Social Psychology: Ch 3, The Self

self-schemas

self-schemas

a belief people hold about themselves that guides the processing of self-relevant information

self-concept

sum of total beliefs you have about the kind of person you are

ex. traits, abilities, motivations

self

consciousness, the reasoning behind your actions

from attention: can only be on one thing at a time, can shift rapidly

self-image, self-concept, self-esteem, self-awareness

exists in the brain: certain areas are more active when looking at a picture of ourselves, can be altered by injuries

relative: can’t be alone

malleable: changed based on people around you

ABC’s of the self

affective: self-evaluation, self-image, self-esteem → how you feel about yourself

behaviour: self-regulation, self-presentation → how you present yourself to others

cognitive: self-concept, identity → mental component

self-recognition

a separate entity from other people

rouge test: child recognize themselves in the mirror, 1.5-2 years old

• animals: apes, some monkeys, some intelligent non-primates (dolphins)

  • test: put red blush stick on kid’s forehead without them realizing, see themselves in the mirror → tough forehead = recognize themselves

  • children in non-western countries: trained to not ask questions, raised for compliance

looking-glass self

explains how the self is a social concept

“meta insight”: distinguish how we perceive ourselves vs how others see us

mirror

self = perception of reflection that is happening around you

introspection

self-knowledge through looking inward at one’s own thoughts and feelings

• not a research method

• problems:

  • mentally busy processing information → don’t understand own thoughts, feelings, behaviours

  • overestimate positives → some people have more insights than others

not always accurate: affective forecasting, Dan Gilbert

affective forecasting (introspection)

Dan Gilbert

emotional prediction: can’t predict how we feel

pre-frontal cortex: experiences in your head

synthetic vs real happiness

impact bias: overestimate strength and duration of emotional reactions

• focus on impact (ex. winning the lottery vs paralyzed) → think about emotional happiness, don’t consider other things

  • ex. prints: ask to take choice 3/4 of the prints to take home, wait → change in order: like chosen one better, not chosen one the least

  • ex. able to take it back: less happy

  • deliberative mindset: many choices → not happy; unsure →implemental mindset: increase happiness

    • fewer choices = happier

• why: people do not realize how much psychological coping mechanisms soften the blow and we focus on single event so much that we neglect to account for other life experiences

self-perception theory

when we are unsure how to feel, we look to our behaviour and surrounding environment to judge how we feel

• observed behaviour: people can know you better than you know yourself

• limit: not freely chosen behaviour, do not infer from behaviour in the presence of situational pressure, reward/punishment

  • ex. eat a sandwich = hungry; paid to eat sandwich = not hungry

• Self-Other Knowledge Asymmetry (SOKA) model:

  • we know ourselves better than others do when it comes to internal traits (anxious/optimistic) and there is no self-other difference when it comes to external traits (quiet/sociable)

  • others may know us better than we know ourselves when it comes to observable traits that can be so touchy for self-esteem purposes that we have motivated blind spots (such as how smart, creative, or rude a person is)

facial feedback hypothesis: smiling can make you feel happy (frowning is not as strong)

• inward, not only based on the face

• based on the process of self-perception: I must be happy if i’m smiling

over-justification effect: attribute the reason for doing something to whatever the outcome was

over-justification effect (self-perception theory)

attribute the reason for doing something to whatever the outcome was

motivation:

• intrinsic: internal, enjoy/interested in it (ex. piano because you like it)

• identified: think it is important (ex. take school seriously)

• introjected: “should” do it, for others (ex. avoid guilt)

• extrinsic: external, gain/reward, avoid punishment (ex. good in school for grades)

study: kids in the 1970s go into the lab in 3 groups → gave them markers, one group gets told to be rewarded after playing, one group gets an unexpected reward, one group gets no rewards

• then play with markers again: the rewarded group didn’t play so much, the unexpected reward played a lot, no reward played a lot but a bit less

  • undermining of intrinsic motivation: rewarded for something you already like doing → attribute activity to reward, don’t like it as much either→ over-justification effect

• ex. reward program for kids reading books: Pizza Hut, free pizza coupon for reading books

  • kids already liked reading books → rewarded → program is over = kids are going to read less, like reading less

social comparison theory

comparing yourself to others

self-esteem: checking on how you’re doing → look to others

• heightened with social media: passive usage to consume content = dec, active interactions with others = inc

upward comparison: someone who is better than you = dec in self-esteem

• small percent uses it as motivation

downward comparison: someone who is worse than you = inc in self-esteem

• problem: big fish little pond, don’t strive for better

when we do this: uncertainty, determining self-worth

whom we compare ourselves to: people on the same level as us, ex. friends

two-factor theory of emotions: symptoms of physiological arousal and a cognitive interpretation to explain arousal

two-factor theory of emotions (social comparison)

symptoms of physiological arousal and a cognitive interpretation to explain arousal → interpret our arousal based on others reactions

• ex. study injects drugs into groups → heightened arousal → look to confederate to detect social cues on how to feel

  • problems: level of arousal cannon be too intense, other people must be present before arousal

autobiographical memories

memories about yourself

essential for self-concept

reminiscence bump

transitional firsts

flashbulbs memories

self-serving

flashbulb memories (autobiographical memories)

detailed, high-resolution recollections of an event

humans are biologically equipped for survival purposes to secure damatic events in memory

ex. September 11, 2001 → twin tower attacks

reminiscence bump (autobiographical memories)

thinking back to late adolescents and early adults

because people go through the most personal growth during this time, most unique experiences, new things happening, start forming the strongest relationships (platonic and romantic)

transitional firsts (autobiographical memories)

stick in mind, first time you ever did X

• ex. first day of highschool, first bf

• first happen in reminiscence bump

self-serving (autobiographical memories)

we think we were better than we actually were

to maintain self-confidence

ex. asked university students to think about their high school grades and then showed them their transcripts

• people who got A’s remember getting A’s vs people who got D’s didn’t remember getting D’s

• feel closer to positive memories → feel detached from negative memories (3rd person pronouns)

• nostalgia (sentimental longing for the past) found during distressing life events → boost self-esteem, self-concept, optimism about future

culture of self-concept

stand out: individualistic culture, unique and separate from others (African Americans)

fit in: collectivist, community-like, sense of self is tied to relationships (Asian/Latino Americans)

• research started in Japan, ex. kids all dress the same

• Latinos: social and emotional relationships are important

independent view of the self: self vs mother, father, friend (describe yourself as personal traits)

interdependent view of the self: self overlaps with mother, father, friend (describe yourself in group affiliations)

cultural cycle: ideas, institutions, and social interactions that shape how individuals think, feel, and act (four i’s)

dialecticism: acceptance of contradictory characteristics through compromise (Asian, vs American perspective = right vs wrong)

social class: higher = more personal choices/entitled, lower = more constrained in choices

self-esteem

affective

Rosenberg self-esteem scale: depends on time, the person you’re thinking about

essential to happiness

stable: same across situations

unstable: varies according to external factors

sociometer theory: desire for self-esteem is the need to connect with others and gain their approval → Sociometer: detect acceptance and rejection (inc brain activity in rejection-related brain regions = lower self-esteem)

terror management theory: need for self-esteem → terrified of death so accept cultural views of how the earth was created, the purpose of existence

benefits: high = positive outlook on life; low = self-defeating cycles

• does not cause people to perform well → lead to neglect of others, avoid risks

• people with high can outperform those with low

• can predict quality of social relations over time

gender and racial differences in self

boys = higher in physical abilities, girls = higher in ethics

• girls going through puberty early have a lower self-esteem →then comes up

• boys going through puberty early have a higher self-esteem → then goes down

black people score higher than white people

self-focusing situations

focusing all your attention on yourself

• some people more naturally like this

• situations: when receiving criticisms, arguments, see pictures of yourself or a video of yourself, walking by mirrors

self-awareness theory

distraction from noticing yourself: not usually self-focused, but certain situations can force us to notice ourselves

• higher = more likely to have clinical disorders, self-destructive thoughts when they fail to meet their standards

• higher when they believe in God/Karma

comparison to your ideal self: reality vs what you want

self-guides: actual self → inc in self-esteem

• way off: decrease in self-esteem

  • shape up: behaving in a way to reduce our self-discrepancies

  • ship out: withdrawing from self-awareness

    • dont wanna be in photos, take mirrors out of the house, watch TV as a major distraction, binge eating

    • self-harm as a distraction

  • ex. body image: where you are and where you wanna be

  • discrepancy: more there is, more importance of domain, more focus = greater harm

can be used for good things: be more honest about yourself,

• using mirrors: people are more aware and steal less

  • retail stores, candy bowl out on Halloween

self-focusing persons

private self-consciousness: people think a lot about their own thoughts and feelings, tend to be always high in self-awareness

• reduce discrepancies relative to your own standards

public self-consciousness: image projecting, social situations, care a lot about having the same opinions as other people

• ex. drawing E on your forehead: oriented for other people = high PuSC

• match your behaviour to socially accepted norms

usually one side

self-regulation

process where we seek to control or alter our thoughts, feelings, behaviours, and urges to live an acceptable social life

ex. dieting: strong to resist urge of sweets = easy to give up on tough math problems

• solution: non-limited belief

self-control: efforts come from a common reservoir, which is like flexing a muscle (becomes fatigued)

increase in self-control = weaker self-regulation

ironic mental process

effort to control self-control can backfire

harder you inhibit thoughts/feelings = less likely to succeed

athletes choking under pressure

ex. golfing: professionals miss shots because on TV, focusing on themselves, high pressure

mechanisms of self-enhancement

maintain feelings of worth to protect self-esteem

self-serving cognition

self-handicapping

basking in reflected glory

downward social comparison

sour grapes

defensive pessimism

self-affirmation

better-than-average effect

implicit egoism

symbolic self-completion

self-serving cognition (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

serve to help you

attributions: take credit for success but don’t take credit for failures

less likely to think bad things are going to happen to you

ex. teacher is a hard grader when you fail a test

self-handicapping (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

do things to create a barrier to have excuses for future performances

done when you have self-doubts: unsure about your competence (lack of ability)

ex. procrastinating, faking illness to get out of a test

basking in reflected glory (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

boost in self-esteem by associating with someone who is successful

true only as long as that area of success is not part of your identity

ex. being happy when friend wins golf championship

• ex. you’re also a competitive golfer, friend wins championship, not boost to self-esteem (threat)

opposite of cutting off reflected failure

downward social comparison (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

compare yourself to someone who not doing as well as you

inc in self-esteem

ex. you only got into your second choice university program, friend didn’t get into any → feel better that you’re going to university

ex. I’m better today than I was in the past

sour grapes (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

you apply for something, don’t get it → tell yourself you didn’t really want it

defensive pessimism (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

set low expectations so you won’t be disappointed

ex. excitement of vacation is better than the actual trip (joy can come from telling people about the trip)

self-affirmation (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

remind yourself of other areas in your life that are doing well to cancel out hit to self-esteem

problem: need multiple facets of identity, if one doesn’t go well you are able to handle setbacks

• only have 1 thing going → suffer

better-than-average effect (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

when you don’t do well at something → overestimate how many others don’t do well at that thing

• more likely to see yourself as better when it comes to personal traits that are important

• ex. failing a test, everyone did

when you do well at something → underestimate how many others also do well at that thing

• ex. doing super well on a test, only a handful did

implicit egosim (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

unconscious expression of self-esteem

people are quicker to associate the self words with positive traits than negative traits

ex. people are more favourable to letters contained within their own name and number of their birthday

symbolic self-completion (mechanisms of self-enhancement)

threat to self-esteem in one domain, acquire symbol and objects of value in that domaine to fill the void

• ex. friend wanted to be a veterinarian, failing university → bought a sweater from the vet school to wear

• ex. midlife crisis: realization of getting old → buying a sport car

• ex. daughter not doing well at swim meet, mom buys expensive bathing suit → brags about how advanced her kids is

self-presentation

two faces: try to shape what others think of us and even what we think of ourselves

can be conscious/unconscious, accurate/misleading, intended for external audience/for ourselves

strategic self-presentation

self-verification

sandbagging: people play down their abilities, lower expectations, publically predict they will fail to reduce performance pressure

strategic self-presentation (self-presentation)

shape the way you present yourself so that others like you or think you are competent (can be moral, dangerous, or helpless too)

• ingratiation: complements, flattery

• self-promotion: try to impress others (ex. bragging about children)

• self-handicapping: reference to what other people think

  • ex. he didn’t win the fight because he went out partying, not because he’s a bad fighter

• basking in reflected glory: reference to what other people think

can lead to unsafe patterns: risk of AIDS (not buying condoms), eating disorder (not eating)

self-verification (self-presentation)

try to get other people to see you the way you see yourself

• positive or negative light

• people receive personality feedback that confirm self-conceptions

• ex. in qm class, kids saying their bad at math → kids would fail math and then tell prof they were just bad at math (trying to get her to see them as bad math kids)

self-monitoring

regulate your own behaviour to meet the demands of the situation

high: strategic self-presentation (mimic people’s demeanour, look into rules for conduct)

low: self-verification (stubborn, unwilling to compromise to get along)

tends to drop with age

positive illusions

used for higher self-esteem

convince yourself a lie → easy to lie to others

display greater public confidence through seeing yourself better than others

problems: can lead to chronic patterns of delusion

culture of self-esteem

japanese are self-critical: present themselves more modestly to others

individualists present themselves as unique

collectivists present themselves as equal to the group