Self-discrepancy: Comparisons of the psychometric properties of three instruments.

Abstract

In 2 studies, the psychometric properties of 3 methods for measuring real-ideal and real-ought self-discrepancies were compared: the idiographic Self-Concept Questionnaire-Personal Constructs, the nonidiographic Self-Concept Questionnaire-Conventional Constructs, and the content-free Abstract Measures. In the 1st study, 125 students at a university clinic completed the 3 instruments and measures of anxiety and depression before individual therapy. In the 2nd study, 278 undergraduates completed the 3 instruments at 2 time points 4 weeks apart and completed multiple measures of anxiety and depression at the 2nd time point. Internal consistency alphas were consistently strong for the personal construct measures (.90 to .92) and moderate to strong for the conventional construct measures (.82 to .90). Test-retest reliability coefficients were above .70 for the personal construct and conventional construct measures, but the coefficients for the latter were inflated by the stability of their error terms. The 2 discrepancies were found to be factorially distinct even though they were highly correlated. Convergent and discriminant evidence of validity was found in both studies for all measures except the abstract real-ought discrepancy. Convergence was as strong or stronger for the personal construct measures in comparison to the other measures. Test-criterion evidence of validity, with multiple measures of anxiety and depression as criteria, was found in both studies for all measures except for the abstract real-ought discrepancy in relation to anxiety. Overall, the findings support the idiographic personal construct instrument most strongly for clinical assessment and for clinical, translational, and personality research.

Under vs. over Primary Control Discrepancies and Their Relationships to Well-Being in a Primary Control Culture

“…Our results show that the "general primary control cultural discrepancy" between the control orientation an individual claims s/he would use in certain situations, and the control orientation s/he thinks should be used in the same situations, is negatively related with well-being for both over and under cultural discrepancy. This corresponds to previous studies suggesting that any discrepancy between what a "person thinks he ought to do" and what "he thinks he will actually do" will be expressed in low well-being ( Festinger, 1957, Higgins, 1987, Rogers, 1951, Sanderson et al, 2008Watson, Bryan & Thrash, 2010). Thus, the expected negative correlation between "general primary control cultural discrepancy" and well-being was confirmed.…”

“…Internal Cronbach coefficient consistencies was α = 0.60. For the reliability and validity of self-discrepancy measures see: Watson, et al, (2010).…”

The role of self-discrepancies in American Jewish identities on mental and spiritual well-being.

“…While Higgins (1987) reported intercorrelation ranges from .53-.76, more recent studies have reported intercorrelations ranging from .67-.80 (Tangney et al, 2008) to even .92 (Hart et al, 1997). Some have argued that these high intercorrelations suggest that only a single discrepancy is being measured (Gramzow, Sedikides, Panter, & Insko, 2000;Tangney et al, 1998), while others continue to find evidence for two distinct discrepancies (Phillips & Silvia, 2010;Watson et al, 2010). Another plausible explanation for inconsistent results may be related to the limited ability of the utilized instruments to discriminate between anxiety and depression;…”

“…As individuals internalize the standards and expectations held by society, ethnic or religious groups, and significant others, the infusion of obligations and duties into the perception of one's own goals and desires makes the differentiation of Ideal and Ought selves problematic (Watson et al, 2010). However, the limited ability to separate these constructs may be due to problematic methods and instruments that are designed to identify self-discrepancies.…”

“…Beginning with William James' exploration of self-concept within personality, the field of psychology has explored the consequences stemming from a failure to meet one's own expectations (James, 1890;Watson, Bryan, & Thrash, 2010). According to Rogers Rogers (1951) theorized that a discrepancy between the way one actually sees oneself (Actual self) and the 'I' or 'me' that one would truly like to see (Ideal self) is the primary determinate of negative psychological states.…”