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.

We propose that a preference for favorable social feedback (i.e., selfenhancement) requires only that feedback be characterized as favorable or unfavorable but that a preference for self-confirming feedback (i.e., selfverification) 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.

Although people with negative self-views want to be liked at some level, they repeatedly enact behaviors that alienate their relationship partners. Why? One possibility is that such persons reside in social environments that offer them little insight into what they are doing wrong. Although persons who had negative self-views elicited unfavorable reactions, they did not appreciate this fact because their interaction partners concealed their aversion behind a facade of kind words. To be sure, the interaction partners of people with negative self-views tended to leak their disdain nonverbally. These negative nonverbal messages proved to be uninformative, however, because people with negative self-views overlooked them. These data imply that people with negative self-views may live in social worlds in which they are deprived of corrective feedback that could allow them to improve themselves.

The Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) program is a national public health initiative sponsored by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Center for Substance Abuse Prevention to prevent substance abuse and its consequences. State grantees used a data-driven planning model to allocate resources to 450 communities, which in turn launched over 2,200 intervention strategies to target prevention priorities in their respective populations. An additional goal was to build prevention capacity and infrastructure at the state and community levels. This paper addresses whether the state infrastructure goal was achieved, and what contextual and implementation factors were associated with success. The findings are consistent with claims that, overall, the SPF SIG program met its goal of increasing prevention capacity and infrastructure across multiple infrastructure domains, though the mediating effects of implementation were evident only in the evaluation/monitoring domain. The results also show that an initiative like the SPF SIG, which could easily have been compartmentalized within the states, has the potential to permeate more broadly throughout state prevention systems.

No abstract