Lecture 4 (Week 5) - Self and Motivation

Independent self qualities

Exist by themselves;
Stable across situations;
Abstract (encapsulating different manifestations of the self across situations)

E.g.,
Pure traits (kind, friendly);
Autonomous preferences (liking books, wanting to become doctor, taking the bus);
Immediate situation (tired, hungry);
Name;
Physical descriptions (age factual, physical, cute, short)
Evaluative descriptions of self (good at math);
Existential description (myself)

[PAINPEE]

Interdependent self qualities

Framework of relations;
Roles that imply responsibilities and appropriate behaviors;
Characteristics = context-dependent behaviors

E.g.,
Qualified traits (sometimes when at home, I am...);
Universal global descriptions (human being, earthling)
Social identities (role status, family info, ethnicity, race, nationality, gender, self-ascribed identities, origin, religion, occupation);
Social descriptions (good listener, having many friends);
Peripheral info on one's context;

[QUSSP]

Study: "Who am I" (methodology)

Participants asked to fill out statements about "who they are"

E.g., "I am creative; good at psychology; myself; tall, 25 years old; a younger sister; a member of my community; sometimes really smart; a good listener

Study: "Who am I" (results)

American and Nairobi undergrads: far more likely to mention personal characteristics (Americans: 7% roles & memberships, 50% personal traits)

Workers in Nairobi, Masai, and Samburu: far more likely to mention roles and memberships (Masai and Samburu: 60-70% roles & memberships, 2% personal traits)

Study: "Who am I" (explanation of findings)

Substantial differences both between and within countries (subcultures): Nairobi workers and undergrads differ from Masai and Samburu

Possible explanations: urbanization (living in the country's capital); Westernization (TV, media); lifestyle (not living within an extended family); education (formal schooling)

*Masai = semi-nomadic warrior tribe;
**Samburu = semi-nomadic pastoral tribe

Independent view of self

Identity comes from inner attributes that reflect a unique essence of individual and that remain stable across situations and across lifespan

(self = stable)

1. Self experienced as distinct from others (circle of individual doesn't overlap with others);
2. Self-defining aspects = within individual (large X = core, attitudes, traits, abilities);
3. Self = bounded and stable (circle around self = solid);
4. Ingroup boundaries = relatively permeable (still feel closer to ingroup but do not view outgroup as fundamentally distinct)
--> new relationships formed and old relationships dissolved (without having a large impact on person)

Interdependent view of self

Individuals not as separate and distinct entities but as participants in a larger social unit (relational entity), where identity is contingent upon key relationship with ingroup members

(self = fluid)

1. self connected to others (overlaps with an individual's relationships) --> interdependent individuals' identities = closely connected with others e.g., "older brother";
2. key aspects of identity (self) = grounded in relationships. Roles govern how you feel, behave e.g., "good listener when w/ brother, but task-oriented at work";
3. fluid identity, situation-relevant, unstable;
4. solid ingroup-outgroup distinction (people may behave very differently towards outgroup members)
--> obligations to others = important for ingroup relations

Self-concept in the brain (methodology)

Participants:
1) English-speaking expats in China
2) Chinese-natives

Instruction: Consider how well certain traits characterized themselves or their mothers

fMRI scanner

Self-concept in the brain (Chinese-native results)

Same pattern of brain activation when thinking about themselves and their mothers (MPFC)

Chinese self-representations for themselves and their mothers = not that distinct and both reflect self-concept. Significant others form a core part of self-concept for those w/ interdependent selves

*Medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) linked to self-representations

Self-concept in the brain (Western participant results)

Different brain regions activated --> represent themselves and their mothers in distinct ways (independent self)

More activation in MPFC when thinking about themselves than about their mothers

Individualistic culture self-concept cycle

Individualistic culture --> Cultural practices stress self-sufficiency (e.g., sleeping by yourself) --> Independent self-concept

(cycle repeats)

E.g., elderly saving up for retirement homes, children having own bedrooms, students paying their own tuition fees

Collectivistic culture self-concept cycle

Collectivistic culture --> Cultural practices stress connectedness (e.g., co-sleeping) --> Interdependent self-concept

(cycle repeats)

E.g., children co-sleeping with parents, family having influence over partner selection, etc.

Example of a distal cause of culture (constraints/affordances of physical environment)

Agriculture

Rice cultivation = requires much coordination and cooperation w/ others (rice-growing regions in China: higher prevalence of interdependent thinking and holistic reasoning)

Wheat cultivation = less reliance on others (wheat-growing regions: higher prevalence of independent thinking and analytic reasoning)

(distal cause = initial differences that lead to effects over long periods of time and often through indirect relations)

Constraints/affordances of social environment

Correlation between individualism and education/social class within same country

Example of a proximal cause of culture (constraints/affordances of social environment)

Exposure to higher education = more independent

(proximate cause = direct and immediate relation with its effect)

Boston culture cycle (historically derived ideas/practices)

Settled by Puritans searching for religious freedom --> colonial resistance;

History ("old and established"), tradition, status, hierarchy, community-focused, tight social norms

Boston culture cycle (norms, practices, products)

Norms for behavior = tight;

Newspaper headlines reference community;

Firm websites reference social entities, top-down control, status;

Hospital websites reference hospital status and establishment

Boston culture cycle (psychological tendencies)

More contingent self-evaluation;

More contingent self-worth;

Feeling good tied to relief from contingency

(feelings and selves = socially contingent)

San Francisco culture cycle (historically derived ideas and practices)

Settled by pioneers and fortune seekers;

Unlimited possibility, rejecting tradition ("new and free"), egalitarianism, innovation, individual-focused, loose social norms

San Francisco culture cycle (norms, practices, products)

Norms for behavior = loose;

Newspaper headlines reference individuals, creativity, newness;

Firm websites reference individuals, working as equals, uniqueness;

Hospital websites reference individual empowerment, alternative medicine, new approaches

San Francisco culture cycle (psychological tendencies)

Less contingent self-evaluation;

Less contingent self-worth;

Feeling good tied to own positive experience

(feelings and selves less contingent on others)

Main takeaway from Boston vs. San Francisco study

Self and well-being are, in some part, local

Entity theory of self (independent self-concept) (implicit theories of self)

Aspects of self = resistant to change across one's life because they are innate (natural, stable)

Fixed mindset: Effort = 35%, Ability = 65% "I can't do it"

Incremental theory of self (interdependent self-concept) (implicit theories of self)

Aspects of self = malleable and can be improved because they depend on one's efforts (fluid)

Growth mindset: Effort = 65%, Ability = 35% 'I can't do it, YET!"

Study: Effects of mindset on performance (results) (implicit theories of self)

Children praised for their intelligence after solving easier puzzle (e.g., "you must be really good at these") --> more likely to go back to easier puzzle

(if these children suffered w/ the harder puzzle, they assumed they weren't smart enough e.g., "I'm not good enough")

Children praised for their effort after solving easier puzzle (e.g., "you tried really hard and it paid off") --> more likely to persevere w/ harder puzzle

Consequences of self-concept

Psychological processes: Emotion, motivation, thinking style

Implicit theories (naïve beliefs and interpretations): Self, self-consistency, self-awareness

Implications of implicit theories of self

Related to effort (is studying believed to make one more intelligent?);

Related to reaction to & attribution of success vs. failure (attribution to inner ability and acceptance of failure vs. attribution to own efforts and strategies & react w/ extra training in face of failure)

Study: Studying hard Chinese vs. North-Americans (results) (implicit theories of self)

Is "studying hard" important for success in math?

60% of Chinese said Yes --> intelligence depends on effort; admission into university based on knowledge (ability to learn large amounts of info)

25% of North-Americans said Yes --> intelligence is inborn; admission into university based on general IQ tests

Study: Who is sitting next to student when filling out twenty-statement test? (methodology) (implicit theories of self)

Looked at descriptions they gave and checked how positive these descriptions were

But the context changed (e.g., authority, peer, group, alone)

Study: Who is sitting next to student when filling out twenty-statement test? (results) (implicit theories of self)

USA: higher positive self-views and stable view of self across situations

Japan: lower positive self-views and variance between situations (e.g., most positive when alone) (but stable within situations)

Study: Who is sitting next to student when filling out twenty-statement test? (explanation of findings) (implicit theories of self)

Japanese results may be related to incremental theory of self: if you're self-critical about the areas in which you're not doing so well, then you can try to improve them

Why is consistency important to people with independent self-views? (self-consistency)

In USA, (internal) consistency = likeability, well-being, and social skills

But not in Korea, where interdependent self-views are more common

What is cognitive dissonance? (self-consistency)

Discomfort a person feels when their behavior does not align with their values or beliefs

(can also occur when a person holds two contradictory beliefs at same time)

How it happens: powerful motivation to be consistent --> distress feeling when we observe ourselves behaving inconsistently, or against our own sense of self-consistency --> the need to rid ourselves of this feeling by acting more consistently

Another strategy = change our attitudes so we no longer appear to be so inconsistent (dissonance reduction)

Example of cognitive dissonance (self-consistency)

Choosing between different models of cars
--> best choice not always clear
--> after decision has been made, dissonance may follow (features of alternatives that are inconsistent with that choice)
--> rationalize to reduce unpleasant feelings by viewing elements that are consistent with making a good decision (i.e., positive features of their choice and negative features of their rejected alternative) as more important. Elements that are inconsistent with their decision viewed as less important

Cognitive dissonance experiment #1 (results) (self-consistency)

European Canadians: post-decision spread (rationalization of choice) for CD they chose

Japanese: no such tendency

Study: Cognitive dissonance experiment #1 (explanation of findings) (self-consistency)

Canadian students: Inconsistency is unpleasant for the independent self -- If you think of yourself as stable and consistent, but you act in a way that is not consistent w/ your beliefs --> you must fix it

Japanese students: not as unpleasant as they can be more flexible in how they think about themselves

Study: Cognitive dissonance experiment #2 (results) (self-consistency)

When ordering food for themselves vs. for others...

European-Canadians: show justification of their choices for themselves

Japanese: show justification of their choices for others (raise extent to which they think their friends like the dish)

(Cognitive dissonance still occurs: consistency matters for a different aspect of self e.g., self- vs. peer-consistency)

What is subjective self-awareness? (self-awareness)

Self as an Acting Agent (attention directed outwards, self not consciously aware) --> more 1st-person memory, high self-esteem, not very accurate in predicting own behavior

"I": attention outwards ("I'm standing here and seeing you")

(We are the source of all our perceptions and behaviors. The world revolves around us based on our observations and experience)

What is objective self-awareness? (self-awareness)

Self as an Observed Object (consider how you appear to others, evaluation apprehension) --> more 3rd-person memory, more self-critical, accurate in predicting own behavior

"me": attention inwards ("I'm seeing myself standing down there and the audience)

(A reflective state with attention focused on ourselves for social evaluation. This awareness leads us to judge our own behavior against our personal standards, as we use social evaluation to achieve correctness and consistency in our beliefs and actions)

Effect of self-enhancing stimuli on self-awareness (methodology) (self-awareness)

Enhancing stimuli (mirror, video camera) to see how judgments of discrepancy between ideal and actual self change

Effect of self-enhancing stimuli on self-awareness (American results) (self-awareness)

"I" modus participant --> seeing yourself in a mirror forces a switch to "me"

Switch from "I" to "me" modus when seeing yourself in a mirror: more critical evaluation of self (increases gap between ideal and actual self)

Effect on US samples: e.g., cheat less, more self-critical, self-evaluation less positive/more similar to Japanese)

Effect of self-enhancing stimuli on self-awareness (Japanese results) (self-awareness)

Seeing self in mirror has little effect on Japanese

Japanese chronically in "me-modus"

Higher chronic self-awareness in Japan than USA

What is personality?

What distinguishes one individual from the other;

Differences in characteristic thoughts, feelings, behavior when situational variables are held constant

Assumption of researching personality

Only need 5 uncorrelated dimensions to adequately describe personality (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism)

(these are the most basic building blocks of personality)

Openness

Wide range of interests, eagerness to experience new situations, experiencing unfamiliar without anxiety/with pleasure

Conscientiousness

Control and inhibition of behavior, task-orientation

Extraversion

Seeking new contacts with energy, confidence, enthusiasm, tendency to experience things positively

Agreeableness

Kindness, empathy vs. cynicism, hospitality

Neuroticism

Emotional instability, proneness to experience fear/shame/anger

How was the Big 5 questionnaire constructed?

Many trait words out there (e.g., shy, quiet, introvert) but lots of overlap

Allport & Odpert = identified 18,000 traits

Costa & McCrae = factor-analysis and proposed that all traits can be reduced to 5 factors

Criticism of the Big 5 personality model

Missed factors due to taking a Western perspective in creating the inventory

Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI)

Dependability (responsibility, optimism, trustworthiness);

Interpersonal relatedness (harmony, relational orientation, tradition);

Social potency (leadership, adventurousness, extraversion);

Individualism (defensiveness, self-orientation)

[DISI]

How was the CPAI constructed?

Made list of personality traits based on analysis of cultural messages (novels, proverbs, etc.) --> put into questionnaire --> fill in by Chinese --> factor analysis

Results of CPAI

No overlap for Big 5 Openness & CPAI Interpersonal Relatedness. BUT Costa & McCrae found them in China --> Not as important in China? Differences in accessibility? Method bias?

Interpersonal relatedness = replicated w/ Singaporeans & Hawaiians

(openness to experience = factor that emerges with least consistency)

Main issues of personality tests (equivalence and bias)

Construct equivalence - Is personality conceptualized in the same way?
(e.g., how can we talk about a stable personality when people with an interdependent self-view experience self as fluid?)

Reference-group effect - People tend to compare themselves to local terms (e.g., "I am very punctual" has a different meaning in Italy vs. the UK)

Solution to personality test issues

Behavioral measures and objective observations (e.g., efficiency of postal workers and accuracy of public clocks)

(more objective measures = do not correlate well w/ self-reports on conscientiousness)

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

Biological needs - survival (self-preservation)
(e.g., physiological; safety)

Social needs - establishing and maintaining relationships
love and belonging (connectedness motivation);
self-esteem (self-enhancement motivation);
self-actualization (mastery motivation)

Love and belonging need (connectedness motivation)

The motivation to connect and belong / need to maintain significant relationships

BUT how those relations are structured differs

("Motivation to fit in/to belong vs. motivation to stick out/to be unique")

Self-esteem need (self-enhancement motivation)

The need to feel valued and respected

The motivation to view oneself positively. BUT there may be other ways to feel valued

Self-actualization need

The need to achieve our full potential. BUT what is actualized in the self and how people "master" their environment may differ across cultures

How is independent self shown in connectedness motivation?

Acting as individual agents, distinct from others;

Wanting to stick out & secure their uniqueness

E.g., renewing your vows after years of marriage ("I still choose you")

How is interdependent self shown in connectedness motivation?

Acting as relational agents, consistently with others;

Wanting to fit in & secure group belonging

E.g., relationships based on assurance and persistence (obligation to remain because of roles)

Study: Which color pen do you prefer? (methodology) (connectedness motivation)

Researchers in an airport asked prospective passengers to fill out a questionnaire
--> Pull out a bag of 5 pens (which were either green or red)
--> Participants had to choose between a minority- and a majority-color pen

Study: Which color pen do you prefer? (results) (connectedness motivation)

European Americans = far more likely to pick minority-colored pen (motivation for uniqueness)
East Asians = far more likely to pick majority-colored pen (motivation for fitting in/belongingness)

*Similar patterns (preference for uniqueness vs. belongingness) were also found between middle and working class European Americans

How is independent self shown in self-enhancement motivation?

Self-serving bias;

Compensatory self-enhancement;

External attribution of failure;

Basking in reflected glory;

Downward social comparison;

Discounting negative information

\
\[SCEBDD\]

(High self-esteem)

What is self-serving bias? (Independent self of self-enhancement motivation)

Tendency for people to exaggerate their positive characteristics;

Assumption of self above average -- especially in domains without clear standards;

We attribute positive events and successes to our own character or actions, but blame negative results to external factors unrelated to our character

E.g.,
Americans remember success better than failure experiences (62% vs. 38%)
Japanese about equal (48% vs. 52%)

(success is more memorable for Americans, but not for Japanese)

Downward social comparison (Independent self of self-enhancement motivation)

Creating favorable comparison to shed positive light on own performance

E.g., "he is even worse off than me" vs. Easterners who engage more in upward social comparison (rather painful) especially after failure

Compensatory self-enhancement (Independent self of self-enhancement motivation)

Acknowledge negative self-related information but focus on/exaggerate other domain with more positive outcome

E.g., "I suck at math but I am a good gardener" vs. Easterners do not inflate their self-assessment in other domains; contrariwise, they consider task/domain of failure more important

What is discounting negative information? (Independent self of self-enhancement motivation)

Reducing importance of domain

E.g., "I'm not good at math, but math is also not important in everyday life"

What is external attribution of failure/poor performance? (Independent self of self-enhancement motivation)

Attributing the cause of failure to something outside of one's self

E.g., "I did not get the grant because the committee failed to see how great my proposal was/ "I was discriminated against because I'm a woman"

What is basking in reflected glory of a successful group? (Independent self of self-enhancement motivation)

Emphasizing the link to successful individuals or groups (BIRGing)

E.g., feeling proud of my Greek identity when thinking of the ancient Greek civilization vs. focusing on the recent economic recession

How is interdependent self shown in self-enhancement motivation?

Self-criticism;

Upward social comparison;

Increase significance of domain;

No compensatory self-enhancement;

Internal attribution of failure;

Critical attitude toward one's team

\
\[SUINIC\]

(Modesty)

Relationship between Self-esteem, Independent self-concept, and Individualistic cultural values (self-enhancement)

Positive

% high self-esteem of European-Canadians vs. Japanese (self-enhancement)

European-Canadians: 93%
Japanese: 55%

*Rosenberg self-esteem scale
**High self-esteem (> midpoint of scale)

Where do differences in self-enhancement motivation come from?

Baumeister (1987): Notion of individual selves did not emerge in Western literature until 12th century (when the Christian concept of "Last Judgment" changed from being an issue of salvation of collectives --> salvation of individual souls

Salvation of collectives -->
Salvation of individual souls predestined -->
Individual certainty about one's fate as only available clue --> Higher motivation for self-enhancement

(Distal explanation)

Predetermination/predestination (self-enhancement)

Protestant idea that God had long ago determined who would gain salvation (and who would burn in hell) --> uncertainty about one's fate --> how you live = reflection of whether you have been chosen

(the only way to know is to feel certainty about your fate --> try to feel good about yourself to convince yourself that you're going to heaven)

More proximal effect of difference in self-enhancement motivation

Rise of individualism (also in traditionally collectivist societies): people who are primarily dependent on themselves (e.g., "I am all that I've got in the end") should be more motivated to hold positive view of themselves

What determines your worth in Self- vs. Face-enhancement?

Self-esteem: you assign positive value to yourself (ultimately inalienable)

Face: others grant you positive value if you fulfill role expectations (easily lost). Doesn't apply if by yourself and is instead associated w/ social context

What is self-esteem? (self-enhancement)

Individual evaluates themselves
--> self-esteem = something you must build up by focusing on your strengths
--> promotion orientation (concern over advancing oneself and aspiring for gains)

Inalienable dignity = each person at birth possesses an intrinsic value theoretically equal to that of every other person. Inherent worth not taken away by others

No word for "self-esteem" in Japanese. The expression of "losing face" entered English as direct translation from Chinese only in 19th century

Is there a word for "self-esteem" in Japanese

No

When did the expression of "losing face" enter English (face-enhancement)

As direct translation from Chinese during 19th century

Motivation for self-enhancement

Focus on one's strengths and try to advance them
--> Promotion orientation
--> "Making sure good things happen"

Motivation for self-improvement (face-enhancement)

Seek out potential weaknesses and try to improve on them
--> Prevention orientation
--> "Making sure bad things don't happen"

Study: Persistence after success or failure (methodology) (self- or face-enhancement)

Participants told that they did either very well or poorly on a creativity test (bogus feedback)
--> timed on another set of creativity tests

Q: How long do people persist on these tasks as a result of good/bad feedback?

Study on persistence after success or failure (results) (self- or face-enhancement)

Canadians (promotion-focused): worked harder when they thought they did very well --> more likely to provide them opportunities to view themselves positively

Japanese (prevention-focused): worked harder when they thought they did poorly --> improve themselves and be less likely to fail in future

How to further increase persistence after success/failure on difficult tasks? (self- or face-enhancement)

Emphasize a growth mindset = attribute success to effort rather than talent

What is mastery motivation? (self-actualization)

Capacity of individuals to exert control over environment to achieve desired outcomes

Forms of cultural variation in how people actualize the self and master their environment (mastery motivation)

1. Different models of agency (e.g., how & why people act)
2. Different ideas of how people achieve control

Cultural differences of agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Degree in which agency is explained as a function of individual traits, dispositions, reasons, goals, histories, situational variables and enabling circumstances

E.g., performance (goal achievement) constructed as a function of different people's actions or as a function of focal actor's actions

Japanese athlete example of agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

"Here is the best coach in the world, the best manager in the world, and all of the people who support me -- all of these things were getting together and became a gold medal. So I think I didn't get it alone, not only by myself" (Naoko Takahashi)

American athlete example of agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

"I think I just stayed focused. It was time to show the world what I could do. I am just glad I was able to do it. I knew I could beat Suzy O' Neil, deep down in my heart I believed it, and I know this whole week the doubts kept creeping in, they were with me on the blocks, but I just said, No this is my night" (Misty Hyman)

What are models of agency? (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Implicit theories making meaning about action;

Descriptive and normative understandings of how and why people act

Disjoint agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Actions should be freely chosen, contingent on own preferences, goals, intentions, motives;

Decisions = independent from others;

Choice = free, autonomous choice (expression of individual preferences)

(Individuals as agents)

Conjoint agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Actions = responsive to obligations, expectations from others, roles, situations;

Preferences, goals, intentions = interpersonally anchored;

Choice = freely acting to meet perceived requirement + consideration of others

(Collectives as agents)

What is absence of personal preference and where does it occur? (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

What: Not attaching meaning to preferences

Where: Higher value of interdependent responsibility over personal choice in India. We feel more responsible toward people we like than dislike; Indian stronger moral obligation to help everyone independent of personal preferences

(Indians more likely to help strangers compared to Americans)

Example of disjoint agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Subway sandwich shop: choice is based entirely on personal preferences in every aspect of the sandwich; as little social constraint as possible

(Sandwich maker only executes customer's desires)

Example of conjoint agency (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Japanese bakery: choice takes other's preferences into account; rankings of popular products (display of 4th and 5th most frequently sold item)

(others i.e., baker have expertise on what customers enjoy: "Osusume")

Study: Free choice vs. Usurped choice pen study (methodology) (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Free choice: get to choose and keep the pen you wanted after filling out questionnaire

Usurped choice: cannot have the pen you wanted because it is the last one

Study: Free choice vs. Usurped choice pen study (results) (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Upper-middle class Americans: lower desirability of usurped choice pen

Working-class Americans: higher desirability of usurped choice pen

Study: Free choice vs. usurped choice pen study (explanation of findings) (how do people exert agency) (mastery motivation)

Upper-middle class Americans:
raised to favor choices and to express themselves through their choices. They learn to respond quite negatively when they believe that they do not have any choice in a situation

Working-class Americans:
grow up learning that much of what people encounter in life = beyond their control. A good way to maintain one's independence = emphasize one's integrity and resilience during tough times. Accept and cope with occasions when they don't end up with what they wanted