Self-serving attributions in social context: Effects of self-esteem and social pressure.

Examined attributions (ATs) of Ss high (HSEs) and low (LSEs) in self-esteem in contests where (a) they were low or high in the motivation to make a positive impression on an audience, (b) the audience was perceived as supportive or critical, (c) Ss' accounts were public or private, and (d) Ss had succeeded or failed on a previous task. HSEs were most egotistical when evaluative pressures were greatest (i.e., they were motivated to make a good impression and had the opportunity to account publicly), whereas LSEs were least egotistical under these conditions. HSEs tended to internalize success by raising self-ratings, whereas LSEs tended to internalize failure by lowering self-ratings. A critical audience seemed to activate concerns about the defensibility of ATs, producing more caution and less explicit boastfulness. Factor analysis of Ss' responses suggested that they conceptualized the situation in terms of its implications for evaluating identity. (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.     

"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)     

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)     

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)     

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)     

This mood is familiar and I don't deserve to feel better anyway: Mechanisms underlying self-esteem differences in motivation to repair sad moods.

Why are people with low self-esteem (LSE) less motivated than people with high self-esteem (HSE) to improve sad moods? The present research examined whether feelings of personal deservingness contribute to this difference. Four experiments with undergraduate participants involved a sad mood induction, a manipulation of personal deservingness, or both. Results suggested that (a) LSEs feel less deserving of positive outcomes and of positive moods than do HSEs, (b) feelings of personal deservingness can vary with the situation, and be lowered through reminders of social rejection and personal flaws, and (c) feeling relatively undeserving dampens LSEs', but not HSEs', motivation to repair sad moods. These results have implications for the emotion regulation, self-esteem, and social justice literatures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and clarity of the self-concept.

This article examines the association between evaluative and knowledge components of the self. Four studies tested the hypothesis that the self-concepts of low-self-esteem (LSE) people are characterized by less clarity or certainty than those of high-self-esteem (HSE) people. LSE Ss exhibited less extremity and self-reported confidence when rating themselves on bipolar trait adjectives (Study 1), less temporal stability in their trait ratings over a 2-month interval (Study 2), less congruence between their self-concepts and their subsequent perceptions of situation-specific behavior and memory for prior behavior (Study 3), and less internal consistency, lower self-rated confidence, and longer reaction times when making me/not me responses to pairs of opposite traits (Study 4). Alternative accounts of the results and the implications of self-concept clarity for understanding the pervasive impact of self-esteem on behavior are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Demand characteristics and inferential processes in psychotherapeutic change.

Assigned 87 19–54 yr old unassertive Ss to 4 types of imaginary role playing: (a) roles based on personality attributes presenting demand characteristics for changing self-concepts, (b) social skills training, (c) exposure to stressful social situations, and (d) a neutral social situation control group. Pre- and post-role-playing scores on a self-concept instrument were determined. ANOVAs showed that Ss who participated in condition (a) increased significantly in assertiveness and self-esteem and decreased significantly in social discomfort compared to the control Ss. It is suggested that general therapeutic factors involve demand variables that cue Ss to alter their self-concepts. (36 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social comparison, multiple reference groups, and the self-concepts of academically handicapped children before and after mainstreaming.

Predictions adduced from social comparison theory and group reference theory were tested in 2 experiments that assessed the impact of half-day integration into the educational mainstream on the self-concepts of academically handicapped children. In Exp I (50 Ss, 6 yrs 2 mo to 10 yrs 10 mo old), mainstreamed Ss exhibited significantly augmented self-concepts, a result attributed to the availability of multiple comparative reference groups. In Exp II (20 Ss, 8 yrs 3 mo to 11 yrs), a manipulation designed to restrict self-concept-relevant social comparisons to Ss in the academic mainstream produced decreased self-regard, while unrestricted utilization of multiple comparative reference groups produced increased self-regard. Results are interpreted as supportive of the theoretical viability of social comparison theory and group reference theory in educational settings. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and counterfactual thinking.

Two studies examined the relation between self-esteem and counterfactual thinking (consideration of "might-have-been" alternatives to reality). Ss imagined themselves in scenarios with another actor that resulted in either success or failure. Ss then "undid" the outcome by altering events that preceded the outcome. Following success, high self-esteem (HSE) Ss were more likely than low self-esteem (LSE) Ss to mutate their own actions. Following failure, LSE Ss were more likely than HSE Ss to mutate their own actions. Also, the structure of counterfactuals was influenced by outcome valence but not by self-esteem: Subtractive structures (in which antecedents are removed) were elicited by success, whereas additive structures (in which antecedents are added) were elicited by failure. The importance of the self and individual differences in self-esteem to counterfactual thinking is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Photographic self-concept enhancement of male juvenile delinquents.

Describes the enhancement of self-concepts of 16 13-16 yr old male juvenile delinquents using a program of photographic feedback about themselves. According to their Tennessee Self-Concept Scale scores, Ss who received the weekly photographic feedback sessions, compared to 14 controls increased in total self-concept, self-satisfaction, and the use of psychological defenses necessary for the maintenance of self-esteem. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Regulating affect interpersonally: When low esteem leads to greater enhancement.

We tested the hypothesis that low self-esteem persons use self-presentation to improve their affect. In Experiments 1–3, Ss high in self-esteem (HSE) and low in self-esteem (LSE) responded publicly or privately to positive or negative feedback from a computer "personality test" (Experiments 1 and 2) or from a peer (Experiment 3). In public, LSE Ss complimented positive sources and derogated negative sources more than their counterparts did. Experiment 2 showed that this was not due to another person's awareness of the feedback, ruling out a strict impression management interpretation. In Experiment 4, some Ss were coaxed to compliment the source of feedback and others were coaxed to derogate the source of feedback. When publicly complimenting positive feedback or derogating negative feedback, LSE Ss generally showed a rise in esteem relative to their counterparts. Based on these findings, a model of affect regulation in interpersonal relations is proposed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Internal attributions and types of depression in college students: The learned helplessness model revisited.

Tested the relation between attributions and types of depression (with and without low self-esteem) postulated by reformulated learned helplessness theory vs. an alternative (R. Janoff-Bulman; see record 1981-01320-001). 334 Ss completed the Beck Depression Inventory, Attributional Style Questionnaire, and Janis-Field Feelings of Inadequacy Scale. Scores above 8 on the Beck were considered depressed. A median split on the Janis-Field scale divided Ss into those with and without low self-esteem. Clearest support was found for Janoff-Bulman's formulations. Depressed Ss with low self-esteem made more internal characterological attributions for bad events than the other groups. Nondepressed Ss made more internal behavioral attributions than depressed Ss. The implications for counseling and future research on depression and learned helplessness are noted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of self-esteem, hypothetical explanations, and verbalization of expectancies on future performance.

A hypothetical explanation task was used to make success- or failure-related cognitions differentially available for 60 high self-esteem (HSE) and 60 low self-esteem (LSE) undergraduates. Ss wrote an explanation for either a hypothetical failure or success, or they wrote no explanation. Half of the Ss in each condition stated performance expectancies. The effects of these variables on subsequent performance were examined. Success explanations increased the performance of both HSE and LSE Ss, whereas failure explanations only decreased the performance of LSE Ss. A content analysis revealed that the content of failure explanations, but not success explanations, was related to self-esteem and subsequent performance. These effects were more pronounced for Ss who stated expectancies, and expectancies were more highly correlated with performance in the explanation conditions than in the no-explanation control condition. Results are discussed in terms of current self-esteem theory and the cognitive processes associated with generating causal scenarios for success and failure, expectations, and performance. (57 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Strategies of social comparison among people with low self-esteem: Self-protection and self-enhancement.

People with low self-esteem (LSE) seem to focus on self-protection; rather than trying to achieve gains for their self-esteem, they try to avoid losses. This research examined, in a social comparison context, the hypothesis that LSE Ss seek self-enhancement when they have an opportunity that is "safe," that is, carrying little risk of humiliation. Exps 1 and 2 indicated that LSE Ss sought the most social comparisons after receiving success feedback, whereas high-self-esteem (HSE) Ss sought the most comparisons after failure. Further results suggested that LSE Ss who succeeded were seizing a safe means of self-enhancement and that HSE Ss who failed were seeking to compensate for the failure. Also supporting this interpretation for LSE Ss was Exp 3, in which LSE Ss who succeeded sought the most comparisons when such comparisons promised to be favorable. All 3 studies illustrate the value of a new measure of social comparison selection. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

But what about smart girls? Adolescent self-esteem and sex role perceptions as a function of academic achievement.

Examined adolescent self-esteem and sex-role perceptions as a function of academic achievement with 71 male and 69 female 7th graders divided into 3 groups (below average, average, and above average level of academic competence). Ss responded to a self-esteem inventory under the following 2 sets of instructions: (a) a standard set and (b) a set in which Ss were asked to respond as they thought a member of the same age and grade but of the opposite sex would respond. Results of the standard instruction investigation reveal a significant but moderate difference in self-esteem levels in favor of the boys. Reported levels of self-esteem also rose very significantly and commensurately with higher academic achievement for both sexes. Under opposite-sex instructions, girls attributed significantly but moderately higher levels of self-esteem to boys, and boys attributed significantly lower levels of self-esteem to girls. Girls in the above average group, however, rated boys significantly below themselves. Findings are discussed in terms of attribution theory and the possibility that academically competent girls possess more masculine or androgynous than feminine characteristics. (30 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Research on a workshop to reduce the effects of sexism and sex role socialization on women's career planning.

Assessed the effects of a 4-wk workshop designed to enhance the awareness of 60 college women about sex role and career factors and to expand their sex role attitudes and self-concepts. During the workshop, portions of a 28-min videotape were presented to Ss and discussed each wk in small groups. The videotape presentation is a direct application of a model depicting factors affecting both sex role socialization and career decision-making processes. Treatment effects were assessed by means of 5 career and sex-role instruments in a pretest/posttest control-group design. Results indicate that treatment Ss spent more time thinking about their career planning, described themselves as being more "masculine," and reported investigative, social, and enterprising careers as being more appropriate career choices than control Ss. The workshop appears to have expanded Ss' "masculine" sex role self-concepts and changed their attitudes about the appropriateness of 2 stereotypic masculine career areas (investigative and enterprising). (59 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)