The Nature + Origins of the Social Self

Behaviour function (1) + notes (2)

B = f(P,E) → behaviour is a function of a person in their environment

• The relative weight of importance of person and environment depends on the situation

• Note that the split is not 50/50 but rather 100/100, because if you took away one variable you would no longer have the function (variables inseparable)

The nature of social cognition (2)

• How individuals perceive, interpret, and think about themselves and others in a social context

• Is inherently biased

Ways of gathering information about the self (3)

• Introspection

• Via others’ perceptions

• Social comparison

Notes on introspection (2)

• Relies on accessing stored knowledge about the self, generally in the form of self-schemas

• Vulnerable to positivity bias

Self schema def (2), correlates (1) + effects (4)

• Cognitive structures, derived from past experience, that helps them organise and interpret information about themselves.

• A person’s feelings + beliefs about themself

• Is correlated with behaviour

• Effects:

  • We are more attuned to information that fits with an existing schema

  • Able to recall schema-congruent behaviour more readily

  • Reject info that contradicts schema

  • More attuned to schematic traits (for us) in other people

Model of knowing the self through others’ perceptions (1→3) + potential biases (3)

• “Looking glass self” (Cooley, 1902)

1. You imagine how you appear to others (based on reactions + appraisals from them)

2. You imagine how their judgements of you (reflected self-appraisal)

3. You imagine how they respond

• Each step is open to bias, thus may not be very accurate means of self-knowledge

  • People misrepresent

  • People disagree

  • We discount info we don’t like

Social comparison theory

The theory that people compare themselves to other to obtain an accurate assessment of their own opinions, abilities + internal states

Knowing the self through social comparison (2→2) + industry used in (1)

• Used when no objective measure to evaluate own traits

• Upward comparisons reduce self-esteem (tend to do this when we focus on improving ourself)

• Downward comparisons improve self-esteem (tend to compare ourselves with those who are slightly inferior to us) → self-enhancement)

• Upward → used in aspirational advertising

Facebook study + social comparison (2)

• Passive Facebook use → increases feelings of envy (upward comparison) → decreased wellbeing

• Active Facebook use → increased wellbeing

Accuracy: how well you know yourself vs how well others know you (1→2)

Certain aspects of the self are uniquely known by the self whilst others are uniquely known by others

• Individuals knew their internal traits (direct access to inner states) + daily behaviour better

• Others knew their external traits (through observation) + life outcomes better

Control-system model of identity processes (9)

• Social situation

  → Triggers reflected appraisals/other’s perceptions

• Input

  → Triggers self perceptions

• Comparator: compares input w/ identity standard

  → Change behaviour to align w/ identity standard, change identity standard, or change perception

• Output

  → Effects on environment

• Influences social situation (loop)

Situationism

The notion that the social-self changes across different contexts

Working self-concept

• A subset of self-knowledge that is brought to mind in a particular context (shapes situationism)

Reconciling the contradicting notions of malleability + stability in the self (2)

• We tend to have core beliefs about oneself that are consistent across situations (e.g. being a good listener, whether this makes us shy or outgoing)

• Although the self may be malleable in different social contexts, this usually occurs in a predictable way and is consistent within similar types of social situations (e.g. always shy in class and always outgoing with friends)

Independent vs interdependent self-construal: cultures associated, def, what they promote + important note

• Western cultures, men + middle/high income earners favour independent: the self as “an autonomous entity that is distinct from others”

  • Promotes inward focus on the self + focus on uniqueness

• Eastern cultures, women + low income households favour interdependent: the self as “embedded within social relationships, roles + duties”

  • Promotes outward focus on social situation

• Note: the two are not mutually exclusive (likely do a bit of each to varying degrees)

Note on gender disparity in self-construal (1)

• Likely that socialisation processes (how children raise boys vs girls, types of games played as child [cooperative vs competitive], + traditional gender roles [i.e. raising children → interdependent]), enhance existing biological tendencies for females to be more nurturing + males to be more competitive/aggressive

Social identities def (1)

The parts of a persons’ sense of self that are derived from group membership

How social identities influence a person’s sense of self (1→1)

• Self stereotyping: people come to define themselves in terms of traits, norms + values of a social group they are part of (and of which their membership is a salient part of their identity)

Origins of the social self (4)

• Socialisation processes (family, peer groups etc.)

• Situations/contexts

• Cultural background (especially independent vs interdependent self-construals)

• Social comparison