psych - the self concept (ERROR)

missed first 20 min of oct 21 ( first 7 slides lec 13)

initial sense of self  infants

• they do not have a sense of self

• they have no separation from their parents

infants develop a sense of them self when they have…

• the ability to make things happen (drop their toy )

• the ability to think about themsleves

  • (using i, mine, e.t.c )

  • possesivenes 

  • visual perspective taking (my mom cant see what i see, cause she is behind me)

  • measured through tests of self-recognition

• WHEN:

  • happends during preschool age

  • when their brain begins to create autobiographical memories of themselves 

self-recognition test ( mirror )

• babies around 18-24 months dont make a connection between themsleves and the thing in the mirror . dont have a sense of self.

• they put a red dot on their forehead without telling them. if they recognise that it’s themselves in the mirror they will point out the dot.

self-recognition test (shopping cart )

they try to push the cart to their mother but they dont understand that its their feet standing on a carpet that is preventing it

if they are older thna 18-24 months they will realize that their body is stopping the cart from moving

con: its kind of seems more like problem solving than self-awareness

self-concept

a collection of beleifs about your own nature, qualties and typical behavior 

impart influenced by your relationship with others. is rrelational. 

includes both positive and negative aspects of your self 

self-concept includes: 

personality traits 

abilities 

physical features 

values, goals social roles 

possible selves 

self-schemas 

beleifs about the self

possible selves

WHAT:

ones idea about how you may look like in the future

or how you might not like to look in the future

IMPACT:

having possible selves makes people set goals, and motivates changes in behavior

ex: not a prisoner, a lawyer so i need to go to law school

self concept - DOES IT change ?

relatively consistant but they can change

during major life moments it can change and lead to 

uncertainty of self

uncertainty of self can motivate and lead to productive behavior changes 

self-deception theory

WHO: Higgins

WHAT: There are 3 types of selves

• actual self

• ideal self

• ought self

IMPLICATIONS: 

• if: people live up to their ideal and ought selve then they have self-esteem .

• else: self discrepancy 

• conclusion: ideal and ought set standards for behavior 

actual self

qualities you beleive you actually posess

(ex: i have a moderate income and prodcutivity )

ideal self

qualities you would like to possess 

(ex: i would like to be a rich person… )

ought self 

not how you want to be, but how you think you should be 

based on morals, and social expectations 

ex:(i should be nice)

self-discrepancy

it is mismatch between _ & _ self-perceptions

two types plus their consequences :

1. actual self & ideal self → sadness, disappointment and in sever cases depression

2. actual self & ought self → anxiety, irritiablity, guilt and in sever cases anxiety-related disorders

everyone experiences this but some peeps have bad strategies to fix this  

degree of maladjustment to self discrepancy depends on …

• awareness of discrepancy 

• amount of discrepancy 

• whether the discrepancy is important 

coping with self-discrepancy

• alter your ideal self or ought self

• change behavior so you actual self becomes i/o self

self-reference effect

• we’re good at retaining information that is important/related to the self

social comparison theory

• we compare oursleves to create accurate benchmarks, improve skills/opinions, and maintain self-image

• HOW:

  • comparing ourselves through our reference groups (this can include strangers ) 

  • upward social comparisons (to motivate you)

  • downward social comparisons (coping mechanism)

people’s self-observations are usually...

• a distortion of reality in a positive direction

• ex: (high school seniors all thought they scored above average on a standardize test)

feedback from others vs self-concept

• can impact self-concept

• kids are most effected by parents

• adults are most effected by their intimate partners (they can make them move towards their ideal self, not changing themselves per say)

cultural values vs self concept 

• two main spectrums of culture that effect self-concept:

• individualism and collectivism 

• these are not black/white terms. they are spectrums.

individualism

focus on individual, 

put yourself first

defien yourself based on personal attributes rather than group membership

ex: a child will say I am kind . i have two sisters .

collectivism

focus on relationship and harmony with others 

focus on group goals 

define yourself by your relationships 

ex: a child will say people think i am kind, i am the sister to ike and ife. 

self-esteem

overall assesmment of one’s worth as a person has 4 factors

• social self image (relationships, friends, do you have them? )

• emotional self image ( grumpy, worthy of live )

• acadmeic self-image(smart, doing well)

• physical self-image (your smile, weight, e.t.c )

the development of self-esteem vs. parents

• parent’s play an important role in that

• two dimensions of parenting are important:

  • parrental acceptance (emotional support )

  • parental control (rules, limits )

• these lead to four types of parenting (ANAP)

• authoritative parent is the best type of parenting ACROSS MOST ethnic groups 

authoritarian

low emotional support/acceptance

and high in parental control

authoritarian → “AN“ awful parent

authoritiarive 

high acceptance/emotional support 

high control 

neglectful

low acceptance/emotional support 

low control

permissive

high acceptance/emotional support 

low control

higher self-esteem is assocaited with

better relationshios

greater psuccess

health (mental and physical)

happiness

persistance/resilience

low self-esteem is associat with

not negativity.

confused about themselves.

have contradictory opinions on self .

sucsceptible to fluctuations on slef 

depression and acting out 

rosenber self-esteem scale

leichter scale to score yoru self-esteem

higher score →  higher self-esteem 

reverse scoring is needed for rosenberg self-esteem (ex: for negative connations change from +4 to -4 )

low self esteem vs performance

It is a vicious cycle:

1. low self esteem

2. negative expectations

3. low effort high anxiet

4. failure

5. self-blame

6. lowe self esteem

7. back to 1 again and repeat. 

ethnicity and gender vs low self sesteem

slide 12, search up: ethnicity and gender impact..

the cocktail party effect

ability to focus on releveant infomration amongst chatter

ex: if someone yells your name in a party, your brain brings it to your attention. while your convo partner might not have even noticed .

automatic processing

(mindless)

information processing that happens with little thought (ex: morning routine )

WHO: HEIDER

WHAT: A TWO-GRID inferences people make about the causes of their own behaivor 

TWO AXES: 

internal attributions VS external attribution: BLAME yourself vs blame others

stable vs unstable cause: consistent attribute or circumstance-based  attribute Ex: mood vs intelligence 

effort, mood, and fatigue are examples of what type of cause (heider)

internal and unstable cause

ability, and itenlligence are examples of what type of cause (heider)

internal and stable cause

luck, situation, opportunity are examples of what type of cause (heider)

external and unstable cause

laws, and rules are examples of what type of cause (heider)

external and stable causes 

explanatory style

the tendency to use simil

self-assessment:

desire for truthful information about yourself 

impact bias (+study )

WHAT: people overestimate the intensity and duration of their emotional
responses to events

STUDY:

• college students

• ask how happy they thought they would be they be in a 1y time after being told thry would have sucky dorm rooms

• those with desirable dorm rooms 6

• those with understable rooms said they would have 3.5 happiness

• in a year’s time they were equally as happy

self-serving bias

• blame failure on situation and success on personal attributes

basking in reflected glory

• tendency to publicly  announce association with a succseful person to

• (birging) 

cutting off reflected failure

• distance yourself from other inidividuals that are unsuccesful ( to protect your self esteem )

• OR distancing yourself from your unsuccesful group (ex: sportsfans when their team loses )

• (corfing)

self-regulation

• proces of directing and contorlling one’s behavior to acheive a goal

delayed gratification

• the ability to wait to get somethign desirable

the marshmellow test

• biggest predicotr of success: delayed gratification

• most kids can not wait 15  minutes to get a second  marshmellow

• 1/3 were able to wait 

• 2/3 had a higher rate of diffuclty in later life

  • in school,

  • in SAT

  • in keeping friendships,

  • in being happy

  • in being successful ( money and status )

  • in obeying rules

• 1/3 were found to have a higher rate of success later on in life 

missed first 20 minuts of oct 21

whooops

how to teach delayed gratifications to kids 

dont give into tantrums 

encourage delayed gratifications ( you have to save up for this toy ) 

what could impact the marshmellow test ?

• age

• hunger

• degree of liking marshmellows

• sleep

• the demeanor of the researcher, tone in telling kids to wait

ego-delpetion model of self-regulation

suggests that people have a limited amount of self-control resources

self-control can be “used up“ by another task

taste perception (self-control study )

WHO : BAUMESITER 

WHAT: 

• peopl who had to withhold form eating chocolate, had no self-control left to persist at a difficult puzzle 

• people who got chocolate, and couldnt eat radish (did not feel depleted it was an easy self-control task)they did just as good as the people who were not given the option for food 

• ( radish group tried for 50% less time than others ) 

self-efficacy

• is a person’s beleif in their ability to complete their goals

• Has been positively associated with
  commitment/persistence toward goals (even in the face of
  obstacles), various aspects of health, academic/job
  performance, and psychological adjustme

4 aspects in developing self-efficiacy

• trying to show that we can develop self-efficacy

• mastery experiences

  • when someone learns new skills

  • persisiting through difficulty/failure till u acheive succes

  • MOST EFFECTIVE STRATEGY

• vicarious experience

  • watching experts in your desired field

  • inspire you 

• intpereation of emotional arousal 

  • stress-is-enhancing vs stress-is-debilitating mindsert

  • your reaction to ANS

• persuasion and encouragement 

  • encouragement from others

• created by BANDURA

self-defeating behaviors  ( + 3 categories ) 

seemingly intentional actions that are self-sabotaging

3 categories :

deliberate self-destruction: attempt to harm yourself, typically occurs with people with mental disorders (ex: suicide )

tradeoffs: short term benefits for long term costs ( procastination ) 

counterproductive strategies: using an approached that is bound to fail (ex: exterme deiting ) 

public self

• an image presented to others in social interactions 

• can be automatic or deliberate

• people who see themselves as consistent in other social roles, are happier 

• IT’S NORMAL

impression management

WHAT:

• refers to usually conscious efforts to manage people’s percception of you 

TWO POSSIBLE GOALS:

• attain a particular identiyr

• desired actions from others

there are 4 strategies → (ISNS)

self-monitoring

refers to the degree to which people attend and control the impressions they make on others

high self moinotrs 

more concerned about their social impressions  

talented at self-presentation

adaptable

well-liked 

low self-monitors

express their true selves

dont care about what others think

spontaneous

person perception (5 factors ) 

the process of forming impressions of others

5 factors we rely on to do this:

• appearance (physical characteristics)

• verbal behavior 

• action (ex: volunteering, jogging )

• nonverbal messages (ex: shrugging, body language)

• situational cues (ex: crying in wedding vs funeral ) 

does bad impressions leave a longer impression than good ones ?

TRUE.

snap judgement

little information

use our pre-conceived bias

innacurate

works for trivial stuff

systematic judgements 

• for important for relationships that effect our happiness 

• observing a person in various situations with you and with others and making comparisons ( to ppeps you admire prbably ) 

• takes longer

• is more systematic lol

perceiver expectations

our expectations of others can influence our actual perception of them (self-fuffling prophecy )

confirmation bias

• tendency to focus on/find information that confirms your beleifs

• ex: (dresses suck, look that girl looks uncomfy )

study on the memory of a women’s action 

WHAT

• half were told she was a waitress

• half was told she was a librarian 

• better remembered the actions she did that were consistent with the steroetype they were given 

• (ex: class)

WHO

• Cohen

self-fulffiling prophecy

expectations about others, causes you to treat them in a way that causes them to meet your exepctations

ex: (people’s expectations about aging effects their behavior, if you think poor health is unevitable with aging they will engage with fewer healthire behaviors )

best study for the self-fuffiling prophecy effect

teachers expectations effects students academic performance

weak in general but stronger for stigmatized groups ( disable/minority )

3 steps of self-fufillig prophecy 

• perceiver has an initial perception of a person 

• perceiver behaves towards a person according to their impression 

• person adjusts behavior asa result of the perceiver’s actions 

ex: you r smart, you give them more hw, they become smarter

cognitive distortions

we categorize things and people into groups because it is faster

AND 

overestimate inter-group diff and underestimate intra-group diff

common perspectives on out-group members 

people have less favouralbe impressions to out-group members

outgroup is seen as more homogenous than ingroup

outgroup look more alike physically (ex: racial outgroups are hard to distinguish )

ingroup vs outgroup

ingroup == us

outgroup == them

outgroup homogeneity effect

regard outgroup members as being much more similar regarding behaviour
than they are (ex: skinny people are healthy)

two ways to form an impression of others

snap judgements and systematic judgements

ingratiation ( impression management strategy)

behaving in away that makes you likeable ( ex: compliments )

self-promotion (impression mt. strategies)

playing up your strong points to make you seem competent (ex: job interview)

negative acknowledgemnt (impression mt. strategies)

confessing a negative aspect of youself makes meope like you more (ex: tell me about your weakness )

supplication (impression mt. strategies)

try and present yourself as weak and dependent to get favor from others (ex: crying,groveling)

methods of self-enhancement

birging and corfing

Fundamental attribution error

general tendency to
overemphasize personal factors and underestimate situational
factors when attempting to explain poor behaviour in others

Focalism

tendency to overestimate how much one
will think about an event in the future and
underestimate the influence of other events on
thoughts and emotions

??? i dont get this ???

EX: dorm room vs happiness