DOCSLIB.ORG

Perceptions of Uniqueness and Similarity in Close Relationships

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Perceptions of Uniqueness and Similarity in Close Relationships Personal Relationships, 6 (1999), 269-289. Printed in the United States of America. Copyright 0 1999 ISSPR. 1350-4126/99$9.50 Being better than others but otherwise perfectly normal: Perceptions of uniqueness and similarity in close relationships PAUL A. M. VAN LANGE,” CARYL E. RUSBULT? ASTRID SEMIN-GOOSSENS,L’CARIEN A. GORTS,CAND MIRJAM STALPERSc aFree University, Amsterdam; bUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; and ‘Free University, Amsterdam Abstract The current research addresses individuals’ self-generated thoughts regarding their own and others’ relationships,examining the ways in which perceptions of uniqueness and similarity are manifested in judgments regarding own and others’ responses to dissatisfying incidents. Consistent with the uniqueness bias, participants characterized their own relationships by a greater number of constructive responses and a smaller number of destructive responses relative to characterizations of others’ relationships. Moreover, external raters judged own constructive responses to be more constructive than others’ constructive responses. Consistent with the similarity bias, external raters judged items describing others’ responses to be less frequently occurring and more extreme than their own responses. Also, this research revealed support for the claim that the similarity bias is more pronounced for destructive responses than for constructive responses. A recall task corroborated these findings, revealing very good recall for destructive responses enacted by others and poor recall for destructive responses enacted by oneself. Virtually all relationships eventually are incidents. Broadly conceived, such re- confronted with periodic declines in satis- sponses may be construed as either con- faction-declines caused by relatively en- structive or destructive in that they either during disagreements, conflicts, or unpleas- contribute to the health and vitality of the ant events that are external to the relationship or are harmful to the well-be- relationship itself. Individuals may respond ing of the relationship (cf. Clark & Reis, in a variety of ways to such dissatisfying 1988; Holmes & Boon, 1990; Rusbult, Verette, Whitney, Slovik, & Lipkus, 1991). How do individuals perceive their construc- This research was supported in part by a grant to Paul tive and destructive responses to such inci- Van Lange from the Netherlands Organization for dents? How do individuals think about their Scientific Research (NWO, Grant No. R-57-178), and by a grant to Caryl Rusbult from the National Science own reactions in relation to the behavior of Foundation (Grant No. BNS-9023817). The authors other individuals? And given that destruc- are grateful to Bram Buunk, Jennifer Crocker, Wilma tive responses are potentially detrimental Otten, and several anonymous reviewers for their use- to the health and stability of a relationship, ful comments on an earlier draft of this article. how do individuals interpret and perhaps Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Paul Van Lange, Department of Social justify their destructive actions? Psychology, Free University at Amsterdam, Van der The current research seeks to understand Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Nether- the nature of the beliefs that individuals lands. E-mail: [email protected]. hold regarding relationship functioning, 269 270 PA.M. Van Lange et al. examining the nature of individuals’ self- 1977; Marks & Miller, 1987; Wood, 1989).* generated thoughts regarding their own and However, nearly all studies have focused on others’ constructive and destructive re- either the uniqueness bias or the similarity sponses to dissatisfying incidents. On the ba- bias, thereby largely overlooking the possi- sis of the research regarding social judgment bility that by examining such biases in con- and social comparison, we propose that indi- cert we may illuminate our understanding viduals’ beliefs regarding their own and oth- of the nature of self-other perception ers’ relationship functioning will reflect two (however, see Campbell, 1986; Marks, 1984; relatively pervasive tendencies: (a) unique- McFarland & Miller, 1990). ness bias, or a tendency to overestimate Second, prior research on close relation- one’s own uniqueness, exaggerating the su- ships has examined issues such as perceived periority of one’s own reactions and behav- (and actual) similarity and uniqueness be- iors, and (b) similarity bias, or a tendency to tween partners in a relationship (self-other overestimate the similarity between oneself perceptions within a relationship; e.g., and others, exaggerating the commonness Acitelli, Douvan, & Veroff, 1993; Ross & or “everydayness” of one’s own reactions Sicoly, 1979;for a review, see Sillars & Scott, and behaviors.This framework assumes that 1983). However, very few studies have ex- these two seemingly contradictory be- amined individuals’ beliefs regarding their liefs-uniqueness and similarity-coexist own functioning in relation to others in- and that these biases serve the function of volved in other relationships, capturing as- sustaining the general, self-enhancing belief pects of self-other perceptions among rela- that one is “uniquely better than others but tionships. We suggest that, in addition to the otherwise perfectly normal.” uniqueness bias, the similarity bias under- The current work extends prior research lies such perceptions, particularly for those in several ways. First, the uniqueness and responses that are potentially harmful to similarity biases are pervasive tendencies health and vitality of a relationship. If true, that have been demonstrated to exist in a such self-other perceptions may help un- variety of judgment domains (e.g., in re- derstand why partners may sometimes per- search on “perceived superiority” and sist in particular types of responses (e.g., a “false consensus”; Ross, Greene, & House, reluctance to talk things over), in that they may genuinely believe (and to some degree overestimate) that their own responses are 1. Throughout this article we will employ theconcepts very common, frequently occurring, and of “uniqueness bias” and “similarity bias” to refer to beliefs that are also known as “perceived supe- therefore appropriate (e.g., “Like others, I riority” (e.g., Wood, 1989) and “false consensus” do not talk about every slight problem we (Ross, Greene, & House, 1977).While common lan- have”). guage would suggest that the uniqueness bias in- Finally, as noted by Berscheid (1994, p. cludes a tendency to regard oneself as distinctly in- 84), “Relationships researchers are begin- ferior to others, it should be clear that this bias is defined as the tendency to regard oneself as dis- ning to take advantage of the theoretical tinctly superior to others. The primary reason for and empirical fruits of social cognition to employing the concepts of uniqueness bias and simi- further their understanding of interpersonal larity bias is that these concepts (a) explicate the relationships. Thus the rapprochement contradictory nature of these beliefs, (b) do not that has begun between the fields of social seem to be domain-specific, and (c) have been em- ployed in prior research that has examined simulta- cognition and interpersonal relationships neously both beliefs (e.g., Campbell, 1986; Goethals has the potential to benefit both endeavors.” et al., 1991). In contrast, the concepts of superiority and consensus seem less contradictory and could be construed as relatively more domain-specific, with that are not universally appreciated or universally superiority primarily applying to attributes that are depreciated (e.g., opinions and preferences). As universally appreciated (ability, morality) or uni- will be outlined, the current research focuses on a versally depreciated (e.g., lack of ability, lack of mo- domain that presumably includes both types of at- rality), and with consensus applying to attributes tributes. Uniqueness and similarity 271 By examining self-other perceptions in the adaptive to regard one’s behavior in rela- context of close relationships, we attempt to tively favorable terms by viewing one’s own enhance the linkage between the areas of actions and responses as quite positive, rea- social judgment and close relationships. sonable, and appropriate. The prominence of such favorable beliefs may promote feel- ings of self-worth and happiness, provide Perceptions of Uniqueness and Similarity validation of the quality of one’s relation- in Close Relationships ship, and enhance perceptions that presum- Past research has consistently revealed that ably are relevant-and perhaps neces- individuals are not always accurate and un- sary-to sustaining a relationship (e.g., biased in perceiving social reality, particu- feelings of trust, security, and optimism; larly when this reality has implications for Holmes & Boon, 1990; Van Lange & Rus- the self or close others. One pervasive ten- bult, 1995). dency has been termed the uniqueness bias From a functional perspective, it has (Goethals, Messick, & Allison, 1991), in ref- been argued that uniqueness and similarity erence to the inclination to overestimate biases are differentially functional depend- the superiority of one’s behavior and char- ing on whether the attribute at issue is a acteristics (e.g., perceptions of superiority universally evaluated one (that is, people regarding one’s fairness, generosity, and exhibit good agreement about whether the ability; Alicke, 1985; Brown, 1986; Messick, attribute is desirable
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toplum Yanlisi Davraniştaki Toplumsal: Iç-Grupla Özdeşleşme Ve Kolektif Dayaniklilik Arasindaki Ilişki
    Karatay Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı: 6, 2021 Bahar, e-ISSN: 2651-4605 Akdeniz, S. ve Dalmış, İ. (2021). Toplum yanlısı davranıştaki toplumsal: İç-grupla özdeşleşme ve kolektif dayanıklılık arasındaki ilişki. Karatay Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, (6), 37-50. Makale Geliş Tarihi: 29.03.2021 Makale Kabul Tarihi: 29.04.2021 TOPLUM YANLISI DAVRANIŞTAKİ TOPLUMSAL: İÇ-GRUPLA ÖZDEŞLEŞME VE KOLEKTİF DAYANIKLILIK ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ İbrahim DALMIŞ* Seher AKDENİZ** Öz Kolektif dayanıklılık, toplumların afet ve acil durum zamanlarında ortaya çıkan olumsuzluklara dayanma ve elindeki kaynakları kullanarak bu olumsuzluklardan kurtulma yetisi olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Dayanıklılık anlayışı genel olarak kolektif panik anlayışının aksine öz-yardıma, ortak kaynakların kullanımına ve hayatta kalanların kendini toparlama ve çalışmaya devam etmesine vurgu yapmaktadır. Afet ve acil durumlarda grup oluşumunun en kritik belirleyicilerinden biri dış tehdit algısı yani ortak kader anlayışıdır. Ortak kader, çok kısa bir zaman içinde farklı bireylerden oluşan bir yığını, birleşik bir psikolojik kitleye dönüştürmektedir. Kolektif dayanıklılığın ilgili toplulukla özdeşleşme düzeyine göre farklılaşabileceği hipotezine dayalı olarak bu çalışmada, iç-grupla özdeşleşme ile kolektif dayanıklılık arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir. Araştırma betimsel tarama yöntemi ile gerçekleştirilmiş olup, evrendeki durumu belirlemek üzere katılımcılara çevrim-içi platformda kendileri hakkında yapılandırılmış sorular yöneltilmiştir. Araştırmaya değişik eğitim gruplarından yaşları 18 ile
    [Show full text]
  • Relationships and the Self: Egosystem and Ecosystem
    C HAPTER 4 RELATIONSHIPS AND THE SELF: EGOSYSTEM AND ECOSYSTEM Jennifer Crocker and Amy Canevello Most social scientists assume that people are funda- Crocker & Canevello, 2008, 2012b;ASSOCIATION Crocker, mentally self-interested, that they do what they Olivier, & Nuer, 2009). We first describe this perceive to be advantageous to themselves (Miller, system in general terms that apply to most, if not all, 1999). Unsurprisingly, this view pervades research types of relationships. Then, because romantic rela- on the self, in which people are depicted as self- tionships are the focus of a great deal of interest and enhancing and self-protective, seeking validation research, we describe the principles of romantic and affirmation, and taking credit for successes but relationships driven by egosystem motivation. dodging blame for failures. Perhaps more surprising, We next describe an emerging alternate view, in this view also pervades a great deal of research on which people have the capacity to transcend self- relationships, which presumably involve shared interestPSYCHOLOGICAL and care deeply about people and things bonds between people and feelings such as close- beyond themselves, which we call ecosystem motiva- ness, caring, affection, or love. Many researchers tion (Crocker, 2008; Crocker & Canevello, 2008, assume that people in relationships, as in the rest of 2012b; Crocker et al., 2006). In relationships, their lives, are fundamentally self-centered and people driven by ecosystem motivation seek to pro- self-serving. In this view, people want to AMERICANbe in rela- mote the well-being of the relationship partner not tionships to promote their own ends, ©they use rela- out of selfish motives to obtain benefits in return, tionship partners to satisfy their own needs, and but because they care about the partner or because they sacrifice and compromise in relationships to both people care about the well-being of someone or keep their relationship partners happy so they can something beyond themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpersonal Goals, Others Regard for the Self, and Selfesteem
    European Journal of Social Psychology, Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 41, 422–434 (2011) Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.808 Research Article Interpersonal goals, others’ regard for the self, and self‐esteem: The paradoxical consequences of self‐image and compassionate goals AMY CANEVELLO* AND JENNIFER CROCKER Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, USA Abstract People often adopt self‐image goals to increase others’ regard for them and perhaps their own self‐esteem. But do these impression management goals achieve their intended result in close relationships? And do they endure over time? We suggest that self‐image goals predict decreased self‐esteem and close others’ regard for the self through decreased responsiveness to others. In contrast, compassionate goals, which reflect a genuine concern for others’ well‐being, predict increased self‐ esteem and others’ regard through increased responsiveness. We tested these hypotheses in a longitudinal study of college roommates followed across a semester. Path analyses supported both predictions, suggesting a paradox for interpersonal goals in close relationships: explicit attempts to increase close others’ regard for the self backfire and damage self‐esteem, but having goals to meet others’ needs result in others’ positive regard and promote self‐esteem. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. People often adopt self‐image goals, attempting to gain others’ self‐esteem. In contrast, when people have compassionate esteem by constructing desired images of the self in others’ goals, reflecting genuine concern for others’ well‐being eyes (e.g., Baumeister, Tice, & Hutton, 1989; Leary & (Crocker & Canevello, 2008), they bolster close others’ Kowalski, 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • The Costly Pursuit of Self-Esteem
    Psychological Bulletin Copyright 2004 by the American Psychological Association 2004, Vol. 130, No. 3, 392–414 0033-2909/04/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.392 The Costly Pursuit of Self-Esteem Jennifer Crocker and Lora E. Park University of Michigan Researchers have recently questioned the benefits associated with having high self-esteem. The authors propose that the importance of self-esteem lies more in how people strive for it rather than whether it is high or low. They argue that in domains in which their self-worth is invested, people adopt the goal to validate their abilities and qualities, and hence their self-worth. When people have self-validation goals, they react to threats in these domains in ways that undermine learning; relatedness; autonomy and self-regulation; and over time, mental and physical health. The short-term emotional benefits of pursuing self-esteem are often outweighed by long-term costs. Previous research on self-esteem is reinterpreted in terms of self-esteem striving. Cultural roots of the pursuit of self-esteem are considered. Finally, the alternatives to pursuing self-esteem, and ways of avoiding its costs, are discussed. The pursuit of self-esteem has become a central preoccupation 1998). The desire to believe that one is worthy or valuable drives in American culture (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, behavior and shapes how people think about themselves, other 2003; Heine, Lehman, Markus, & Kitayama, 1999; Pyszczynski, people, and events in their lives (e.g., Crocker, 2002a; Greenberg, Greenberg, & Solomon, 1997; Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, & Kasser, Pyszczynski, Solomon, Pinel, Simon, & Jordan, 1993; Kunda & 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences for Interpersonal Conflict, Self-Relevant Affect, And
    Pursuing Interpersonal Goals: Consequences for Interpersonal Conflict, Self- Relevant Affect, and Alcohol-Related Problems by Scott J. Moeller A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology) in the University of Michigan 2010 Doctoral Committee: Professor Jennifer K. Crocker, Chair Professor Brad J. Bushman Professor Phoebe C. Ellsworth Professor Robert A. Zucker ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Portions of this dissertation were supported by an Institutional National Research Service Award to Scott Moeller (2T32MH015801-27), and by a National Institute of Mental Health grant to Jennifer Crocker (R01MH58869). ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………ii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………iv LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………..v ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………...vi CHAPTER 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………...1 Research Paper 1…………………………………………………………….3 Research Paper 2…………………………………………………………….4 Research Paper 3…………………………………………………………….5 Summary…………………………………………………………………….6 2. Creating Hostility and Conflict: Effects of Entitlement and Self-Image Goals ………………………………...7 Studies 1A and 1B…………………………………………………………...8 Method……………………………………………………………….8 Results & Discussion………………………………………………..10 Study 2………………………………………………………………………12 Method………………………………………………………………12 Results……………………………………………………………….13 iii Discussion…………………………………………………………...17 General Discussion………………………………………………………….18 3. Drinking and Desired Self-Images: Path Models of Self-Image Goals, Coping
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Pursuit of Self-Esteem
    1 The Pursuit of Self-Esteem: Implications for Good and Evil Jennifer Crocker, Shawna J. Lee, and Lora E. Park University of Michigan Reference: Crocker, J., Lee, S. J., & Park, L. E. (2004). The pursuit of self-esteem: Implications for good and evil. In A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil, 271- 302. New York: Guilford Press. 2 The Pursuit of Self-Esteem: Implications for Good and Evil North Americans generally view self-esteem as an unmitigated good, integral to a meaningful, satisfying, and fulfilling life. From a young age, parents, teachers, and popular culture teach us that feeling good about ourselves is a high priority (Miller, 2001, April). Thousands of self-help books, childrearing guides, and television shows hail the benefits of increasing self-esteem. The Self-Esteem Movement, based on the assumption that high self- esteem leads to positive outcomes (Benson, Galbraith, & Espeland, 1998; Glennon, 1999; Miller, 2001, April), aimed to raise children’s self-esteem to combat social problems, such as academic underachievement, high dropout rates, crime, teenage pregnancy, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, and interpersonal aggression (Branden, 1994; Dawes, 1994; McElherner & Lisovskis, 1998; Mecca, Smelser, & Vasconcellos, 1989; Seligman, 1998). Underlying this cultural concern with self-esteem is the belief that feelings of worthlessness and low self-esteem lead people to do things that are harmful and destructive to themselves and to others; in other words, low self-esteem is one source of evil. The costs of low self-esteem and the benefits of high self-esteem seem so pervasive that many psychologists have assumed that self-esteem is a universal and fundamental human need (Allport, 1955; Epstein, 1985; Greenberg, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1986; James, 1890; Maslow, 1968; Rogers, 1961; Rosenberg, 1979; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 1991; Steele, 1988; Taylor & Brown, 1988; Tesser, 1988), even arguing that humans evolved as a species to pursue self-esteem (Leary & Baumeister, 2000; Leary & Downs, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Feminist Periodicals
    The U n vers ty o f W scons n System Feminist Periodicals A current listing of contents WOMEN'S STUDIES Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2001 Published by Phyllis Holman Weisbard LIBRARIAN Women's Studies Librarian Feminist Periodicals A current listing ofcontents Volume 21, Number 1 Spring 2001 Periodicallilerature is the cutting edge ofwomen's scholarship, feminist theory, and much ofwomen's culture, Feminisf Periodicals: A Current Listing of Contents is published by the Office of the University of Wisconsin System Women's Studies Librarian on a quarterly basis with the intent of increasing public awareness of feminist periodicals, It is our hope that Feminist Periodicals will serve several purposes: to keep the reader abreast of current topics in feminist literature; to increase readers' familiarity with a wide spectrum of feminist periodicals; and to provide the requisite bibliographic information should a reader wish to subscribe to ajournal or to obtain a particular article at her library or through interlibrary loan, (Users will need to be aware of the limitations of the new copyright law with regard to photocopying of copyrighted materials.) Table ofcontents pages from current issues ofmajorfeministjournals are reproduced in each issue of Feminist Periodicals, preceded by a comprehensive annotated listing of all journals we have selected, As publication schedules vary enormously, not every periodical will have table of contents pages reproduced in each issue of FP. The annotated listing provides the following information on each journal: 1, Year of first publication, 2. Frequency of pUblication, 3. U.S, subscription price(s), 4, SUbscription address, 5. Current editor.
    [Show full text]
  • Library Resources Technical Services
    Library Resources & ISSN 2159-9610 Technical Services October 2017 Volume 61, No. 4 Evolving Roles of Preservation Professionals: Trends in Position Announcements from 2004 to 2015 Mary Miller and Martha Horan Towards Sustainable Partnership: Examining Cross Perceptions of Public and Technical Services Academic Librarians Cathy Weng and Erin Ackerman What Does Giving Primacy to a Certain Entity Cause in a Conceptual Model for Cataloging? An Expression-Entity Dominant Model Revisited Shoichi Taniguchi NOTES ON OPERATIONS Full Stream Ahead: Designing a Collection Development Workflow for Streaming Video Content Mary Wahl The Association for Library Collections & Technical Services 61 ❘ 4 Library Resources & Technical Services, journals.ala .org/lrts (ISSN 2159-9610) is published quarterly by the American Library Association, 50 E. Hu- ron St., Chicago, IL 60611. It is the official publi- Library Resources cation of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services, a division of the American Library Association, and provided as a benefit to & members. Subscription price to nonmembers $100. Technical Services Individual articles can be purchased for $15. Busi- ness Manager: Keri Cascio, Executive Director, Association for Library Collections & Technical ISSN 2159-9610 October 2017 Volume 61, No. 4 Services, a division of the American Library Asso- ciation. Submit manuscripts using the online sys- tem: http://www.editorialmanager.com/lrts. Mary Editorial 178 Beth Weber, Editor, Library Resources & Techni- cal Services; e-mail: [email protected]. Advertising: ALCTS, 50 E. Huron St., Chicago, IL ALCTS Annual Report 180 60611; 312-280-5038; fax: 312-280-5033; alcts@ ala.org. ALA Production Services: Chris Keech, Tim Clifford, Lauren Ehle, and Hannah Gribetz.
    [Show full text]
  • Lara K. Kammrath – Curriculum Vitae (January, 2016)
    Lara K. Kammrath – Curriculum Vitae (January, 2016) Department of Psychology Phone: (630) 608-3891 Wake Forest University Email: [email protected] PO Box 7778 Fax: (336) 758-4733 Winston-Salem, NC 27109 Website: http://college.wfu.edu/psychology/about-the-department/faculty-and-staff/lara-kammrath Education 2004 Ph.D. Columbia University Social/Personality Psychology 2001 M.A. Columbia University Social/Personality Psychology 1998 B.A. University of Chicago Psychology Academic Employment 2015 - present Associate Professor, Social/Personality Psychology, Wake Forest University 2011 - 2015 Assistant Professor, Social/Personality Psychology, Wake Forest University 2006 - 2011 Assistant Professor, Social/Personality Psychology, Wilfrid Laurier University 2006 - 2011 Ad Hoc Adjunct Professor, Executive MBA program of Columbia Graduate School of Business & Haas School of Business UC Berkeley 2004 – 2006 Post-doctoral Researcher, Columbia Graduate School of Business Professional Affiliations International Association for Relationship Research (IARR) Society for Experimental and Social Psychology (SESP) Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) Association for Psychological Science (APS) American Psychological Association (APA) Research Interests Self-Regulation in close relationships, with a specific focus on the role of personality, mental-states, and situations that influence the self-regulation of communal actions in close relationships Teaching Awards 2009 Berkeley-Columbia Executive MBA program, “The Executive MBA Award for Commitment to Excellence.” Research Awards: External 2009-2012 SSHRC Faculty Research Grant, Principle Investigator. Title: The Limits of Love: How and when loving attitudes fail to manifest in loving actions. $42,620. 2007-2008 SSHRC Faculty Research Grant, Principle Investigator. Title: Conflict Styles and Interpersonal Expectations. $81,400. 1999-2003 National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship Research Awards: Internal 2013 SBE Faculty Research Award, Principle Investigator.
    [Show full text]
  • The Costs of Seeking Self-Esteem ∗ Jennifer Crocker University of Michigan
    Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 58, No. 3, 2002, pp. 597--615 The Costs of Seeking Self-Esteem ∗ Jennifer Crocker University of Michigan Americans are deeply engaged in the pursuit of self-esteem, attempting to satisfy contingencies or criteria for what makes a person worthwhile. In this article, I examine the costs of this pursuit of self-esteem for the self, in terms of compe- tence, relatedness, and mental health, and for others. I hypothesize that external contingencies of self-worth require validation from others and are unreliable as a basis of self-esteem, and hence are associated with greater costs. Data from a longitudinal study of an ethnically diverse sample of 642 college freshman support the view that contingencies of self-worth shape how students spend their time, and the prediction that external contingencies of self-worth, especially appearance, have high costs for stress, aggression, drug and alcohol use, and symptoms of disordered eating. The pursuit of self-esteem has become a central preoccupation in our society. Self-help books advise us how to achieve high self-esteem, child rearing guides tell us how to raise children with high self-esteem, schools devote aspects of their curriculum to raising children’s self-esteem, and most people organize their lives, in part, around seeking out or avoiding activities, situations, and people to protect, maintain, and enhance their self-esteem (Miller, 2001). In this article, I consider the costs of this pursuit. I have four goals: first, to consider what previous research *The research reported in this manuscript was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grants 1 R01 MH58869-01, and 1 K02 MH01747-01.
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Esteem and Ingroup Bias
    INGROUP BIAS AND SELF-ESTEEM: A META ANALYSIS BY CHRISTOPHER L. ABERSON A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Claremont Graduate University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate Faculty of Psychology Claremont, California 1999 Approved by: ______________________________ Dr. Amy Marcus-Newhall © Copyright by Christopher L. Aberson, 1999 All Rights Reserved. We, the undersigned, certify that we have read this dissertation and approve it as adequate in scope and quality for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dissertation Committee: ________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Amy Marcus-Newhall, Chair ________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Dale E. Berger, Member ________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Ximena B. Arriaga, Member ________________________________________________________________________ Dr. Michele A. Wittig, Visiting Examiner Abstract of the Dissertation Ingroup Bias and Self-Esteem: A Meta Analysis by Christopher L. Aberson Claremont Graduate University, 1999 Social Identity Theory contains two seemingly incompatible predictions regarding the relationship between self-esteem and ingroup bias. The first focuses on low self- esteem as motivation for bias, predicting that low self-esteem individuals exhibit more ingroup bias. The second posits that high self-esteem results from exhibiting bias, thus, high self-esteem individuals exhibit greater bias. A meta analysis examined the relationship between self-esteem and ingroup bias. Additionally, the project examined methodological issues such as the lack of consistency in measurement of self-esteem, artificial dichotomization of self-esteem scores, classification of individuals as low self-esteem, and theoretical considerations such as the use of different ingroup bias strategies and the role of social category salience. Thirty- four studies yielding 102 effect sizes from 6660 subjects were included in the analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Identity Politics1 Winter 2020 Thursday 1:30-4:20 PM Encina Hall
    Political Science 426: Identity Politics1 Winter 2020 Thursday 1:30-4:20 PM Encina Hall West 417 Professor: Hakeem Jefferson [email protected] For Meetings: https://go.oncehub.com/HakeemJefferson Course Description: Whether one considers the partisan and electoral choices citizens make or the judgments citizens render in response to officer-involved shootings or other salient social and political events, the centrality of identity in our politics is indisputable. But what is an identity? What are the conditions under which identities become politicized? How do identities work to structure attitudes and affect behavior? This course seeks to provide some answers to these questions. Using an interdisciplinary and cross-subfield approach, students are brought into conversation with scholarship that demonstrates the powerful ways that identities influence all aspects of the political. A primary goal of the course is to provide students a foundation for thinking carefully and creatively about the way that identity and identity-based considerations matter for the various research questions they seek to answer. Required Texts: Readings will be available on the course’s Canvas site. You are required to purchase White Identity Politics by Ashley Jardina, which we will discuss January 30. Daily Class Schedule: 1:30-3:05 PM – Seminar discussion of assigned texts 3:05-3:15 PM – Break 3:15-4:20 PM – Virtual Identity Politics Workshop For the first half of each class (1:30 PM-3:05 PM), we will engage in an open discussion of the assigned readings for that week’s topic. We will then take a 10-minute break.
    [Show full text]