Collective self-esteem, personal self-esteem, and collective efficacy in in-group and outgroup evaluations

In assessing the relationship between self-esteem and in-group/outgroup evaluations, this study examined whether self-esteem is better measured at a collective (collective self-esteem [CSE]) than a personal level (personal self-esteem [PSE]). It was expected that subjects high in CSE would engage in more in-group favoritism (measured by in-group evaluations), whereas those low in CSE would engage in more outgroup derogation (measured by outgroup evaluations). No effect for PSE was predicted. Furthermore, the study explored whether perceptions of collective efficacy may underlie this relationship. Subjects played a public goods task. The in-group's outcome was compared to the outcome of other relevant outgroups, enhancing pressures towards intergroup differentiation. Consistent with the predictions, subjects high in CSE evaluated in-group members more positively than those in low CSE (i.e., in-group favoritism), whereas subjects low in CSE evaluated outgroup members more negatively than those high in CSE (i.e., outgroup derogation). Also in line with our predictions, no effect for PSE was found. Perceptions of collective efficacy appeared to be a mediator of the effect of CSE.     

The relation of self-esteem variability to emotion variability, mood, personality traits, and depressive tendencies

The relation of self-esteem variability to personality, mood, and behavior was investigated. Self-esteem variability was measured by calculating the standard deviation of self-ratings made during a week of experience-sampling. Participants high in self-esteem variability were self-conscious, socially anxious, and avoidant of social contexts. Self-esteem variability was partially independent of the conceptually similar trait of affect-intensity. The contributions of the study to work on self-esteem stability are discussed.     

Fields of Tension in a Boundary-Crossing World: Towards a Democratic Organization of the Self

In their study of the relationship between self and society, scientists have proposed taking society as a metaphor for understanding the dynamics of the self, such as the analogy between the self and the functioning of a totalitarian state or the analogy between the self and the functioning of a bureaucratic organization. In addition to these models, the present article proposes a democratic society as a metaphor for understanding the workings of a dialogical self in a globalizing, boundary-crossing world. The article follows four steps. In the first step the self is depicted as extended to the social and societal environment and made up of fields of tension in which a multiplicity of self-positions are involved in processes of positioning and counter-positioning and in relationships of social power. In the second step, the fertility of the democratic metaphor is demonstrated by referring to theory and research from three identity perspectives: multicultural, multiracial, and transgender. In the fields of tension emerging between the multiplicity of self-positions, new, hybrid, and mixed identities have a chance to emerge as adaptive responses to the limitations of existing societal structures. In the third step, we place the democratic self in a broader societal context by linking three levels of inclusiveness, proposed by Self-Categorization Theory (personal, social, and human) to recent conceptions of a cosmopolitan democracy. In the fourth and final step, a model is presented which allows the formulation of a series of specific research questions for future studies of a democratically organized self.     

Characteristics of secrets and the frequency,reasons and effects of secrets keeping and disclosure

This longitudinal study examines secrets keeping and disclosure. College students filled in two questionnaires, with a 4 months time span in between. Their psychological and physical wellbeing was investigated, together with self‐esteem, the topic and some characteristics of their most important secret (if they had a secret), reasons for having the secret, to whom they confide the secret, how they felt about confiding, and whether they thought that their behaviour would reveal that they kept a secret when they talked with someone who is not aware of their secret. The findings showed that total secrecy was rare, and that most secret‐holders had informed at least one other person about their secret. Moreover, the findings challenge the view that secrets keeping has negative effects on secret‐holders. Results revealed some negative effects, but only when the secret was serious. No positive effects were found for secrets disclosure. Secret‐holders confided information to those with whom they felt emotionally close; were more reluctant to confide when they kept the secret to avoid disapproval, and more likely to confide when they believed that others would find out about their secrets by paying attention to their (secret‐holders) behaviour. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Collective self-esteem, personal self-esteem, and collective efficacy in in-group and outgroup evaluations

In assessing the relationship between self-esteem and in-group/outgroup evaluations, this study examined whether self-esteem is better measured at a collective (collective self-esteem [CSE]) than a personal level (personal self-esteem [PSE]). It was expected that subjects high in CSE would engage in more in-group favoritism (measured by in-group evaluations), whereas those low in CSE would engage in more outgroup derogation (measured by outgroup evaluations). No effect for PSE was predicted. Furthermore, the study explored whether perceptions of collective efficacy may underlie this relationship. Subjects played a public goods task. The in-group's outcome was compared to the outcome of other relevant outgroups, enhancing pressures towards intergroup differentiation. Consistent with the predictions, subjects high in CSE evaluated in-group members more positively than those in low CSE (i.e., in-group favoritism), whereas subjects low in CSE evaluated outgroup members more negatively than those high in CSE (i.e., outgroup derogation). Also in line with our predictions, no effect for PSE was found. Perceptions of collective efficacy appeared to be a mediator of the effect of CSE.     

Daily dynamics of personal identity and self‐concept clarity

We examined the daily dynamics among self‐concept clarity and identity processes, and their effects on distress, among a sample of 580 Dutch adolescents. Participants completed measures of identity, self‐concept clarity, anxiety and depression at annual intervals; and daily single‐item measures of self‐concept clarity, identity commitments and reconsideration across three 5‐day weeks. We examined (a) cross‐lagged associations of self‐concept clarity to identity commitment and reconsideration and (b) associations of daily fluctuations in self and identity processes to later anxiety and depression. Results indicated that self‐concept clarity and identity commitments influence one another reciprocally across days, and that day‐to‐day fluctuations in identity predicted later anxiety and depression. Results are discussed in terms of self and identity processes and their effects on distress. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Development of the self-system: How children perceive their own and others' ideas about themselves

The purpose of this article is to present a model for the development of the self-system in which six concepts within and related to the self-system are distinguished as follows: Four intraindividual self-concepts involving the real and the ideal self-concepts, the perceived real concepts of others about the self, and the perceived ideal concepts or expectancies of others about the self and two environmental concepts involving the actual ideas of others about the child and the others' ideal concepts of or expectancies toward the child. The development and interrelationships among these concepts were studied with 204 children from six age groups (i.e., 6-, 8-, 10-, 12-, 14- and 16-year-olds) with respect to their fit. The intraindividual self-concepts of the children were assessed by means of a Repertory Grid procedure presented to the children. The environmental concepts were obtained by interviewing both parents. The results suggest that although adolescents believe that they do not fulfill their parents expectations, their parents are reasonably satisfied with the extent to which their children have met their ideal expectations.