{"id":526,"date":"2015-10-30T20:31:58","date_gmt":"2015-10-30T20:31:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.candelalearning.com\/zelixcst110\/?post_type=chapter&p=526"},"modified":"2015-10-30T20:33:30","modified_gmt":"2015-10-30T20:33:30","slug":"self-concept","status":"web-only","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/zelixcst110v2\/chapter\/self-concept\/","title":{"raw":"Self-Concept","rendered":"Self-Concept"},"content":{"raw":"Self-concept<\/a><\/span><\/strong> refers to the overall idea of who a person thinks he or she is. If I said, \u201cTell me who you are,\u201d your answers would be clues as to how you see yourself, your self-concept. Each person has an overall self-concept that might be encapsulated in a short list of overarching characteristics that he or she finds important. But each person\u2019s self-concept is also influenced by context, meaning we think differently about ourselves depending on the situation we are in. In some situations, personal characteristics, such as our abilities, personality, and other distinguishing features, will best describe who we are. You might consider yourself laid back, traditional, funny, open minded, or driven, or you might label yourself a leader or a thrill seeker. In other situations, our self-concept may be tied to group or cultural membership. For example, you might consider yourself a member of the Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity, a Southerner, or a member of the track team.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_527\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]\"Photo<\/a> Men are more likely than women to include group memberships in their self-concept descriptions.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nOur self-concept is also formed through our interactions with others and their reactions to us. The concept of the\u00a0looking glass self<\/a><\/span> explains that we see ourselves reflected in other people\u2019s reactions to us and then form our self-concept based on how we believe other people see us.[footnote]Charles Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order<\/em> (New York, NY: Scribner, 1902).[\/footnote]<\/span> This reflective process of building our self-concept is based on what other people have actually said, such as \u201cYou\u2019re a good listener,\u201d and other people\u2019s actions, such as coming to you for advice. These thoughts evoke emotional responses that feed into our self-concept. For example, you may think, \u201cI\u2019m glad that people can count on me to listen to their problems.\u201d\r\n
\r\n

We also develop our self-concept through comparisons to other people. Social comparison theory<\/a><\/span> states that we describe and evaluate ourselves in terms of how we compare to other people. Social comparisons are based on two dimensions: superiority\/inferiority and similarity\/difference.[footnote]Owen Hargie, Skilled Interpersonal Interaction: Research, Theory, and Practice<\/em> (London: Routledge, 2011), 261.[\/footnote]<\/span> In terms of superiority and inferiority, we evaluate characteristics like attractiveness, intelligence, athletic ability, and so on. For example, you may judge yourself to be more intelligent than your brother or less athletic than your best friend, and these judgments are incorporated into your self-concept. This process of comparison and evaluation isn\u2019t necessarily a bad thing, but it can have negative consequences if our reference group isn\u2019t appropriate. Reference groups are the groups we use for social comparison, and they typically change based on what we are evaluating. In terms of athletic ability, many people choose unreasonable reference groups with which to engage in social comparison. If a man wants to get into better shape and starts an exercise routine, he may be discouraged by his difficulty keeping up with the aerobics instructor or running partner and judge himself as inferior, which could negatively affect his self-concept. Using as a reference group people who have only recently started a fitness program but have shown progress could help maintain a more accurate and hopefully positive self-concept.<\/p>\r\n

We also engage in social comparison based on similarity and difference. Since self-concept is context specific, similarity may be desirable in some situations and difference more desirable in others. Factors like age and personality may influence whether or not we want to fit in or stand out. Although we compare ourselves to others throughout our lives, adolescent and teen years usually bring new pressure to be similar to or different from particular reference groups. Think of all the cliques in high school and how people voluntarily and involuntarily broke off into groups based on popularity, interest, culture, or grade level. Some kids in your high school probably wanted to fit in with and be similar to other people in the marching band but be different from the football players. Conversely, athletes were probably more apt to compare themselves, in terms of similar athletic ability, to other athletes rather than kids in show choir. But social comparison can be complicated by perceptual influences. As we learned earlier, we organize information based on similarity and difference, but these patterns don\u2019t always hold true. Even though students involved in athletics and students involved in arts may seem very different, a dancer or singer may also be very athletic, perhaps even more so than a member of the football team. As with other aspects of perception, there are positive and negative consequences of social comparison.<\/p>\r\n

We generally want to know where we fall in terms of ability and performance as compared to others, but what people do with this information and how it affects self-concept varies. Not all people feel they need to be at the top of the list, but some won\u2019t stop until they get the high score on the video game or set a new school record in a track-and-field event. Some people strive to be first chair in the clarinet section of the orchestra, while another person may be content to be second chair. The education system promotes social comparison through grades and rewards such as honor rolls and dean\u2019s lists. Although education and privacy laws prevent me from displaying each student\u2019s grade on a test or paper for the whole class to see, I do typically report the aggregate grades, meaning the total number of As, Bs, Cs, and so on. This doesn\u2019t violate anyone\u2019s privacy rights, but it allows students to see where they fell in the distribution. This type of social comparison can be used as motivation. The student who was one of only three out of twenty-three to get a D on the exam knows that most of her classmates are performing better than she is, which may lead her to think, \u201cIf they can do it, I can do it.\u201d But social comparison that isn\u2019t reasoned can have negative effects and result in negative thoughts like \u201cLook at how bad I did. Man, I\u2019m stupid!\u201d These negative thoughts can lead to negative behaviors, because we try to maintain internal consistency, meaning we act in ways that match up with our self-concept. So if the student begins to question her academic abilities and then incorporates an assessment of herself as a \u201cbad student\u201d into her self-concept, she may then behave in ways consistent with that, which is only going to worsen her academic performance. Additionally, a student might be comforted to learn that he isn\u2019t the only person who got a D and then not feel the need to try to improve, since he has company. You can see in this example that evaluations we place on our self-concept can lead to cycles of thinking and acting. These cycles relate to self-esteem and self-efficacy, which are components of our self-concept.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

<\/div>","rendered":"

Self-concept<\/a><\/span><\/strong> refers to the overall idea of who a person thinks he or she is. If I said, \u201cTell me who you are,\u201d your answers would be clues as to how you see yourself, your self-concept. Each person has an overall self-concept that might be encapsulated in a short list of overarching characteristics that he or she finds important. But each person\u2019s self-concept is also influenced by context, meaning we think differently about ourselves depending on the situation we are in. In some situations, personal characteristics, such as our abilities, personality, and other distinguishing features, will best describe who we are. You might consider yourself laid back, traditional, funny, open minded, or driven, or you might label yourself a leader or a thrill seeker. In other situations, our self-concept may be tied to group or cultural membership. For example, you might consider yourself a member of the Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity, a Southerner, or a member of the track team.<\/p>\n

\"Photo<\/a><\/p>\n

Men are more likely than women to include group memberships in their self-concept descriptions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Our self-concept is also formed through our interactions with others and their reactions to us. The concept of the\u00a0looking glass self<\/a><\/span> explains that we see ourselves reflected in other people\u2019s reactions to us and then form our self-concept based on how we believe other people see us.[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/span> This reflective process of building our self-concept is based on what other people have actually said, such as \u201cYou\u2019re a good listener,\u201d and other people\u2019s actions, such as coming to you for advice. These thoughts evoke emotional responses that feed into our self-concept. For example, you may think, \u201cI\u2019m glad that people can count on me to listen to their problems.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

We also develop our self-concept through comparisons to other people. Social comparison theory<\/a><\/span> states that we describe and evaluate ourselves in terms of how we compare to other people. Social comparisons are based on two dimensions: superiority\/inferiority and similarity\/difference.[2]<\/sup><\/a><\/span> In terms of superiority and inferiority, we evaluate characteristics like attractiveness, intelligence, athletic ability, and so on. For example, you may judge yourself to be more intelligent than your brother or less athletic than your best friend, and these judgments are incorporated into your self-concept. This process of comparison and evaluation isn\u2019t necessarily a bad thing, but it can have negative consequences if our reference group isn\u2019t appropriate. Reference groups are the groups we use for social comparison, and they typically change based on what we are evaluating. In terms of athletic ability, many people choose unreasonable reference groups with which to engage in social comparison. If a man wants to get into better shape and starts an exercise routine, he may be discouraged by his difficulty keeping up with the aerobics instructor or running partner and judge himself as inferior, which could negatively affect his self-concept. Using as a reference group people who have only recently started a fitness program but have shown progress could help maintain a more accurate and hopefully positive self-concept.<\/p>\n

We also engage in social comparison based on similarity and difference. Since self-concept is context specific, similarity may be desirable in some situations and difference more desirable in others. Factors like age and personality may influence whether or not we want to fit in or stand out. Although we compare ourselves to others throughout our lives, adolescent and teen years usually bring new pressure to be similar to or different from particular reference groups. Think of all the cliques in high school and how people voluntarily and involuntarily broke off into groups based on popularity, interest, culture, or grade level. Some kids in your high school probably wanted to fit in with and be similar to other people in the marching band but be different from the football players. Conversely, athletes were probably more apt to compare themselves, in terms of similar athletic ability, to other athletes rather than kids in show choir. But social comparison can be complicated by perceptual influences. As we learned earlier, we organize information based on similarity and difference, but these patterns don\u2019t always hold true. Even though students involved in athletics and students involved in arts may seem very different, a dancer or singer may also be very athletic, perhaps even more so than a member of the football team. As with other aspects of perception, there are positive and negative consequences of social comparison.<\/p>\n

We generally want to know where we fall in terms of ability and performance as compared to others, but what people do with this information and how it affects self-concept varies. Not all people feel they need to be at the top of the list, but some won\u2019t stop until they get the high score on the video game or set a new school record in a track-and-field event. Some people strive to be first chair in the clarinet section of the orchestra, while another person may be content to be second chair. The education system promotes social comparison through grades and rewards such as honor rolls and dean\u2019s lists. Although education and privacy laws prevent me from displaying each student\u2019s grade on a test or paper for the whole class to see, I do typically report the aggregate grades, meaning the total number of As, Bs, Cs, and so on. This doesn\u2019t violate anyone\u2019s privacy rights, but it allows students to see where they fell in the distribution. This type of social comparison can be used as motivation. The student who was one of only three out of twenty-three to get a D on the exam knows that most of her classmates are performing better than she is, which may lead her to think, \u201cIf they can do it, I can do it.\u201d But social comparison that isn\u2019t reasoned can have negative effects and result in negative thoughts like \u201cLook at how bad I did. Man, I\u2019m stupid!\u201d These negative thoughts can lead to negative behaviors, because we try to maintain internal consistency, meaning we act in ways that match up with our self-concept. So if the student begins to question her academic abilities and then incorporates an assessment of herself as a \u201cbad student\u201d into her self-concept, she may then behave in ways consistent with that, which is only going to worsen her academic performance. Additionally, a student might be comforted to learn that he isn\u2019t the only person who got a D and then not feel the need to try to improve, since he has company. You can see in this example that evaluations we place on our self-concept can lead to cycles of thinking and acting. These cycles relate to self-esteem and self-efficacy, which are components of our self-concept.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Candela Citations<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
CC licensed content, Shared previously<\/div>