Effects of strategic self-presentation on subsequent self-esteem.

Abstract

Three experiments were conducted to explore the effects of strategic self-enhancement or self-deprecation on the actor's self-esteem as measured in a separate context. In the first experiment subjects were strongly influenced, by observing others in a screening interview, to emulate their self-enhancing or selfdeprecating behavior when they were themselves interviewed. This carried over and was reflected in their subsequent self-esteem. In the second experiment this carry-over effect was replicated in a setting in which the subject was interviewed while playing the role of a job candidate. In the third experiment, subjects instructed to be self-enhancing in an interview subsequently showed elevated selfesteem (unless their interview behavior was prescribed by the experimenter and thus not self-referring). Subjects instructed to be self-deprecating subsequently showed lowered self-esteem if they had been given a clear choice as to whether to engage in the interview. Thus self-perception theory can account for selfenhancing carry-over, whereas dissonance theory offers a more appropriate explanation for the carry-over or internalization of self-deprecating actions. This article concerns how an actor's private self-appraisal is affected by strategic self-presentations to a target person. What happens to an ingratiator's self-concept, for example, when in the interests of managing a favorable impression he or she describes personal characteristics in a highly favorable way? Studying the impact of ingratiation is a topic that has received little concern in the self-presentation literature. A notable exception is the study by Gergen (1965) in which situationally induced self-enhancement led to carry-over effects when self-esteem was subsequently measured in a different setting. As yet, however, we know precious little about the robustness of such carry-over effects and even less about the conditions accentuating or minimizing them.If Joan A, who finds herself in a sociallyThis research was supported by the National Science Foundation. We are indebted to Joel Cooper for his discerning comments.Requests for reprints should be sent to Edward E.

Self-Confidence and Personal Motivation

“…17 Such mechanisms seem to be at work in experiments where subjects who are asked to behave in a self-deprecating manner later report lower self-esteem than earlier, while persons who are asked to display self-enhancing behavior report higher self-esteem [Jones et al 1981]. This may be due to the fact that they were led to rehearse unfavorable or favorable information about themselves, thus increasing the probability of remembering it later on.…”

Self-Esteem, Self-Prediction, and Living up to Commitments

“…There is considerable evidence that situational factors can lead to temporary changes in self-evaluation (Baumgardner, Kaufman, & Levy, 1989;Jones, Rhodewalt, Berglas, & Skelton, 1981) and it appears that although self-esteem is a relatively enduring trait, there are fluctuations that can be measured . Some aspects of the self may be more malleable than others and individuals are generally able to offset a threat to one dimension of their self-esteem by af-firming other unrelated aspects of the self (Steele, 1990).…”

Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior.

“…"In effect, the target person has become the person the perceiver expected" (Fazio, Effrein, & Falender, 1981, p. 240). E. E. Jones, Rhodewalt, Berglas, and Skelton (1981) have used the term cany-over effects to refer to changes in the phenomenal self that result from self-presentational strategies; both self-perception and dissonance processes can account for these changes (E. E. Jones et al, 1981;Rhodewalt & Agustsdottir, 1986).…”

“…They argued that although the core self-concept may be resistant to change, the working self-concept varies with the social situation and depends on the social context for its expression. Analysis of the phenomenal self in terms of latitudes of acceptance and rejection offers a compatible approach to the question of stability and malleability of self-conceptions (E. E. Jones et al, 1981;Rhodewalt, in press;Rhodewalt & Agustsdottir, 1986).…”