MISS PROF ONLY

The self How we come to understand ourselves The Nature of the Self  The me, the “known”  The self-concept the content of the self; that is, our knowledge about who we are (thoughts and beliefs)  The I, the “knower”  Self-awareness thinking about ourselves. It makes you more sensitive to your own attitudes and dispositions. The Self-Concept  Self-complexity is the number of different self -schemas and possible selves that a person has  “Who am I?”  Physical descriptors  Social descriptors  Psychological descriptors The Self-Concept The Self-Concept  Self-complexity  Self -esteem is a person's global or overall evaluation of his or her own self -worth.  The more complex our self -concept, the less any one failure seems to affect our self -esteem. The Functions of the Self  Organizational Function  Self-schemas  Self- reference effect (Markus, 1977)  Executive Function  regulate behavior  make decisions  plan for future  Self-regulatory resource model Cultural Definitions of Self  Independent view  defining oneself in terms of one’s own internal thoughts, feelings, and actions.  Individualistic cultures  Interdependent view  defining oneself in terms of one’s relationships to other people, recognizing that one’s behavior is determined by the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others.  Collectivistic cultures Gender Differences in the Definition of Self  Tendencies, not absolutes  Women  Relational interdependence  Ex: Significant others, Children, Siblings  Men  Collective interdependence  Ex: Italian, a Yankees fan Knowing Ourselves  Introspection: the process whereby people look inward and examine their own thoughts, feelings, and motives. Knowing Ourselves  Introspection  How often are people “introspective?”  Self = 8% of total thoughts Csikszentmihalyi & Figurski (1982) Knowing Ourselves  Introspection  Strangers to Ourselves: Everyday Introspection (Wilson, 2004)  Gut feelings without analysis  Pros/Cons lists (analyzing reasons)  It is difficult to know exactly why we feel a certain way Self-Awareness Theory  The idea that when people focus attention on themselves, they evaluate and compare their behavior to their internal standards and values.  What brings attention to the Self?  What are internal standards and values? Self-Awareness Theory  Self-Awareness  When behavior ≠ standards  we change or experience discomfort  When self -awareness is uncomfortable, we often escape (via drinking, watching TV, FB, etc.) The Influence of Self-Focus  Diener and Wallbom (1976)  All Ps say that cheating is wrong.  Half Ps are given opportunity to cheat on an anagram test  71% cheat  Half Ps are given opportunity to cheat on the anagram test, but have a mirror on their desks  only 7% cheat Self-Concept Formation  Daryl Bem’s Self -Perception Theory  When our feelings are uncertain or ambiguous…  Self-perception is the process of inferring our own traits, attitudes, or emotions, by observing our behavior and the situation in which it occurs Self-Perception  The overjustification effect  The tendency to believe that a behavior was extrinsically (not intrinsically) motivated as external incentives increase  Intrinsic motivation is engaging in an activity for the pure enjoyment of the activity itself  Extrinsic motivation is engaging in an activity to gain external rewards or to avoid punishment The Overjustification Effect  Greene, Sternberg, and Lepper (1976)  4th and 5th grade teachers introduced four new math games to their students.  Greene, Sternberg, and Lepper (1976)  4th and 5th grade teachers introduced four new math games to their students. The Overjustification Effect  Greene, Sternberg, and Lepper (1976)  4th and 5th grade teachers introduced four new math games to their students. The Overjustification Effect Preserving intrinsic interest  Cannot harm interest if no interest to begin with  Task-contingent rewards  Giving reward just for doing it  More harmful  Performance- contingent rewards  Giving reward for doing it well  Less harmful Social Identity Theory  Part of your identity comes from your membership in groups  Family, school, work crew, sports fan  Important source of pride & self -esteem BIRGing (& CORFing)  Basking In Reflected Glory (BIRG)  A way to boost self -esteem  one associates themselves with known, successful others such that the winner's success becomes the individual's own accomplishment  Cutting Off Reflected Failure (CORF)  A way to preserve self -esteem  Distancing oneself from anyone/thing seen as a failure Schachter’s Two-Factor Theory of Emotion PHYSIOLOGICAL AROUSAL -Feeling flushed -Hands shaky -Heart racing EXPLAIN AROUSAL - Snake EMOTION - Fear Schacter & Singer (1962)  Cover Story: test “Suproxin’s ” effect on vision  The participants were then put in one of four experimental conditions: 1. Adrenaline Ignorant 2. Adrenalin Informed 3. Adrenalin Misinformed 4. Control Group (placebo)  Participants were then assigned to either the euphoria condition or the anger condition.  Exposed to a confederate who either made them laugh or made rude comments.  DVs: observational measures of emotional response through one- way mirror + self -report measures from participants Schacter & Singer (1962)  Across both the euphoric & anger conditions…  Most emotional display (lots of anger/euphoria) = those who received epinephrine but who were uninformed or misinformed about the effects  Least emotional displays = those who were informed or who received placebo Misattribution of Arousal  Dutton and Aron (1974)  An attractive female assistant surveyed men crossing a 450- foot long, 230-foot high suspension bridge.  Half were interviewed while on the bridge.  Half were interviewed after crossing and resting a few minutes.  Assistant gives her phone number if they have questions. Dutton and Aron (1974) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percentage of men calling the assistant After Resting On Bridge Surveyed  The misattribution of arousal is the process whereby people make mistaken inferences about what is causing them to feel the way they do. Cognitive Appraisal Theories of Emotion  More recent than 2-factor theory  Does not rely on arousal  Claims that emotions are elicited by evaluations (appraisals) of events and situation.  Accounts for why people may have very different emotional reactions to same event. Relationship ends  Appraisal of loss  Sadness Relationship ends  Appraisal of relief  Happiness Self-Concept formation via other observation Leon Festinger’s S ocial Comparison Theory  When no objective standards exist, we rely on social comparison.

 Social comparison is the process of evaluating our own opinions, abilities, or performance by comparing ourselves to others.

Social Comparison Theory  When motivated to accurately evaluate the self:  lateral social comparison involves seeking similar others to compare to. Social Comparison Theory  When motivated to improve the self:

 upward social comparison comparing ourselves to those who are better than we are on a particular trait or ability  When motivated to enhance or protect our self- esteem:  downward social comparison comparing ourselves to people who are worse than we are on a particular trait or ability Downward Social Comparison  Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & LaPrelle (1985) Earned high marks (16/20) Earned low marks (8/20) Others did worse than you Others did better than you Downward Social Comparison  Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & LaPrelle (1985) Earned high marks (16/20) Earned low marks (8/20) Others did worse than you Others did better than you Downward Social Comparison  Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & LaPrelle (1985)  Ps were then asked whether they would like to look at the tests of some other Ps. Earned high marks (16/20) Earned low marks (8/20) Others did worse than you Others did better than you Downward Social Comparison  Pyszcynski, Greenberg, & LaPrelle (1985) 0 20 40 60 80 100 % wanting to see others' tests Positive feedack(16/20) Negative feedback (8/20) Others scored better Others scored worse Self-Presentation  Self- presentation is the act of expressing a desired image of the self to an audience.  Impression Management is the attempt to get others to see a person as they want to be seen.  Ingratiation  Self-handicapping: Strategy of creating obstacles and excuses so that they don’t have to blame themselves for poor performance Self-Presentation Self -handicapping  Berglas and Jones (1978)  Ps complete 20 logic problems  For half, all problems are easy  For half, all problems are difficult to impossible  All Ps receive actual performance feedback Self-Presentation Self -handicapping  Ps told they will take another test and must choose to ingest:  “Actavil”: improves intellectual performance  “Pandocrin”: impairs intellectual performance  Results:  Easy problems: Ps chose Activil  Difficult problems : Ps chose Pandocrin