User:Sandy~enwikiversity/Week 2 The Social Self

Lecture 2 – Notes

 * Culture – collective storehouse of information and knowledge, cultural practices we pass on to our young.
 * Social Brain Theory''' – understand our brains in part by our development of social complexities and complex culture.
 * Psyche – the mind. A psychological combination of biological inherit and what we’ve done with that culture.
 * Nature – physical world.
 * Evolution – We have got to this point through a long history of survival through breading. Random change that may evolve.
 * Natural Selection – survival (until reproduction)

Tutorial
Definition of social psychology -The collective mind A - Affect B - Behaviour C - Cognition


 * Individuals make up society, experiences, nature, nurture
 * A combination of environment and society changes us
 * What you want to know
 * Behaviour control
 * The self – looking glass theory
 * Social influence and behaviour

Readings

The Social Self
The self comes in to being at the junction between the biological processes of the inner body and the socio-cultural network to which we belong and its store of common beliefs and practices. Even without meeting other people we would still have a concept of self as a body separate to the external environment.

The self is an important tool we use to make our way through society and thereby satisfy our needs. To be effective at this the human self has taken shape through deep powerful drives such as being concerned about how others perceive us. Not only does this drive serve the goal of survival and reproduction but as social beings we care generally what others think of us. As cultural beings we have self awareness, or self concepts, which enable us to develop elaborate sets of beliefs about ourselves.

The interpersonal self or public self is part of the self that helps us to connect socially to each other. Most of us convey a certain image to others. This differs from self-conceptin as much as you may not believe the image you are portraying to be true. Negative traits like annoying habits can be left out.

The agent self or executive function is the part that gets things done, makes choices and exerts self control.

Self as impulse refers to a person’s inner thoughts and feelings as opposed to self as institution which is the way we behave in public; particularly the various roles we play in society.

Culture and Interdependence
Whether we are in a dependant or interdependent culture dictates what the self is, how we see ourselves and what motivates the self to accomplish.
 * Interdependent self-concept or self-construal is what makes you different from others.
 * Dependent self-construal is what connects you to others/groups.

Social roles
We are not designed to be by ourselves and as social beings the purpose of the self is to gain social cceptance. We have the ability to learn and adapt to behave properly and to conform to social rules and norms which in turn improves our chances of appeal and acceptance by others.

Erving Goffman analysed most human behaviour and selfhood in terms of actors playing roles.

Cultures are large systems within which we need to find one or several roles that culture defines such as a doctor or lawyer. Most of these roles are ways of relating to each other in a cultural system. Without society the self would not exist in full and without self-awareness and self-hood self-knowledge and the capacity to turn our attention back on to our source would not be possible. One of the things that sets us apart from other animals is our ability to change roles though out a life time.

Self-Awareness
Self-awareness is directing our attention at the self. It is vital for self regulation which is how we control and change ourselves. It usually involves evaluating ourselves against set standards and as a result coming up with good or bad evaluations about ourselves. These standards are ideas that have the power to cause and shape behaviour. Increased self-awareness makes our attitudes more consistent. Self-awareness enables us to behave better according to cultural standards which supports the idea that inner processes serve interpersonal functions to help us get along with others. Duval and Wicklund’s (1972) self awareness theory argues a state of self-awareness is unpleasant. Comparing ourselves to ‘average people’ or people not doing as well as us is healthier for our self-awareness than comparing ourselves to unrealistic standards such as super models. We have one of two reactions when we don’t meet those standards. We either try to fix the problem by improving ourselves or escaping from the problem by avoiding or reducing our self-awareness and therefore reducing those negative feelings (i.e. through alcohol use or suicide). Simply changing the standard rather than ourselves is often easier.

Self-awareness is vital for self regulation which is the process we use to control and change ourselves, our thoughts feelings and behaviours.

Public self-awareness is the how we are perceived by others. Thinking about ourselves through other peoples eyes. Looking outwardly to understand the self.

Private self-awareness attends to our inner needs such as emotions, thoughts desires and traits. Looking inwardly to understand the self.

Self Knowledge
Charles Horton Cooley (1902) – Looking glass self - we learn about ourselves from how we think we appear to others. The three components to this theory are:
 * We imagine how we appear to others
 * We imagine how others will judge us
 * We develop a positive or negative emotional response to this judgement

George Herbert Mead (1934) – added to Cooley’s theory that by suggesting most self-knowledge comes from feedback from others about ourselves telling us who and what we are. He called them the generalised other. The limitations of these theories stems from the fact that the feedback we get from others about ourselves is often not very accurate, honest or even consistent. We may also disregard the feedback depending on the incoming information and the source. As a result our self-knowledge often doesn’t match our public perception.


 * Introspection – the process by which we look inwardly to examine our mind and mental states. Privileged access refers to the fact that only I have direct access to my mind and feelings and therefore the only one who can truly know oneself. This also has its limits. Up to the age of eleven children think their parents know them better than they do. Nesbitt and Wilson (1977) also argued that people don’t really have privileged access to know how their mind works and guess or make assumptions as to what they assume are socially desirable answers when explaining their actions. We know what we think and feel but we don’t always know why.

Social Comparison
Festinger (1954) - social comparison theory – suggests people learn about themselves through comparing themselves to others. Self-Perception and the Overjustification Effect Bem’s (1965) - self-perception theory - self knowledge comes from learning about ourselves through observation.
 * Upward social comparison – comparing yourself with others better than you. This can inspire you to do better.
 * Downward social comparison – comparing yourself with worse off than yourself can make you feel good.
 * Intrinsic motivation – performing an activity for the sake of it.
 * Extrinsic motivation – performing an activity for its result or reward.

Overjustification Effect – The self perception theory predicts extrinsic motivation will win over intrinsic motivation as a result of the end reward and that rewards turn play in to work. Once a reward (i.e. you are paid) is offered and subsequently expected (extrinsic motivation) for an activity it is difficult to resume the activity for the sake of it (intrinsic motivation). If the reward isn’t expected it doesn’t diminish intrinsic motivation (Lepper et al.,1973).

The Fluctuating Image(s) of Self - The phenomenal self or the working self concept is what you see of yourself at any one time or the image of self that is active in our thoughts. Different aspects of us stand out at any one time and come to the forefront of our knowledge into the phenomenal self i.e. awareness that you are the only person in a group with dark or white skin.

Motivations for wanting Self-Knowledge
We seek self knowledge in many and varied ways such as undertaking personality tests. Self knowledge has many advantages including social acceptance. It is important to know our strengths and weaknesses to help us fit in with others or groups. The three motivations to seek self knowledge:
 * Appraisal motive – the desire to know the truth about ourselves including our abilities.
 * Self-enhancement motive – the desire to know favourable things about ourselves, this includes disregarding any criticism while exaggerating good qualities.
 * Consistency motive (self-verification motive) – the desire to verify our self-concepts through feedback that confirms what we already know (or think we know) about ourselves.

The self-enhancement is the strongest of the three motives for self-knowledge because we like to hear good things about ourselves. This motive is particularly important to us as it has an emotional appeal and when positive feedback is received it indicates we are accepted by others. The second strongest motive is the consistency motive; we like to have what we already believe about ourselves confirmed. This motive has a cognitive appeal confirming the way we think. As is the case with the appraisal motive it is important, even though sometimes difficult, for us to know the truth about ourselves as a basis for decisions but it is even more important to us to be shown signs we are accepted by others and to receive confirmation of our existing beliefs about ourselves.

The Duplex Mind
In different ways different parts of the duplex mind cultivates our self-knowledge. It is relevant to the interplay between the conflicting motives. The automatic systems tends to favour the self-enhancement motive as we like to think everything that’s good is because of me but everything that’s bad isn’t the result of me (something else is to blame). This automatic egotism emerges when we are under stress or preoccupied. Our conscious system is then needed to put a balanced and consistent view of the self and a more accurate appraisal of the facts.

Self Handicapping
Putting obstacles in the way of achieving is known as self handicapping. Self handicapping has a two-fold purpose. It can be used as an excuse for under achieving or used to boost our reputation. For example getting drunk the night before an exam gives us an excuse for failure if we don’t do well or boosts our reputation of being intelligent if a high grade is achieved even though we hadn’t studied and got drunk instead.

The self reference effect is any information that has an impact or relates to the self is retained better than any other information.

The endowment effect is similar in as much as items that belong to are of greater value. An item that is connected to the self becomes more valuable (in monetary and sentimental terms). Choosing an item is of greater value than being given something.

Can Self-Concept Change?
Our identity does change but very slowly. There are several theories supporting revising self-knowledge. We can consciously decide to change the way we think about ourselves and our actions will follow to reflect the new you or we can decide to change our behaviour which can subsequently change our concept will follow.

Our social world carries powerful expectations for the self to remain constant. We make the assumption that people remain the same over lengths of time which to a certain degree is true. Our social environment changing is the most common cause for the self-concept to change. If we remain in the same social circle our self-esteems tends to stay the same and even when we gradually change that same social circle tends not to notice. If we move to a new social circle then the new version of us apparent.

The looking class theory
Suggests we know ourselves through what we think other people’s opinions of us are. Therefore if those ‘others’ change (new social circle) then how we think they see us is also likely to change. Inner processes are also tied to interpersonal relations so if our social circle changes and we interact with new people our inner self is also likely to change. This supports the theory that our inner self is there to support interpersonal processes and our inner self needs to adapt to changing interpersonal processes.

On the other side of the coin, for us to change it is important for us to use our social environment. For example if we decide to get fit we join a gym or boot-camp with trainers and other people with the same goal. If you persuade others that you have changes and they accept and expect you to behave differently it is easier to maintain the changed behaviour. Self and identity require social validation. Once we have revised our inner self it is likely we will then revise our stories and memories about our lives to suit our new self.

Self-Esteem
Self-esteem is how favourably we evaluate ourselves. If your self-esteem is high you have a positive evaluation of yourself. If your self-esteem is low it isn’t that you have a negative evaluation about yourself but that the strong positive views just don’t exist. There has been much research about low self-esteem resulting in the following conclusions:
 * People with low self-esteem do not want to fail and are often less confident that they will achieve their goal.
 * Ideas about themselves are often confusing and uncertain with views about themselves to be contradictory.
 * Rather than focusing on self-enhancement their focus is on self-protection to avoid loss of esteem. They tend not to take chances or pursue opportunities to avoid, failure, embarrassment and rejection.
 * They are more likely to be emotional with more emotional highs and lows which include mood swings and overreactions than those with high self-esteem.

Choosing our comparison group carefully helps us to gain and retain self-esteem. Comparing ourselves to someone not quite as good as us makes us feel good about ourselves. The two main benefits of high self-esteem are initiative and it simply feels good. People with high self-esteem are more confident to speak up in groups, approach people and make friends and resist influence. Making us feel good provides a store of good feelings that we can draw upon when things don’t go well or as planned. It helps us overcome bad feelings. People with high self-esteem are less likely to give up and will try harder.

On the down-side people with high self-esteem are more likely to be adventurous with drugs, sex and other temptations. Another negative aspect related to high self-esteem is narcissism which is excessive self love and self focus. Narcissists believe they are better than others and believe they should be treated better than others. High self-esteem has also been associated with higher prejudice believing there group is better than other groups and discriminating more heavily in favour of their group.

People with high self-esteem continue to pursue self-esteem by dominating others and to increase their competencies whereas those with low self-esteem pursue it by seeking validation from others and avoiding failures. The pursuit of self-esteem weakens our intrinsic motivation as we are pressured to live up to other’s expectations and may exhibit behaviours others approve of for social acceptance.

Self-Deception Strategies
Self-deception strategies are the cognitive tricks we use to sustain the positive illusions we have about ourselves. One self-deception theory is the self-serving bias which is the ability to take credit for our achievements but not accept blame for our failures blaming external factors (see self-handicapping). Another related strategy is our ability to more sceptical of bad feedback than good feedback. Greenwald’s (1988) junk mail theory of self-deception suggests we have the ability to quickly identify and disregard bad or unwelcome news diminishing its impact and making it easier to forget. We also have the ability to misconstrue our view of other people to convince ourselves that our good traits are unusual but our bad traits are common.

Sociometer Theory
The sociometer theory suggests self-esteem is our measure of how our socially accepted we think we are. This can explain why we are so concerned with self-esteem as it is very strongly linked to our social acceptance.

Self-Presentation
As cultural animals we care what other people think. Self presentation is any behaviour that conveys an image of ourselves or some information about ourselves to others. Self presentation is not only how we dress, it is from how we speak about ourselves to what car we drive to the way we behave including hiding emotions so others think positive thoughts about us. Making a good impression and maintaining a good reputation through good self-presentation are important aspects of obtaining social acceptance. Good self-presentation involves showing ourselves to have good traits and not bad ones. The limitations of good self-presentation lie with the audience you are presenting to. If the values of the audience differ from ours we are likely to conform to and behave in a manner we know will meet the audience’s expectations and approval. This is usually the case but on the other hand we may deliberately present ourselves in a manner we know the audience will not approve of. Either way it may mean we are not presenting our true self.

We aspire to have many identities, which may range from a university student, to daughter, to an athlete or defending a certain value. To claim theses identities we need social validation. There is a trade-off between favourability and feasibility. We like to present ourselves in the best light but if we think we might be found out our claims are exaggerated we will tone them down. Good self-presentation helps us to create a good first impression. When an interpersonal relationship is developed this good self-presentation is less important and modesty becomes more natural and common among friends. One of the reasons for this is our friends are often familiar with our faults and failures and are likely to know when we are exaggerating. Modesty enables us to get along with each other more harmoniously.

Self-presentation is often stronger than self preservation and may lead to risky behaviours such as smoking to portray what we might think is a cool adult like image. Taking such risks indicates we value the gain of social acceptance more than our health and it is more of a motivation than the motivation to stay alive and healthy. This supports the theory that our psyche is designed to seek social acceptance. We are also more concerned with our self-presentation than our private self-esteem.

Skinnerian behaviourism – The theory that emphasised learning from reward and punishment as the main cause for behaviour.

Culture is a network of meaning and as such what we do depends partially on what those meanings are. Meaning connects things giving actions meanings when they are connected to other things or events. We use thought to imagine our actions before we physically carry them out and most actions can be described as meaning different things.

Levels of Meaning
Actions are made up of high and low levels of meaning which range from the more complex and longer time span (bigger picture) to the smaller here and now detail. When we experience unpleasantness and the bigger picture becomes overwhelming we like to focus on the lower level meanings. Focusing on the lower level also helps us to solve problems. In others words if we are trying to reach a particular goal that isn’t going to plan or is against our moral standards we might take a step back and focus on the individual tasks, details and process we are undertaking to achieve that goal.

Once the lower level tasks/details are modified so the goal again looks achievable we can then re-focus on the high level of meaning, the overall goal. Operating at either level has its draw-backs. At the higher level we may experience guilt from not adhering to our moral standards, i.e. looking out for our own interests at a negative cost to others. On the flip side operating at the lower level of meaning leaves us vulnerable to influence which may change how we act or what we think. We may change how we feel about a low level meaning which in turn will change the high level meaning once we return to focus at that level. There can also be differences of meaning within the high and low levels of meaning with important consequences. Dweck’s (1996) research has shown there are two styles we use:
 * Entity theorists - believes that traits are fixed and stable. They don’t like criticism and or negative feedback at all as they think any bad traits are permanent. They stick to things they are good at and easy tasks so they are guaranteed success and therefore receive associated credit admiration. Failure is devastating to entity theorists and they often lead to learned helplessness; they just give up and don’t try thus avoiding failure and being labelled incompetent.
 * Incremental theorists – believe traits are subject to change and improvement. They enjoy learning and challenges and don’t mind criticism or failure as they believe they will improve. They enjoy difficult tasks as a means of learning. If an incremental theorists failure they just try harder.

Both entity theorists and incremental theorists apply their beliefs to others. They basically believe people have fixed and stable behaviour traits and should not be expected to change (internal attributions) or that people’s traits are constantly changing and are in a temporary state (external attributions).

Linking actions to a goal is an important type of meaning. A goal is an idea of some desired future state. The goal is the link between values and action and because we hold certain values they then need to be translated in to behaviour to uphold those values.

Inner processes as well as cultural factors influences our goals. Cultural factors often set out the variety of possible goals. For example in some countries it is not culturally acceptable for a woman to run for government. We choose from those set goals depending on our current personal circumstances, wants and needs. If we start working toward a goal and either fail to achieve it or discontinue pursuing the goal a Zeigarnick effect occurs. Our automatic system interrupts our conscious system bringing thought of the incomplete goal to our thoughts.

The goals we set need to be realistic to maintain motivation to achieve. If the goal is to simple interest may be lost whereas if the goal is to difficult it may be seen as unachievable and again interest is lost. Most of us have a hierarchy of goals which requires us to plan and undertake a series of short term smaller goals or tasks (proximal goals) in pursuit of the long term ultimate goal (distal goal). The planning process of setting the proximal goals increase the chances of success in reaching the distal goal.

There are however, downsides to making plans. If the plans are inflexible they may be discouraging as they leave no scope for change. Also, making those plans can be very tiresome and time consuming which can also be discouraging. Another problem with making plans is they can be overly optimistic not allowing for unexpected issues i.e. setting deadlines that aren’t achievable because materials or resources aren’t available. This optimism is called the planning fallacy. We tend to be overly optimistic when looking long term because we look at the desirability whereas short term decisions tend to more realistic because we focus on the feasibility.

Self-determination theory
Freedom of action; people need feel they have some degree of autonomy and internal motivation. This means some of our motivation must come from our inner drives and not external forces. This autonomy leads to greater self-esteem and overall well-being from the knowledge it is an achievement of our own. Reaching goals as a result through extrinsic motivation is far less rewarding.

Interestingly we perform better in a stressful situation if we believe we have some control over the situation even if we don’t. This is called the panic button effect.

Making Choices
There are two main steps when making a choice if we are presented with a great range of options. A fairly quick short-list is drawn from the huge array of choices which excludes many of the options leaving only a select few. The select few are looked at in detail until a final choice is made. Some of the major patterns guiding choice are: Temporal discounting – immediate reward over future gain even if the future gain out weights the immediate reward.
 * Risk aversion – making choices to reduce risk by focusing on the possible losses more than the possible gain.
 * The certainty effect – giving greater weight, we often give undue greater weight to certain outcomes than to possibilities even if those possibilities are highly unlikely.
 * Keeping options open – postponing difficult decisions which can lead to decision avoidance if that final decision isn’t made. Decision avoidance is also known as the status quo bias which is the decision to keep things the way they were without change.

Haselton & Buss’ (2000) error management theory suggests both men and women minimise costly errors but because men tend to focus more on temporal discounting when making choices the errors differ. Another pattern that leads to no change is the omission bias or default option which is making the choice that requires no action at all and therefore avoids regret if a wrong decision is made.

Jack Brehm’s (1966) reactance theory is very similar to reverse psychology in as much as it we need to have freedom of choice and have a adverse negative reaction if choices are taken away by others or external forces. This reactance results in three main reactions:
 * desire for the choice no longer available increases
 * reasserting your freedom by trying to reclaim it
 * an aggressive reaction toward the person or cause of your restricted freedom