|
|||||
Social
Psychology (PSY403)
VU
Lesson
11
THE
SELF (CONTINUE.......)
Aims
Introducing
the concept of the self as the subject
and object of
awareness
Objectives
Understanding
self-regulation through the discussion in
Applied social psychology
lab
Conducting
a Journal Activity to understand the
impact of students' culture on different
aspects of their
self
concept.
Discussing
historical factors in the transformation of
collectvistic to individualistic culture
in the West
Understanding
the self concept of
biculturalists
Evaluating
the self self
esteem
Applied
Social Psychology Lab:
Negatives of private self
consciousness
We
all indulge in self
awareness, but if focus too
much after a failure, it can
intensify our
negative
emotions;
we may become depressed. Hence outcome of
negative self consciousness
may be indulgence in
self
destructive activities.
Examples:
Binge eating; substance
abuse; two most serious
problems of youth today (Wechseler et
al.,
2000).
The purpose is usually to
reduce awareness of some distressing
events. For example, in
binge eating
attention
is redirected on chewing, tasting
and swallowing, temporary
relief from
depression.
According
to Hull et al. (1986) UGs
high in self consciousness
are more likely to indulge in
substance use
after
academic failures.
Application
of self-regulation theory
·
Focus
your awareness beyond the
immediate situation and pay
attention to long term goals.
·
Pay
attention to cues that
trigger undesirable behavior, e.g., cues
in social environment
like
arguments
with family members
·
Recognize
when your resolve is weak. As
mentioned earlier people have
limited amount of energy
at
any given time to regulate,
they should not exert in an
unrelated activity
·
Establishing
an implementation intention are
statements to yourself that as
soon as a particular
situation
occurs you will be
automatically initiate goal-directed
behavior.
·
Adaptive
self regulation of unattainable goals:
Worsch et al.'s study (2003)
with parents of
cancer
children.
Journal
Activity
Each
of us as individuals has a unique
perspective on the world that is in part
derived from the groups to
which
we belong. Our cultural
background contributes to how we
think, feel, and behave in the
social
world.
Culture here is defined
broadly and may include many
types of things such as your
ethnicity,
religion,
race, family size,
geographical location, generation, and
gender orientations. The procedure
of
this
activity is as written
below:
"Think
about your own cultural
background. Describe some ways that it
has impacted your view of
and
behavior
in the world. Some examples of
influence include (but are
certainly not limited to)
patterns of
family
interaction, expectations regarding marriage,
music preferences, food
preferences, style of
dress,
values,
sense of humor, political
affiliation, behavior in public
places, propensity
toward
competitiveness,
ambition, gender roles, and conversational
style. Also construct your
self schema
model"
47
Social
Psychology (PSY403)
VU
POSSIBLE
HISTORICAL EFFECTS
Using
this classification scheme,
Louis Zurcher (1977) found
that while American college
students in the 1
950s
and early 1 960s tended to describe
themselves in terms of social roles,
college students in the
1970s
identified
themselves in terms of psychological
attributes. This self-concept trend
has continued
(Trafimow
et
al., 1991) and coincides with a rise in
individualistic attitudes among Americans
(Roberts & Helson,
1997).
Zurcher
suggests that these self-concept and
attitudinal changes are due to
wide-spread cultural changes
beginning
in the 1950s (Wood & Zurcher,
1988).
In
reaction to this dissatisfaction,
Zurcher asserted that
college students' identification
with personal
qualities
rather than institutional affiliations
was an attempt to achieve a greater feeling of
personal control
over
their lives.
INDIVIDUALIST-COLLECTIVIST
COMPARISONS
In
general, American, Canadian, and European self-concepts
are composed of predominantly
attributive
self-descriptions,
indicating that these
individualist cultures foster the
development of an independent
self
for
their members. In contrast, people
from collectivist cultures such as
China, Mexico, Japan, India,
and
Kenya
have more social self-descriptions, indicating a
fostering of an interdependent
self
(Kanagawa et
al.,
2001; Ma & Schoeneman,
1997.
within
collectivist societies, childrearing
practices emphasize conformity,
cooperation, dependence, and
knowing
one's proper place,} whereas
within more individualist societies,
independence, self-reliance, and
personal
success] are stressed. One
consequence of these differing
views is that in an individualist
society,
people
develop a belief in their
own uniqueness and diversity
(Miller, 1988). This sense
of individuality is
nurtured
and fostered within the educational
system (see table 3.4), and
its manifestation is considered a
sign
of maturity (Pratt, 1991). On the
other hand, in a collectivist society,
uniqueness and individual
differences
are often seen as
impediments to proper self-growth
(Kim & Choi, 1994).
Instead, the self
becomes
most meaningful and complete when it is
closely identified with--not
independent of--the
group
(DeVos,
1985)
WHAT
ABOUT BICULTURALISTS?
Although
cultures can be characterized as being more
oriented toward individualism or
collectivism, not
everyone
living within a particular
culture will have the same
individualist-collectivist leanings
(Ayyash-
Abdo,
2001).
Although
we tend to cognitively suppress the
simultaneous activation of competing social
identities
(Hugenberg
& Bodenhausen, 2004), such
suppression is not always
successful. When biculturalists'
dual
views
of themselves and their worlds
collide, this can lead to
internal conflict; as they attempt to
reconcile
individualist
strivings with collectivist
yearnings (Sussmaii, 2000).
How
is this conflict best resolved?
Based on studies of Pueblo,
Navajo. Latino, Iranian
American, Indian
American,
and Asia American/Canadian children
and adults, neitte abandoning
one's ancestral
collectivist
culture
nor isolating oneself from
the dominant individualist culture is
good for mental health
(Benet-
Martinez
& Karakitapoglu-Aygun, 2003; Joe,
1994). Instead, successful
biculturalism entails
retaining
ancestral
values and practices while incorporating
new values and practices from
the dominant culture.
EVALUATING
THE SELF
It
consists of numerous evaluations of
self as being good, bad, or mediocre.
This evaluative aspect of
the
"me"
is called self-esteem.
48
Social
Psychology (PSY403)
VU
This
difference in evaluating the self
has important consequences
for people's lives.
Individuate with low
self-esteem
are generally more unhappy
and pessimistic (DeNeve & Cooper,
1998; Shepperd et al.,
1996),
less
willing to take risks to benefit
themselves (Josephs et al.,
1992), more likely to encounter academic
and
financial
problems (Crocker & Luhtancn, 2003),
less likely to have successful
careers (Judged Bono,
2001),
and less likely to be physically
healthy (Vingilis et al.,
1998) than high self
esteem individuals.
Self-Esteem
Development and
stability
Feelings
of self-worth gradually develop
during childhood, with
parents playing a critical
role in
determining
its evaluative direction.
Although young children do
not have a recognizable sense of
self-
esteem,
during middle childhood,
their increasing cognitive maturity
allows them to integrate others'
evaluations
of them and their own
self-assessments into a global
sense of self-esteem
Research
conducted in more than 200 cultures that
children with high
self-esteem usually have
authoritative
parents who exert
control not marely by
imposing rules and consistently enforcing
them, but
also
by allowing their children a
fair amount of freedom within the rules
and by discussing the rationale
behind
their decision (Querido et
al.,2002).
In
contrast, parents who impose many rules
and expect strict obedience (authoritation
parents) and
those
who
make few demands and submit to
their children's desires
(permisive
parents) tend to
raise children
who
are less confident in their
abilities and have lower self-esteem
(Baumrind, 1996).
How
stable is self-esteem across the
life span? To answer this
question,Kali Trzesniewski and
her
colleagues
(2003) conducted a meta-analysis of fifty
self-esteem studies involving almost
30,000
participants
in the United States countries. Test-retest
correlations of self-esteem measures
across at least a
one-year
interval were obtained from
sample involving people from
age 6 to age 83. Te
researchers found
that
self-esteem stability is relatively
low during childhood,
increases throughout adolescence
and young
adulthood,
and declines during midlife and
old age.
Dark
side to high self-esteem
S
t a b ilit y o f s e lf - e s t e e m a c r o s s lif e s p a
n
·
Cultural
differences in
considering
high self
0
.8
esteem
essential for
0
.7
well-being
0
.6
·
Hidden
cost to trying
0
.5
0
.4
to
achieve or maintain
Age
0
.3
high
self-esteem
0
.2
(Blaine
& Crocker,
0
.1
1993).
0
6-11
1
2 -1 7
1
8 -2 1
2
2-29
3
0 -3 9
6
0-83
·
People
with unstable
Y
e a rs
Y
e a rs
Y
e a rs
Y
ea rs
Y
e a rs
Y
e a rs
self-esteem
become
angry
when
challenged
(Bushman & Baumeister, 1998): Defense
to avoid downward revision
(Tangney et al.,
1992)
·
Stable
not fed by a narcissistic defensiveness
(Taylor et al., 2003)
Unstable
self-esteem
Characteristics
of Unstable self-esteem:
·
Consciously
positive
·
Unconsciously
negative
49
Social
Psychology (PSY403)
VU
Readings
Franzoi,
S.L. (2006). Social
Psychology. New
York: McGraw Hill. Chapter
3.
Lord,
C.G. (1997). Social
Psychology. Orlando:
Harcourt Brace and Company. Chapter
5.
50
Table of Contents:
|
|||||