Self-esteem and direct versus indirect forms of self-enhancement.

Abstract

Two studies explored the relation between self-esteem and self-enhancement biases. It was proposed that people with high self-esteem engage in forms of self-enhancement in which the self is directly linked to positive identities and outcomes, whereas people with low self-esteem engage in forms of self-enhancement in which the self is indirectly linked to positive identities and outcomes. To test the hypothesis, we examined group favoritism as a function of self-esteem and group involvement. As expected, high self-esteem subjects were most apt to display favoritism when they were directly involved in group processes, whereas low self-esteem subjects were most apt to display favoritism when they were not directly involved in group processes. Furthermore, consistent with the view that these tendencies reflect a motivated desire to enhance self-worth, these effects were less evident after subjects had received positive feedback than after they had received negative feedback. The discussion centers on the nature of high and low self-esteem and the influence of self-enhancement and self-consistency motives in social behavior.Conventional wisdom holds that self-serving biases are principally the refuge of those with low self-esteem. This position, typically referred to as self-enhancement theory (Shrauger, 1975), is based on the notion that all individuals are motivated to maintain a positive self-concept, and that the need for selfenhancement increases the more the desire to think favorably of the self goes unfulfilled. In their efforts to shore up a negative self-image, those with low self-esteem are presumed to distort and bias personal information in a self-enhancing direction (cf. Dittes, 1959;Jones, 1973;Kaplan, 1975).In contrast to the preceding view, which holds that self-enhancement biases are more prevalent among those with low self-esteem than among those with high self-esteem, other theories suggest that individuals with high self-esteem are more apt to display evidence of self-enhancement. Self-consistency theorists (Lecky, 1945;Swann, 1983 contend that individuals are motivated to maintain a consistent self-image because stable self-views enable them to predict and control their world (Epstein, 1973). From this perspective, people with high selfesteem more than those with low self-esteem should exhibit selfenhancing biases, because such biases strengthen the self-image of those with positive self-views but threaten the self-image of those with negative self-views.Despite the theoretical elegance of each of these arguments, recent research has failed to distinguish consistently between these opposing views (McFarlin & Blascovich, 1981;Swann, Griffin, Predmore, & Gaines, 1987). Under some conditions and with some dependent variables, people with low self-esteem This research and preparation of this article were supported by a New Faculty Seed Grant from Southern Methodist University to Jonathon D. Brown.We thank Bill Swann and Shelley Taylor for their helpful comments on a previous version of this article.

Relationship between Anxiety, Self-Confidence, and Evaluation of Coaching Behaviors

“…As a result, low-confident athletes may perceive and evaluate more coaching behaviors negatively. Brown, Collins, and Schmidt (1988) and Smith and Smoll(1990) suggested that individuals who are low in self-esteem may be more reliant on indirect measures of self-worth, such as those received through the feedback from others, to satisfy their self-enhancement needs. In a similar way, the low-confident athlete may rely on the coach's verbal and nonverbal feedback to assist in building confidence.…”

TARGET ARTICLE: Toward a Conceptualization of Optimal Self-Esteem

“…Conversely, when low explicit self-esteem is accompanied by positive implicit self-esteem, self-serving responses may serve to undermine conscious negative self-feelings, if only temporarily. This undermining of conscious negative self-feelings may increase low self-esteem individuals' felt safety or risk-taking to engage in self-protection and self-enhancing strategies (Brown, Collins, & Schmidt, 1988;Wood, Giordano-Beech, Taylor, Michela, & Gaus, 1994). These assertions are speculative, however, and they await direct empirical support.…”

Perceiving the World Through Group-Colored Glasses: A Perceptual Model of Intergroup Relations

“…For instance, early investigations of the "minimal group paradigm" had people perform a trivial task such as guessing the number of dots in a rapidly presented image or expressing preference for abstract paintings from Klee and Kandinsky (J. D. Brown, Collins, & Schmidt, 1988;Tajfel et al, 1971). Surprisingly, even such minimal and arbitrary assignment of "groups" led people to express ingroup favoritism in resource allocation, giving more money to anonymous ingroup members (Tajfel, 1982).…”