and interact with. When evaluations were related to specific competence domains, 7th graders preferred positive peers to negative peers, whereas 3rd graders selected peers who viewed them as they viewed themselves. When evaluations were related to global self-worth, children's selections were unrelated to views of their own global worth. Selection of a globally negative peer was associated with attachment-insecurity/maternal-rejection and depressive symptoms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-image resilience and dissonance: The role of affirmational resources.

Predicted that high self-esteem Ss (HSEs) would rationalize an esteem-threatening decision less than low self-esteem Ss (LSEs), because HSEs presumably had more favorable self-concepts with which to affirm, and thus repair, their overall sense of self-integrity. This prediction was supported in 2 experiments within the "free-choice" dissonance paradigm: one that manipulated self-esteem through personality feedback and the other that varied it through selection of HSEs and LSEs, but only when Ss were made to focus on their self-concepts. A 3rd experiment countered an alternative explanation of the results in terms of mood effects that may have accompanied the experimental manipulations. Results were discussed in terms of the following: (1) their support for a resources theory of individual differences in resilience to self-image threats—an extension of self-affirmation theory, (2) their implications for self-esteem functioning, and (3) their implications for the continuing debate over self-enhancement vs self-consistency motivation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social skills, social outcomes, and cognitive features of childhood social phobia.

Social skills, social outcomes, self-talk, outcome expectancies, and self-evaluation of performance during social-evaluative tasks were examined with 27 clinically diagnosed social phobic children ages 7–14 and a matched nonclinical group. Results showed that, compared with their nonanxious peers, social phobic children demonstrated lower expected performance and a higher level of negative self-talk on social-evaluative tasks. In addition, social phobic children showed social skills deficits as assessed by self- and parent report, an assertiveness questionnaire, and direct behavioral observation. Furthermore, compared with the control group, social phobic children were rated by themselves and others as significantly less socially competent with peers and were found to be less likely to receive positive outcomes from peers during behavioral observation. Implications for the assessment and treatment of childhood social phobia are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Acceptance is in the eye of the beholder: Self-esteem and motivated perceptions of acceptance from the opposite sex.

Social risk elicits self-esteem differences in signature social motivations and behaviors during the relationship-initiation process. In particular, the present research tested the hypothesis that lower self-esteem individuals' (LSEs) motivation to avoid rejection leads them to self-protectively underestimate acceptance from potential romantic partners, whereas higher self-esteem individuals' (HSEs) motivation to promote new relationships leads them to overestimate acceptance. The results of 5 experiments supported these predictions. Social risk increased activation of avoidance goals for LSEs on a word-recall task but increased activation of approach goals for HSEs, as evidenced by their increased use of likeable behaviors. Consistent with these patterns of goal activation, even though actual acceptance cues were held constant across all participants, social risk decreased the amount of acceptance that LSEs perceived from their interaction partner but increased the amount of acceptance that HSEs perceived from their interaction partner. It is important to note that such self-esteem differences in avoidance goals, approach behaviors, and perceptions of acceptance were completely eliminated when social risk was removed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The interpersonal consequences of inflated self-esteem in an inpatient psychiatric youth sample.

This study tested R. F. Baumeister, L. Smart, and J. M. Boden's (1996) theory of inflated self-esteem with an inpatient psychiatric youth sample. Participants were assessed on their self-reported self-esteem, self-reported interpersonal problems, and peer rejection (measured by evaluations from 3 or 4 peers). Consistent with the hypotheses, those with low self-esteem reported the most interpersonal problems, followed consecutively by the moderate self-esteem group and then the high self-esteem group, who reported the fewest interpersonal problems. Also in line with the hypotheses, those with low and high self-esteem were rejected by their peers when compared with the moderate self-esteem group. Thus, the high self-esteem group was rejected by their peers but did not themselves report interpersonal problems. These findings provide further support for Baumeister et al.'s theory and generalize the theory to a clinical setting. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-advocacy and self-esteem.

Explored the utility of treating self-esteem as an attitude that might be vulnerable to the same kinds of experimental manipulations usually directed at more traditional, less consequential attitudinal issues. Within an attitudinal advocacy paradigm, 109 undergraduates wrote 3 essays either about their personality attributes or about social propositions. Half the Ss writing on each of these topics were told to advocate a positive position (i.e., self-laudatory or proposition supporting) in their essays. The remaining Ss, although induced to advocate positive positions, were led to believe that they could elect to write negative (self-deprecatory or issue-opposing) essays. As anticipated, Ss who wrote the self-laudatory essays subsequently rated themselves more favorably than did Ss who wrote in support of social propositions. The latter Ss showed a corresponding advocacy effect with regard to the social proposition that they had espoused. The manipulation of perceived choice did not influence the magnitude of the advocacy effect. The results are regarded as encouraging with respect to the application of laboratory-derived attitude change procedures to issues of high personal relevance and clinical importance. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: Self-esteem differences in the experience and anticipation of success": Correction to Wood et al (2005).

Reports an error in "Snatching Defeat From the Jaws of Victory: Self-Esteem Differences in the Experience and Anticipation of Success" by Joanne V. Wood, Sara A. Heimpel, Ian R. Newby-Clark and Michael Ross (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2005[Nov], Vol 89[5], 764-780). There are typographical errors in Table 2 (certain values should not have been in bold face). The corrected table is provided in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2005-15658-009.) Successes--defined broadly as meeting important standards or receiving positive evaluations--are widely assumed to be enjoyed equally by people with high self-esteem (HSEs) and low self-esteem (LSEs). Three studies examined the contradictory hypothesis that HSEs react more favorably to success than do LSEs and that success brings about certain unfavorable consequences for LSEs. Undergraduate participants reacted to a laboratory-manipulated success (Studies 1 and 2) or imagined highly positive events in the future (Study 3). Self-esteem differences emerged in anxiety, thoughts about the self, and (in Study 3) thoughts about non-self-related aspects of the event. LSEs were more anxious than HSEs after succeeding, success improved HSEs' self-relevant thoughts but not LSEs', and LSEs focused more on success's negative aspects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)