Self-verification and contextualized self-views

Whereas most self-verification research has focused on people's desire to verify their global self-conceptions, the present studies examined self-verification with regard to contextualized selfviews-views of the self in particular situations and relationships. It was hypothesized that individuals whose core self-conceptions include contextualized self-views should seek to verify these self-views. In Study 1, the more individuals defined the self in dialectical terms, the more their judgments were biased in favor of verifying over nonverifying feedback about a negative, situation-specific self-view. In Study 2, consistent with research on gender differences in the importance of relationships to the self-concept, women but not men showed a similar bias toward feedback about a negative, relationship-specific self-view, a pattern not seen for global self-views. Together, the results support the notion that self-verification occurs for core self-conceptions, whatever form(s) they may take. Individual differences in self-verification and the nature of selfhood and authenticity are discussed.     

Cultural differences in self-verification: The role of naïve dialecticism

This research presents the first evidence of cultural differences in self-verification and the role of naïve dialecticism in mediating these differences. Chinese, Asian-American, and non-Asian American students completed a series of personality tests, and were presented with bogus feedback that was either self-consistent or self-discrepant, and either positive or negative. Whereas non-Asians self-verified (i.e., tended to exhibit resistance), mainland Chinese and Asian-American participants tended to adjust their self-views when they received (either positive or negative) feedback that contradicted their prevailing self-conceptions. Mediated moderation analyses showed that naïve dialecticism, mediated cultural differences in self-verification.     

Agreeable fancy or disagreeable truth? Reconciling self-enhancement and self-verification

Three studies asked why people sometimes seek positive feedback (self-enhance) and sometimes seek subjectively accurate feedback (self-verify). Consistent with self-enhancement theory, people with low self-esteem as well as those with high self-esteem indicated that they preferred feedback pertaining to their positive rather than negative self-views. Consistent with self-verification theory, the very people who sought favorable feedback pertaining to their positive self-conceptions sought unfavorable feedback pertaining to their negative self-views, regardless of their level of global self-esteem. Apparently, although all people prefer to seek feedback regarding their positive self-views, when they seek feedback regarding their negative self-views, they seek unfavorable feedback. Whether people self-enhance or self-verify thus seems to be determined by the positivity of the relevant self-conceptions rather than their level of self-esteem or the type of person they are.     

The fleeting gleam of praise: cognitive processes underlying behavioral reactions to self-relevant feedback

We propose that a preference for favorable social feedback (i.e., self-enhancement) requires only that feedback be characterized as favorable or unfavorable but that a preference for self-confirming feedback (i.e., self-verification) is based on a more elaborate set of cognitive operations that requires both the characterization of feedback and a subsequent comparison of that feedback to a representation of self stored in memory. Study 1 set the stage for testing this hypothesis by showing that depriving people of processing resources interfered with their tendency to access their self-conceptions. In Studies 2 and 3, participants who were deprived of resources preferred the favorable, self-enhancing evaluator, whereas control participants displayed a preference for the self-verifying evaluator, even if that evaluator was relatively unfavorable.     

Depression and the search for negative evaluations: more evidence of the role of self-verification strivings.

Swann, Wenzlaff, Krull, and Pelham (1992) suggested that depressed and dysphoric persons verify their self-conceptions by seeking rather negative appraisals. Hooley and Richters (1992) and Alloy and Lipman (1992) have worried that (a) idiosyncratic features of Swann et al.'s participants and design may have produced their effects and (b) Swann et al. presented no evidence that self-verification strivings are motivated. We address these issues empirically. Study 1 showed that 20 dysphoric participants preferred interacting with a person who appraised them unfavorably over participating in another study, in comparison with 30 nondysphorics. Study 2 revealed that 26 dysphoric persons responded to feedback that challenged their negative self-view by working to reaffirm their low self-esteem, in comparison with 47 nondysphorics. These findings support the notion that at some level depressed and dysphoric persons want rather negative appraisals.     

Intimates as agents of social support: sources of consolation or despair?

We proposed that people's intimates may insulate them against self-discrepant feedback. Individuals who possessed low or high self-esteem (targets) reported to the laboratory accompanied by persons with whom they were involved in intimate relationships (intimates). Some intimates perceived targets in a manner that was congruent with targets' self-conceptions; others perceived targets in a manner that was incongruent with targets' self-conceptions. Targets received bogus feedback that was discrepant with their self-esteem and interacted with either their intimate or a stranger. Targets then completed a measure of self-esteem. As expected, targets changed their self-ratings in the direction of the discrepant feedback when they interacted with either an incongruent intimate or a stranger but not when they interacted with a congruent intimate. Moreover, congruent intimates were just as effective in insulating low self-esteem targets against positive feedback as they were in insulating high self-esteem individuals against negative feedback. Finally, the more targets discussed the feedback, the less self-rating change they experienced. Implications for social support processes and attempts to cope with traumatic events are discussed.     

Interpreting the uninterpretable: The effect of self-esteem on the interpretation of meaningless feedback

People often seek out and retain positive information about themselves via self-enhancement processes. Under other circumstances, they seek out and retain self-confirmatory information via self-verification processes. Research on both of these self-evaluation processes has been based heavily on domains such as social skills, in which people have a large database of prior information that presumably influences the way in which incoming self-relevant information is interpreted. In the present research, participants were asked to evaluate themselves on a set of imaginary "pseudotraits" to investigate how self-esteem influences the self-evaluation process when prior information is unavailable. Participants who had been identified through pre-testing as either high or low in self-esteem received false feedback on five pseudotraits (e.g., "casortic"), after which they evaluated the favorability of this feedback. High self-esteem participants tended to view their feedback as favorable, whereas low self-esteem participants did not.     

Why people self-verify.

Why do people choose interaction partners who see them as they see themselves? Self-verification theorists propose that a desire to bolster perceptions of predictability and control underlies such activities. In contrast, advocates of positivity strivings argue that people choose such interaction partners in the hope of making themselves feel good. Two studies tested these competing explanations by examining the spontaneous verbalizations of participants as they chose interaction partners. The results suggested that positivity as well as self-verification strivings caused participants with positive self-views to choose partners who appraised them favorably. The epistemic considerations underlying self-verification processes, however, best explained why people with negative self-views chose partners who appraised them unfavorably.     

Being known, intimate, and valued: global self-verification and dyadic adjustment in couples and roommates

We contend that close relationships provide adults with optimal opportunities for personal growth when relationship partners provide accurate, honest feedback. Accordingly, it was predicted that young adults would experience the relationship quality with relationship partners who evaluated them in a manner consistent their own self-evaluations. Three empirical tests of this self-verification hypothesis as applied to close dyads were conducted. In Study 1, young adults in dating relationships were most intimate with and somewhat more committed to partners when they perceived that partners evaluated them as they evaluated themselves. Self-verification effects were pronounced for those involved in more serious dating relationships. In Study 2, men reported the greatest esteem for same-sex roommates who evaluated them in a self-verifying manner. Results from Study 2 were replicated and extended to both male and female roommate dyads in Study 3. Further, self-verification effects were most pronounced for young adults with high emotional empathy. Results suggest that self-verification theory is useful for understanding dyadic adjustment across a variety of relational contexts in young adulthood. Implications of self-verification processes for adult personal development are outlined within an identity negotiation framework.     

自尊对自我确认倾向的影响:来自人际选择的证据

采用改编后的“整体自尊问卷”和“交谈自尊问卷”筛选出整体自尊和交谈自尊高低不同的四组被试,通过模拟现实人际互动情境,在评价人对被试的交谈表现提供不同评价(肯定或否定)及表达不同交友态度(接受或排斥)的条件下,考察了整体自尊与特殊自尊对人际互动过程中自我确认倾向的影响,结果表明:(1)不论社交需求是否获得满足,即整体自尊是否得以维持,被试的自我确认倾向都只受特殊自尊的调节;(2)在社交需求和一致性需求同时获得满足,即整体自尊与特殊自尊均得以维持时,被试的自我确认倾向受整体自尊和特殊自尊的共同调节;(3)在社交需求和一致性需求未同时获得满足,即整体自尊和特殊自尊不能同时得以维持时,高整体自尊者的自我确认倾向受特殊自尊的调节,而低整体自尊者未表现出自我确认的倾向。     

Are they bothered? How the opportunity to damage a partner's reputation influences giving behavior in a trust game

Studies of reputation use in social interactions have indicated that when individuals can acquire a positive or negative reputation, they are motivated to act in a cooperative fashion. However, few researchers have examined how the opportunity to confer this reputation on a partner may influence an individual's behavior in a mixed-motive situation. In the present study, an experiment using a trust-game paradigm indicated that participants felt that they had more control over their partner's reputation when they could leave feedback regarding the outcome of their interaction with their partner. However, the participants would only donate a substantial portion of their initial endowment (i.e., over 50%) when they could leave feedback for a partner and when they felt that their partner was concerned about his or her own reputation. The author discusses these findings in regard to how they might apply to real-world reputation use and how possible future studies may further expand knowledge in this area.     

Meta-accuracy about potential relationship partners' models of others

We investigated whether people can determine which partners are best able to confirm their self-views. Results suggest that people are able to determine the valence of a potential romantic partner's model of other (i.e., they are meta-accurate). Previous research indicates that people expect to have their specific negative and positive self-views confirmed by partners whose model of other matches the valence of their self-view. In the present study, participants generally sought feedback that was congruent with a partner's model of other. However, men who held positive self-views were not meta-accurate; rather, they sought positive or negative feedback from partners regardless of the valence of the partner's model of other. These gender differences are discussed in terms of differential socialization patterns. Results suggest that people may choose relationship partners who are able to confirm their self-views.     

Depression and selection of positive and negative social feedback: motivated preference or cognitive balance?

In this commentary we examine Swann, Wenzlaff, Krull, and Pelham's (1992) findings with respect to each of 5 central propositions in self-verification theory. We conclude that although the data are consistent with self-verification theory, none of the 5 components of the theory have been demonstrated convincingly as yet. Specifically, we argue that depressed subjects' selection of social feedback appears to be balanced or evenhanded rather than biased toward negative feedback and that there is little evidence to indicate that depressives actively seek negative appraisals. Furthermore, we suggest that the studies are silent with respect to the motivational postulates of self-verification theory and that a variety of competing cognitive and motivational models can explain Swann et al.'s findings as well as self-verification theory.     

Identity negotiation: where two roads meet

This article traces a program of research on the interplay between social thought and social interaction. Early investigations of the impact of perceivers' expectancies on the actions of target individuals illuminated the contribution of perceivers to the identity negotiation process but overlooked the role of targets. The research discussed here is based on the assumption that targets play an active role in the identity negotiation process. Specifically, just as perceivers strive to validate their expectancies, targets seek to verify their self-views. The nature and antecedents of the processes through which people verify their self-conceptions as well as the relationship of these activities to self-concept change and self-enhancement processes are discussed. This research suggests that perceivers and targets enter their interactions with independent and sometimes conflicting agendas that are resolved through a process of identity negotiation. The identity negotiation process therefore provides a theoretical context in which the interplay between other-perception and self-perception can be understood.     

Avoiding minorities: Social invisibility

Three experiments examined how self‐consciousness has an impact on the visual exploration of a social field. The main hypothesis was that merely a photograph of people can trigger a dynamic process of social visual interaction such that minority images are avoided when people are in a state of self‐reflective consciousness. In all three experiments, pairs of pictures—one with characters of social minorities and one with characters of social majorities—were shown to the participants. By means of eye‐tracking technology, the results of Experiment 1 (n = 20) confirmed the hypothesis that in the reflective consciousness condition, people look more at the majority than minority characters. The results of Experiment 2 (n = 89) confirmed the hypothesis that reflective consciousness also induces avoiding reciprocal visual interaction with minorities. Finally, by manipulating the visual interaction (direct vs. non‐direct) with the photos of minority and majority characters, the results of Experiment 3 (n = 56) confirmed the hypothesis that direct visual interaction with minority characters is perceived as being longer and more aversive. The overall conclusion is that self‐reflective consciousness leads people to avoid visual interaction with social minorities, consigning them to social invisibility. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

社会价值取向和反馈方式对公共物品困境中决策行为的影响

本研究通过模拟投资实验和问卷来探讨重复型公共物品困境中社会价值取向（SVO）与信息反馈方式对决策行为的影响。结果表明：(1)合作型SVO的个体比非合作型个体表现出更多的合作行为;(2)SVO与信息反馈方式的交互作用岁实验轮次越来越显著,非合作型的个体会受信息反馈方式的影响,而合作型个体则不易受反馈方式的影响;(3)与无反馈的条件相比,集体反馈倾向于促进个体的合作行为,个体反馈倾向于抑制合作行为,但反馈所造成的适应性改变使情况更为复杂。     

Chameleonic obsessive job passion: demystifying the relationships between obsessive job passion and in-role and extra-role performance

In seeking to address the theoretical ambiguity regarding how and when obsessive job passion (OJP) leads to work performance, we integrate both self-verification and person–environment (P-E) fit perspectives to propose and test a moderated mediation model linking OJP to performance. We argue that OJP is indirectly related to co-worker-rated in-role and extra-role performance through self-verification, and these indirect links are conditioned by perceived demands–abilities (D-A) fit and needs–supplies (N-S) fit. Results from 190 healthcare professionals and their co-workers collected at three different time periods revealed the contrasting roles played by these two moderators. Individuals with higher OJP self-verify more when they perceive low D-A fit, but self-verify less when they perceive high N-S fit, whereas the opposite holds true for high D-A fit and low N-S fit. Contrary to predictions, negative relationships were found between self-verification and both types of performance. Specifically, OJP is associated with greater in- and extra-role performance (because of reduced self-verification) under high perceived D-A but low N-S fit, whereas the opposite results are observed under low perceived D-A and high N-S fit. The findings underscore the contingent nature of OJP and contribute to job passion, self-concept, and person–environment fit research.     

Different selves have different effects: self-activation and defensive social comparison

Three studies show that different forms of self-activation have differential influences on the processing of social comparison information. Activating neutral self-conceptions results in defensive processing of threatening social comparison information (Study 1). Participants maintain favorable self-evaluations in the face of upward comparison and rate the upward target of comparison negatively. Activating positive self-conceptions results in non-defensive processing of threatening social comparison information (Study 2). Participants endorse negative self-evaluations following upward comparison and rate the upward target of comparison positively. Activating negative self-conceptions maximizes defensive processing of threatening social comparison information (Study 3). Participants maintain favorable self-evaluations in the face of upward comparison and rate both upward and downward targets of comparison negatively. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for strategies to maintain self-esteem in the face of threatening comparisons.     

人际合作与冲突影响博弈决策的结果评价

人际合作与冲突是人际互动的两种主要形式, 在人类社会的发展中有着重要作用。脑成像研究表明, 当个体和人类同伴进行博弈时, 选择合作与选择冲突激活脑区的强度有所不同。但目前尚不清楚, 人际合作与冲突如何影响决策选择之后的结果评价过程。本研究采用Chicken Game任务对此问题进行了探讨, 研究记录了22名健康成人被试与人类同伴进行Chicken Game任务时的脑电活动。结果表明, 反馈负波(FRN)和P300不仅受到结果效价的影响, 同时也受到人际合作与冲突的影响。相对于选择冲突, 个体选择合作时, 输钱和赢钱反馈引发的FRN以及P300波幅差异更大。相关分析表明, RA (被试和解对方进攻)反馈引发的FRN波幅与接受该反馈后下一个trials中和解的选择率(以及总的和解率)呈显著的负相关。上述结果表明, 在社会博弈中, 合作增加了个体对博弈结果的预期, 从而引发更大的FRN效应; 并且合作共赢的结果所具有的物质意义与社会意义, 使其诱发更大的P300波幅。     

How to Create Shared Symbols

Human cognition and behavior are dominated by symbol use. This paper examines the social learning strategies that give rise to symbolic communication. Experiment 1 contrasts an individual‐level account, based on observational learning and cognitive bias, with an inter‐individual account, based on social coordinative learning. Participants played a referential communication game in which they tried to communicate a range of recurring meanings to a partner by drawing, but without using their conventional language. Individual‐level learning, via observation and cognitive bias, was sufficient to produce signs that became increasingly effective, efficient, and shared over games. However, breaking a referential precedent eliminated these benefits. The most effective, most efficient, and most shared signs arose when participants could directly interact with their partner, indicating that social coordinative learning is important to the creation of shared symbols. Experiment 2 investigated the contribution of two distinct aspects of social interaction: behavior alignment and concurrent partner feedback. Each played a complementary role in the creation of shared symbols: Behavior alignment primarily drove communication effectiveness, and partner feedback primarily drove the efficiency of the evolved signs. In conclusion, inter‐individual social coordinative learning is important to the evolution of effective, efficient, and shared symbols.