Self Concepts, Self-Esteem, and Social Self: Core Concepts (3.1–3.3)
3.1 The Cognitive Self: The Self-Concept
Self-concept: cognitive knowledge representation of self; includes beliefs about personality traits, physical characteristics, abilities, values, goals, roles, and the knowledge that we exist as individuals; organized into self-schemas.
Developmental milestones in self-recognition
Chimps show self-recognition in mirror tests (Gallup, 1970) with painted dot; touch dot on own forehead in mirror, not on dot on mirror image.
Humans pass mirror-self recognition; by months, infants recognize themselves (Asendorpf et al., 1996; Povinelli et al., 1996).
Gender awareness by years; by , self-descriptions reflect physical features; by , understanding of basic emotions and traits (Harter, 1998).
Self-schemas: domains of the self (e.g., school progress, appearance, sports) guide processing of self-relevant information; neuroimaging links self-information storage to prefrontal cortex.
Self-concept and memory: self-reference effect; information related to the self is better remembered and processed quickly (Lieberman et al., 2004; Rogers, Kuiper, & Kirker, 1977).
Cultural differences in self-content: three broad categories (physical, personality, social); collectivistic vs. individualistic emphasis; Asian samples show more references to social roles and interdependence; acculturation shifts self-concept components depending on priming (language) and context (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Ip & Bond, 1995; Ross et al., 2002).
Self-complexity and self-concept clarity
Self-complexity: multiple, relatively independent self-aspects; high complexity buffers against negative events; lower complexity leads to greater spillover of domain-specific positive/negative events on overall self-esteem (Linville, 1987; Roccas & Brewer, 2002).
Self-concept clarity: how clearly and consistently one defines the self; higher clarity linked to higher self-esteem and better well-being; cross-cultural differences: more prominent in individualistic cultures; collectivistic cultures show lower clarity and weaker links to self-esteem (Campbell et al., 1996).
Self-awareness and accessibility
Self-awareness varies in accessibility of self-schemas; public self-consciousness rises in observed or judged contexts; mirror exposure, camera, or public speaking increase self-awareness (Duval & Wicklund, 1972).
Deindividuation: reduced self-awareness in groups; can increase antisocial or prosocial behavior depending on norms; SIDE model reframes deindividuation as strengthened group identity and conformity to situational norms (Reicher et al., 1995; Reicher & Stott, 2011).
Private vs. public self-consciousness: private focus on inner beliefs; public focus on external impressions; cultural differences show East Asians higher public self-consciousness in some contexts (Heine et al., 2008).
Self-discrepancy and self-affirmation
Self-discrepancy theory: distress arises from gaps between actual and ideal selves; self-affirmation can reduce threat in some contexts but may increase heuristic processing in threatening situations (Higgins et al., 1987; Philips & Silvia, 2005).
Self-affirmation in online contexts: can bolster self-worth but may also increase selective information processing (e.g., focusing on confirming evidence).
Online self-representation: avatar use in MMOs can reflect ideal selves; avatars rated as closer to ideal than actual selves, especially for low self-esteem individuals (Bessiere et al., 2007).
Looking-glass and labeling in social context
Looking-glass self: our sense of self is shaped by how others view us; self-concept can become aligned with others’ appraisals; labeling (e.g., diagnostic labels) can lead to self-stigma or, in some cases, reclaiming terms (Moses; Galinsky et al., 2013).
Illusion of transparency
People overestimate how much others can read their internal states; others often pay less attention to our inner states than we think (Gilovich et al., 2000).
3.2 The Feeling Self: Self-Esteem
Self-esteem definition: positive or negative evaluation of the self; influenced by performance, appearance, relationships; trait-like but varies as a state (contextual fluctuations).
Measurement of self-esteem
Explicit: Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale; higher scores indicate higher self-esteem (Rosenberg, 1965).
Implicit: Implicit Association Test (IAT) for self-esteem; often reveals positive implicit self-esteem even when explicit measures differ; cross-cultural patterns vary (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000).
Cross-cultural and demographic patterns
Western samples: higher average explicit self-esteem; East Asian samples often lower on explicit self-esteem due to modesty norms; implicit measures sometimes show less consistent cross-cultural differences (Heine et al., 1999).
Gender: women often report slightly lower self-esteem than men; differences are small in more gender-equal societies.
Age: self-esteem tends to dip from childhood into early adolescence, then rises through adulthood and may decline after the sixties (Robins et al., 2002).
Causes and consequences of high self-esteem
Positive correlations: better grades, lower depression, less stress, more initiative, more willingness to defend others; higher self-esteem can promote resilience and activity (Baumeister et al., 2003).
Potential costs: inflated self-esteem can accompany narcissism, conceit, and antisocial behaviors; high self-esteem does not necessarily cause positive outcomes (Baumeister et al., 2003; Campbell et al., 2007).
Self-enhancement and culture: widespread in individualistic cultures; less so in collectivistic contexts; individual differences in tendency to self-enhance exist (Heine, 2004).
Self-verification and self-presentation
Self-verification: people seek feedback that confirms their self-views, especially in close relationships; self-enhancement more common in distant relationships; feedback preferences vary with domain and relationship type (Swann et al., 1994; Swann et al., 2002).
Self-presentation: presenting a positive image to others to gain social approval; can be honest (Goffman) or strategic (Jones & Pittman, 1982); five strategies: ingratiation, intimidation, exemplification, supplication, self-promotion.
Online and cross-context self-presentation
Online behavior often involves self-presentation tactics; narcissism links to exhibitionistic use of social platforms (Facebook, blogging, Twitter); language and content reflect self-presentation concerns (Mehdizadeh, 2010; Bazarova et al., 2013).
Self-monitoring and audience effects
Self-monitoring: tendency to regulate behavior to fit social contexts; high self-monitors adjust behavior to different audiences; low self-monitors rely on internal standards.
Experimental evidence: high self-monitors mimic others’ behavior more when status cues suggest a higher-status partner; implications for self-esteem depending on alignment with social demands (Cheng & Chartrand, 2003; Ickes et al., 2006).
3.3 The Social Self: The Role of the Social Situation
Looking-glass self and labeling in social context
The social environment provides a social reality; repeated labeling and feedback can become internalized self-conceptions; self-labeling can reflect and reinforce group identities or stigmas (Fox & Stinnett, 1996; Taylor et al., 2010).
Social Comparison Theory
We learn about abilities, opinions, and status by comparing with others; meaningful comparisons occur with similar others; upward comparisons can lower self-esteem, downward comparisons can raise it; social comparison orientation moderates affect after comparisons; Facebook studies show upward comparisons linked to rumination and depressive symptoms (Feinstein et al., 2013).
Downward vs. upward comparisons as coping strategies across ages and cultures; older adults tend to use more downward comparisons, supporting higher self-esteem (Helgeson & Mickelson, 2000).
Social Identity Theory and Bask in Reflected Glory
Self-esteem partially derived from group memberships; basking in the reflected glory of ingroups boosts self-esteem; strength and accessibility of group identities vary by situation (Deaux et al., 1995).
Varieties of social identities include ethnicity, religion, occupation, hobbies, relationships, and stigma categories (Table 3.1).
Self-evaluation maintenance (Tesser, 1988)
When a close other outperforms us in a domain central to our self-view, we feel threatened; common responses: distancing, revaluing the trait’s importance, or improving ability.
Self-presentation strategies and audience effects
Five strategies (Jones & Pittman, 1982): ingratiation, intimidation, exemplification, supplication, self-promotion.
Self-presentation across contexts: appearance, possessions, status, and dominance can affect perceived competence; overuse can backfire (e.g., being seen as arrogant or disingenuous).
Online self-presentation and reputation management
Online behavior (Facebook, blogging, micro-blogs) often reflects self-presentational goals; reputation management becomes long-term self-presentation, shaping actions across audiences (Emler et al., 1995; Mehdizadeh, 2010; Wang & Stefanone, 2013).
Gender and cultural differences in self-presentation
Men: more likely to present assertively; women: more modest, use humor and sociability; cultural norms influence self-presentation and career outcomes (glass ceiling effects) (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
Self-presentation in job interviews and cross-cultural contexts
Cross-cultural differences in impression management; some cultures use less self-presentation in interviews (Iceland/Switzerland) while others (Ghana, Turkey) show higher levels (Konig et al., 2011; Bye et al., 2011).
Reputation management and audience segmentation
People present different reputations to different audiences; adolescents may tailor selves to friends vs. parents; online platforms create spaces to manage multiple reputations (Emler & Reicher, 1995; Wiederhold, 2012).
Summary takeaways
The self is shaped by cognitive schemas, affect, and social context; self-concept and self-esteem are dynamic, culturally influenced, and highly dependent on audiences and social comparisons; self-presentation and self-monitoring are key mechanisms by which we maintain or adjust our self-image in daily life.
Title
Brief notes on the Cognitive, Feeling, and Social Self (Sections 3.1–3.3)