7/28/2009
Self Discrepancy Theory and
Research
The Ideal Self and Its Various Relatives
•
•
•
•
Freud’s “ego-ideal”
Adler’s “fictional finalism”
Horney’s “tyranny of the shoulds”
Jung and the danger of becoming one’s
mask or persona
• Maslow’s and Rogers’ “self-actualization”
• William James formula:
Self-esteem = accomplishments divide by
pretentions
Carl Rogers’ method for measuring
real/ideal-self discrepancies
Cue Sort (100 cards with words like
“friendly,” “disciplined,” “lonely” written
on them)
• Real-Self Sort
Participant sorts the cards into a
normal distribution placing “most like
me” cards at one end of the
distribution and “least like me” at the
other end of the distribution
1
7/28/2009
• Ideal Self Sort
Participant sorts the cards into a
normal distribution placing “most like
my ideal self” cards at one end of the
distribution and “least like my ideal
self” at the other end of the
distribution.
The positions of the cards in the two sorts
are then statistically correlated with each
other leading to:
A real/ideal-self discrepancy score
that is in the range of 1.00 to -1.00.
A high positive correlation means
that the real self is close to the ideal
self. Lower correlations indicate
higher discrepancy scores.
Rogers demonstrated the utility of this
measure in therapy outcome research and
partly due to Thorndike’s dictum: “If something
exists, it exists in some quantity. And if it exists in some
self-discrepancy
research entered into its golden days. Many
researchers climbed onto the band wagon
and published hundreds of studies
containing discrepancy scores.
quantity, it can me measured”
2
7/28/2009
Quote from Milan Kundura’s The Unbearable
Lightness of Being: “The goals we pursue are
always veiled. A girl who longs to be married
long for something she knows nothing about.
The boy who hankers for fame has not idea
what fame is. The thing that gives our every
move its meaning, is always unknown to us.”
Might we then not ask how much credibility
can be given to a number that represents the
distance between and an individual and a
phantom, the distance between one’s “now”
self and a self largely based on guess work?
Enter the Undesired Self
• On a cold and rainy November day
• The case of Jennifer
• “Where’s the beef?”
Beef was provided in a study that
showing that real/undesired
discrepancies were more related to Life
Satisfaction ratings than real/ideal
discrepancy scores.
Why might that be?
With some evidence, I argued that the
ideal self tends to be abstract and the
undesired self is more derived from
experience.
Ogilvie pays a visit to Charlie Rose on
Good Morning America. Fame lasted all
of 5-minutes and the end result was an
increase of the number of studies
containing real/ideal-self discrepancy
scores.
3
7/28/2009
E. Tory Higgins’ Self Discrepancy Theory
Retains the Ideal Self and introduces another
self called the “Ought Self”. The theory
predicts that
• Ideal discrepancies predict depression (e.g.,
sadness) also called dysphoria.
• Ought discrepancies predict anxiety (also
called agitation).
This theory was a big hit. Led to lots of
research.
Higgins’ Selves Questionnaire – synonyn/
antonym comparisons:
Ideal Self
Real Self
Smart
Good-looking
Popular
Out-going
Fun-loving
Muscular
In love
Athletic
Organized
Calm
Shy
Lonely
Intelligent
Self-critical
Wall-flower
Weak
Skinny
Book worm
Frantic
Secretive
The introduction of a new measure for self
discrepancies: The Best and Worst Scales
Best Scale
In terms of the various ways I think and feel
about myself, I would say that currently I am
Close to
Being at
My Best
1 2 3 4 5 6
Far from
Being at
My Best
4
7/28/2009
Worst Scale
In terms of the various ways I think and feel
about myself, I would say that currently I am
Close to
Being at
1 2 3 4 5 6
My worst
Far from
Being at
My Worst
A few results
• The two dimensions are independent
• Distance from “Worst” (undesired self)
is more related to both anxiety and
sadness that is distance from either Best
(ideal self) or Ought self
• While both males and females use the
undesired self as a standard for selfevaluation, females do so in a more
pronounced manner.
Results from interviews asking people to
describe what being at their worst was
like:
Females describe being at their worst in
• in interpersonal contexts
• when unhappy about appearance
• during times of transition
Male describe being at their worst in
• context of concerns about their
identities
5
7/28/2009
The undesired self is still pretty much ignored
by personality psychologists, particularly in
the current era of positive psychology. In an
effort to understand this phenomenon, let’s go
back to some descriptions of the ideal (or
best) selves and undesired (or worst) selves.
Ideal selves tend to be described in role
terminology: “I will be at my best when I have
a good job and am married.”
The undesired self (worst self) is also
described in role terminology: “I will be
lonely if I don’t get married” or “I feel at a
loss and nobody is out there to support
me.”
Back to Becker’s theory (Denial of Death)
Self esteem and social structure are
barriers against death anxiety. The rest of
the story is in the paper I assigned for
today and I will review a portion of it, time
permitting.
Death Salience Instruction: Please describe the
emotions that the thought of your own death arouses
in you.
Exam Salience Instruction: Please describe the
emotions that the thought of taking an exam arouse
in you. (Control Condition)
6
7/28/2009
Support the President Survey
It is essential that our citizens band together and support the President of
the United States in his efforts to secure our great nation against the
dangers of terrorism. Personally I endorse the actions of President Bush
and the members of his administration who have taken bold action in Iraq.
…….Mr. Bush has been a source of great inspiration to us all. God bless him
and God bless America
To what extent do you endorse this statement?
1
2
3
4
5
Strongly Somewhat Neither Somewhat Strongly
disagree disagree agree or agree
agree
disagree
4.5 Support the School
President
Taxes
4
3.5
3
2.5
Exam Salience
Death Salience
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.9 3.9
3.3 3.4
Mean Scores
7