Disagreements and self-esteem: Support for the competence-reinforcement model of attraction

Johnson, Catherine; Gormly, John; Gormly, Anne V.

doi:10.1016/0092-6566(73)90049-4

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A second goal was to begin to look at possible positive and negative modeling mechanisms, focusing in particular on how much the participant likes the model. As previously noted, individuals tend to like people who are similar to themselves (e.g., C. D. Johnson, Gormly, & Gormly, 1973;Singh & Ho, 2000), and other work suggests that individuals may conform more with those they like, in part for acceptance (Bovard, 1953;Goethals & Nelson, 1973;Kiesler & Corbin, 1965;Rotter, 1967;Singh & Ho, 2000) and in part perhaps to maintain balance or cognitive consistency among cognitions (e.g., Heider, 1958;Newcomb, 1968;Rosenberg & Abelson, 1960). Heider's (1958) balance theory perspective, for example, would hold that if a participant in our first study liked the model, the participant should have felt pressure to become positive toward the musical selection made by the model, in order to achieve balance or consistency among the cognitive elements, namely, positive relationships among participant, model, and music.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Positive and Negative Opinion Modeling: The Influence of Another's Similarity and Dissimilarity.

Hilmert¹,

Kulik²,

Christenfeld³

2006

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modeling research that has focused on the effects of observing similar others appears to have underestimated the influence of observing dissimilar others. Two experiments demonstrated that observing a model express liking for a piece of music induced more favorable opinions of the music (positive modeling) when the model was similar to the participant observer in relevant opinions, and more negative opinions (negative modeling) when the model was dissimilar to the participant in relevant opinions. Of note, this pattern was more pronounced when participants also believed their general backgrounds were dissimilar rather than similar to that of the model. Underlying social comparison processes and the mediational role of participants' liking of the model are considered.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Positive and Negative Opinion Modeling: The Influence of Another's Similarity and Dissimilarity.

Hilmert¹,

Kulik²,

Christenfeld³

2006

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(b) Another's similarity may help confirm one's own feeling of rightness or goodness (48) and indicate that the other is also good (15,130,145,182,187). The latter effect would occur particularly among those subjects who have high self esteem (182).…”

Section: Impressions Of Cognitive Compatibilitymentioning

confidence: 89%

Interpersonal Attraction and Relationships

Huston¹,

Levinger²

1978

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

403

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…What is more surprising, perhaps, is how easy it is to manipulate a person's reported self-esteem by telling her about the opinions of others. Johnson (1973) ask people to form judgments about (fictitious) others on the basis of booklets containing their answers to a questionnaire. They show that reported self-esteem is higher for those that evaluate individuals whose questionnaire answers are more similar to their own.…”

Section: Raising Other People's Self Esteemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Models of Caring, or Acting as if One Cared, About the Welfare of Others

Rotemberg¹

2014

Annu. Rev. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper surveys the theoretical literature in which people are modeled as taking other people's payoffs into account either because this affects their utility directly or because they wish to impress others with their social-mindedness. Key experimental results that bear on the relevance of these theories are discussed as well. Five types of models are considered. In the first, the utility of people is increasing in the payoffs of another. The more standard version of these preferences supposes that only consumption leads to payoffs and has trouble explaining pro-social actions such as voting and charitable contributions by poor individuals. If one lets other variables determine happiness as well, this model can explain a much wider set of observations. The second class of model that is surveyed involves people trying to demonstrate to others that they have pro-social (or altruistic) preferences. In these models, altruistic acts need not have a direct effect on utility. Third, I consider models of reciprocity where people's altruism depends on whether others act kindly or unkindly towards them. Fourth are models where inequality has a profound effect on altruism, with individuals being spiteful towards people whose resources exceed their own. Fifth and last, I discuss how specifications of altruism might have to be modified to take into account how people behave when they are able to transfer lotteries to others.

show abstract

Disagreements and self-esteem: Support for the competence-reinforcement model of attraction

Cited by 16 publications

References 10 publications

Positive and Negative Opinion Modeling: The Influence of Another's Similarity and Dissimilarity.

Positive and Negative Opinion Modeling: The Influence of Another's Similarity and Dissimilarity.

Interpersonal Attraction and Relationships

Models of Caring, or Acting as if One Cared, About the Welfare of Others

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About