2. Introduction
• The nature of the self and how we present ourselves to others has been
central topic of research in social psychology.
• Self-presentation: Managing The Self In Different Social Context
• Thinking about ourselves influence our choices and behaviors.
• It also serves as a reference point of view for how we perceive and
interact with others.
• We try to ensure that others form impression of us based on our most
favorable self-aspects, that is, we engage in:
– self-promotion-“attempting to present ourselves to others as having
positive attributes (traits)”.
For example:
• If we want others to think we are smart, we can emphasize on
credentials that is, grades obtained, awards won and degrees sought.
• If we want others to conclude we are fun, we will tell them stories
about ourselves that show we are fun-loving.
• If we tell people we are really good at something, people will often
believe us and saying so may even help convince ourselves that it is
true.
3. Self-knowledge: How Do We Know Who We Are?
• American psychologist, William
James described the basic duality of
our perception of self. That
includes:
– Self-concept
– Self-awareness
Self-concept
• “The self is composed of our
thoughts and beliefs about
ourselves called “The Known” or
“Me”.
• “Known aspect of the self”.
Perception Of The Self-who Am I?
– Physical (tall, short, male,
female)
– Skills and competencies (smart,
athletic)
– Psychological (beliefs, shy,
energetic)
– Social (friendly, popular)
– Groups (club, church)
Self-awareness
• Self-awareness is--- the act of
thinking about ourselves.
• The self is also active processor of
information that is, the “Knower”
or “I” aspect of the self.
• These two aspects of the self
combine to create a coherent sense
of identity.
4.
5.
6. Thinking About The Self: Personal Versus Social
Identity
• According to social identity theory:
– we can perceive ourselves differently at any given moment in
time------ depending on----- where we are on:
– the personal versus social identity continuum.
Personal versus social identity continuum:
– Personal versus social identity continuum signifies the two
distinct ways that can be categorized:
Personal Id level
Social Id level
Personal Id Level Social Id Level
7. Personal Identity (Id) Level
• Personal Id end of the continuum refers to when we think of
ourselves primarily as:------ unique individuals.
• How it is described depends on:
– “intra-group comparison”
• Judgments that result from:
– comparisons between individuals who are members of the
same group.
For example:
• How you characterize yourself if you are asked to describe how
you’re different from other Pakistani citizens.
• Answer would be: you describe yourself as liberal.
• For Personal Id, the context we generate to describe ourselves
depends on some comparisons, this way we describe ourselves
differently.
8. Social Identity (Id) Level
• Social Id end refers to when we think ourselves as-----
members of specific social groups (category).
• How it is described as a result of:
– “inter-group comparison”
• Judgments that result from:
– comparisons between our group and another group.
• When we think of ourselves at social Id level:
– we describe ourselves in terms of attributes that
members of our group share with each other
– and what differentiates our group from other
groups.
9. Example:
• If you are female, you might emphasize the attributes that you share with other
women (e.g., warm and caring) and that you observe, differentiates women
from men.
• When we think of ourselves at the social identity level, we describe ourselves:
– in terms of the attributes, that members of our group share with each other
– and
– what differentiates “our group” from other groups.
• That is, descriptions of the self at the social identity level are intergroup in
nature—they involve contrasts between groups.
• If my family was the group I was considering when describing myself,
– I might say that I’m a very patient person,
• even though I would not describe myself in this way if I were thinking of:
women,
or scientists,
or some other group that I belong to as the comparison.
• The point is that:--- even for personal identity, ----the content we generate
depends on some comparative reference, and this can result in different self-
descriptors coming to mind, depending on the context.
10. Figure : Seeing the Self as Competent Can Depend on
the Context .
This woman may define herself as competent in her
role as executive but not so competent in her parental
role (at least some days)!!
For example,
When you are at home with your parents, your self-
image as a responsible adult might sometimes
come into question. You might not pick up things or
you might even expect that someone else will do your
laundry, and so forth.
When, however, you are away at college, you perform
these tasks competently and feel like a responsible
adult. Despite such behaviour of irresponsibility, does
that mean you will generally see yourself in this way?
No, definitely not. You may maintain an image of
yourself as responsible, either because the domains in
which you are irresponsible are not particularly
important to you, or they are not noticeable when you
think of yourself as a college student.
This means that only only some reference
groups are important for self-definition.
Thus, some people may be affected by their families’
perceptions of their competence, but not their
professors, while others may show the reverse .
11. • Conclusion
• What’s important to note here is that:
– when you think of yourself as an individual,
– the content of your self description is likely to differ ------
– From----
– when you are thinking of yourself as a member of a category
(social group) that you share with others.
• We don’t experience all aspects of the self simultaneously, which
aspect of our Id is significant -------at any given moment----- will
influence how we think about ourselves.
• Most of us are members of a variety of different groups (e.g.,
occupation, age group, gender orientation, nationality, sports
teams etc), but:
– all of these will not be noticeable at the same time
• So at any given time (according to situation), we define ourselves
differently creating many selves.
12.
13. Self-esteem: Attitudes Towards Ourselves
• The degree to which the Self is perceived:
– either positively
– or negatively
– that is, one’s overall attitude towards the Self.
Positive (i.e., pride; satisfaction, elation)
Negative (i.e., disappointment; dejection; guilt)
• Self-esteem is the evaluation we make of ourselves.
Aspects Of Self-esteem
• How one gets along with others (likeable; friendly)
• Competence (academics; intellectual ability; physical abilities;
skills)
• Physical appearance( tall/short; fair/tan; skinny/chubby)
• Personal goodness (morals; ethics; conscientious)
14. Self Esteem (Cont’d)
The Need For Self-esteem
• Our sense of self-esteem serve as a sociometer-a rough indicator
of how we are doing in the eyes of others.
• People have high need for self-esteem and want to see
themselves in a positive light.
• People with low self-esteem often find themselves in a vicious
circle of self-defeating behavior.
Self-esteem injured by: Self-esteem boosted by:
1. Romantic rejection
2. Expulsion from family or group
3. Failure
4. Unemployment
5. Loss of loved ones
1. Praise
2. Love
3. Bonding
4. Admission to desired group
5. Accomplishment
15. Is High Self-esteem Always Beneficial
• Is it reasonable to ask whether high self-esteem is a crucial goal for which we should all
strive? Lack of high self-esteem or presence of low self-esteem is the root of many social
ills including drug abuse, depression, poor school performance and various forms of
violence. Low self-esteem is an important cause of aggression and general negativity
towards others. Strong evidence has been of the opposite conclusion, that is, high self-
esteem has been found to be related to:
• Bullying
• Narcissism
• Exhibitionism
• Self-aggrandizing
• Interpersonal aggression
• Men with high self-esteem rather than low self-esteem are more likely to commit acts of
violence towards those who contest their positive self-view.
HIGH SELF-ESTEEM LOW SELF-ESTEEM
People with high self-esteem judge themselves
favorably and feel positive about themselves.
People with low self-esteem judge themselves
negatively, are unhappy with themselves and
often would rather be someone else.
16. Social Comparison: Knowing The Self
• How do we know ourselves whether we are good or bad in
various domains?
• What are our best or worst traits?
• And how likeable we are to others?
• All human’s judgment is relative to some standards of
comparison, that is, how we think about and feel about ourselves
depends on the standards of comparison we use.
• You might be wondering why we compare ourselves with other
people----- at all.
• Festinger’s (1954) social comparison theory suggested that:
– people compare themselves to others when there is no
objective yardstick to evaluate the self-----against other’s
performance.
17. Types Of Social Comparison
• Downward social comparison.
• Upward social comparison.
Downward Social Comparison
• Comparing oneself to others
who do less well than the self.
• Comparing with someone of
lesser ability than ourselves.
Upward Social Comparison
• Comparing oneself to others
who do better than the self.
• Comparing with someone who
out-performs us in areas
central to the self.
18. Contexts Of Comparison
• Two influential perspectives on the self—are build on Festinger’s
(1954) original social comparison theory to describe: the
consequences of social comparison in different contexts.
– Self-evaluation maintenance model.
– Social identity theory.
Self-evaluation Maintenance Model
• Self-evaluation maintenance applies when we categorize the self
at the personal level and we compare ourselves as an individual
with another individual.
• Self-evaluation maintenance model suggests that:
– to maintain positive view of the personal self, people distance
themselves from others who perform better than they do
– but move closer to others who perform worse than they do.
• This view suggests that doing so will protect our self-esteem.
19. Distance themselves Move closer
Who performs better and to maintain positive
image.
Who performs worse because that makes them feel
good.
• Such psychological movement:
• toward
• and away
from a comparison other----- who performs better or worse than you---- illustrates an
important means by which positive self-evaluations are maintained.
• This view suggests that doing so will protect our self-esteem.
20. Social Identity Theory
• Social identity theory applies when we categorize the self at
the group level (for example, as a African American), and
the comparison other ----is sharing the same category
(group) as the self.
For example, another African American who performs poorly might be
embarrassing to our African identity if we categorize the self as also belonging to
that group.
• Social identity theory suggests that:
– to maintain a positive view of their group Id, people will
move closer to positive others with whom they share an
identity.
– But distance from those who perform poorly or
somehow make social Id negative (black sheep effect).
• By doing so, we protect the image of our own group
identity.
21. • Black Sheep effect
• In social psychology, the term black sheep effect, refers to a
more specific phenomenon:
– in which someone who is socially undesirable (unlikable) is
liked less if he or she is a member of your group (an ingroup
member) than if he or she is a member of a group to which
you do not belong (an outgroup member).
– Conversely, someone who is socially desirable (likable) is
liked more if he or she is a member of your ingroup rather
than a member of an outgroup.
• E.g. when we see a Muslim(Ingroup) actress or actor performing
in Indian cinema industry we criticize them more as compare to
Nonmuslim (outgroup) working in the same industry
