Self-Esteem (Current Issues in Social Psychology)

Data are from Cheng and Chartrand As you can see in Figure 4. Although the low self-monitors did mimic the other person, they did not mimic her more when the other was high, versus low, status. Our discussion to this point suggests that people will generally try to view themselves in the most positive possible light and to present themselves to others as favorably as they can. We emphasize our positive characteristics, and we may even in some cases distort information—all to help us maintain positive self-esteem.

There is a negative aspect to having too much self-esteem, however, at least when the esteem is unrealistic and undeserved. Narcissism is a personality trait characterized by overly high self-esteem, self-admiration, and self-centeredness. Narcissists agree with statements such as the following:. People do not normally like narcissists because they are unrealistic and think only of themselves. Narcissists may also be obnoxious, continually interrupting and bullying others, and they may respond very negatively to criticism.

Although they make positive first impressions, people eventually see narcissists less positively than narcissists see themselves, in part because they are perceived as arrogant. Teachers, parents, school counselors, and people in general frequently assume that high self-esteem causes many positive outcomes for people who have it and therefore that we should try to increase it in ourselves and others.

Perhaps you agree with the idea that if you could increase your self-esteem, you would feel better about yourself and therefore be able to study harder, get better grades, or attract a more desirable mate. If you do believe that, you would not be alone. They began by assessing which variables were correlated with high self-esteem and then considered the extent to which high self-esteem caused these outcomes. Baumeister and his colleagues found that high self-esteem does correlate with many positive outcomes. People with high self-esteem get better grades, are less depressed, feel less stress, and may even live longer than those who view themselves more negatively.

The researchers also found that high self-esteem was correlated with greater initiative and activity, such that high self-esteem people just did more things. People with high self-esteem are more likely to be bullies, but they are also more likely to defend victims against bullies, compared with people with low self-esteem.

People with high self-esteem are more likely to initiate interactions and relationships. They are more likely to speak up in groups and to experiment with alcohol, drugs, and sex. High self-esteem people also work harder in response to initial failure and are more willing to switch to a new line of endeavor if the present one seems unpromising. Thus having high self-esteem seems to be a valuable resource—people with high self-esteem are happier, more active, and in many ways better able to deal with their environment.

On the other hand, Baumeister and his colleagues also found that people with high self-esteem may sometimes delude themselves. High self-esteem people believe that they are more likable and attractive, have better relationships, and make better impressions on others than people with low self-esteem. But objective measures show that these beliefs are often distortions rather than facts. Todd Heatherton and Kathleen Vohs found that when people with extremely high self-esteem were forced to fail on a difficult task in front of a partner, they responded by acting more unfriendly, rudely, and arrogantly than did students with lower self-esteem.

If you are thinking like a social psychologist, these findings may not surprise you—narcissists are all about self-concern, with little concern for others, and we have seen many times that other-concern is a necessity for satisfactory social relations. Despite the many positive variables that relate to high self-esteem, when Baumeister and his colleagues looked at the causal role of self-esteem is they found little evidence that high self-esteem caused these positive outcomes. For instance, although high self-esteem is correlated with academic achievement, it is more the result than the cause of this achievement.

Programs designed to boost the self-esteem of pupils have not been shown to improve academic performance, and laboratory studies have generally failed to find that manipulations of self-esteem cause better task performance. In the end then, Baumeister and his colleagues concluded that programs designed to boost self-esteem should be used only in a limited way and should not be the only approach taken.

Raising self-esteem will not make young people do better in school, obey the law, stay out of trouble, get along better with other people, or respect the rights of others. And these programs may even backfire, if the increased self-esteem creates narcissism or conceit. Baumeister and his colleagues suggested that attempts to boost self-esteem should only be carried out as a reward for good behavior and worthy achievements, and not simply to try to make children feel better about themselves.

Although we naturally desire to have social status and high self-esteem, we cannot always promote ourselves without any regard to the accuracy of our self-characterizations. If we consistently distort our capabilities, and particularly if we do this over a long period of time, we will just end up fooling ourselves and perhaps engaging in behaviors that are not actually beneficial to us. One of my colleagues has a son in high school who loves to think that he is an incredible golfer who could compete on the professional golf tour with the best golfers in the world.

His parents are worried about him because although they realize that his high self-esteem might propel him to work harder at this sport, and although he certainly enjoys thinking positively about himself, he may also be setting himself up for long-term failure. How long can he continue to consider himself in this overly positive way before the reality comes crashing down on him that perhaps he really is not cut out for a life on the professional golf circuit and that he should consider doing something else?

The hope is that it will not be too late to take up a more reasonable career when he does. When we promote ourselves too much, although we may feel good about it in the short term, in the longer term the outcomes for the self may not be that positive. Although we may prefer to hold highly favorable views of ourselves, more accurate views would almost certainly be more useful because accurate information is likely to lead to better decision making.

Indeed, research suggests that people do not only self-enhance; they also desire to be known for who they believe they are, even if what they are is not all good. In some cases, the cognitive goal of obtaining an accurate picture of ourselves and our social world and the affective goal of gaining positive self-esteem work hand in hand. Getting the best grade in the class on an important exam produces accurate knowledge about our skills in the domain as well as giving us some positive self-esteem. In other cases, the two goals are incompatible. Doing more poorly on an exam than we had hoped produces conflicting, contradictory outcomes.

The poor score provides accurate information about the self—namely, that we have not mastered the subject—but at the same time makes us feel bad. It is in these cases that we must learn to reconcile our self-concept with our self-esteem. We must be able to accept our negative aspects and to work to overcome them. The ability to balance the cognitive and the affective features of the self helps us create efficient and effective behavior. Jennifer Crocker and Lora Park have noted still another cost of our attempts to inflate our self-esteem: We may spend so much time trying to enhance our self-esteem in the eyes of others—by focusing on the clothes we are wearing, impressing others, and so forth—that we have little time left to really improve ourselves in more meaningful ways.

And in some extreme cases, people experience such strong needs to improve their self-esteem and social status that they act in assertive or dominant ways in order to gain it.

The Feeling Self: Self-Esteem – Principles of Social Psychology

As in many other domains, then, having positive self-esteem is a good thing, but we must be careful to temper it with a healthy realism and a concern for others. Testosterone, alcohol, and civil and rough conflict resolution strategies in lesbian couples. Journal of Homosexuality, 42 4 , 77— Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles?

Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4 1 , 1— Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 1 , 5— Valence transfers when product specific needs are active. Journal of Consumer Research, 32 , — Narcissism and commitment in romantic relationships: An investment model analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28 , — Narcissism, self-esteem, and the positivity of self-views: Two portraits of self-love. Gender and social influence.

Journal of Social Issues, 57 4 , — Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1 , — Using mimicry as a nonconscious affiliation strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 6 , — The costly pursuit of self-esteem. Psychological Bulletin, , — Testosterone differences among college fraternities: Personality and Individual Differences, 20 2 , — Power displays between women and men in discussions of gender linked tasks: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55 , — Psychological Bulletin, 4 , — Using the Implicit Association Test to measure self-esteem and self-concept.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 6 , — The investigation of self-esteem and personal and social responsibility may allow us to gain insights into more cost-effective strategies that are relevant to all citizens and that, over the next generation, can reduce the growing incidence of social problems and their related personal and economic costs. This work also challenges us to recognize the critical need for a long-term focus, for rigorous research that can evaluate the impact of strategies and programs designed to promote self-esteem.

• 60 Color Paintings of Paolo Uccello (Paolo di Dono) - Italian Early Renaissance Painter (1397 – December 10, 1475).
• Les belles de Cocteau (Essais et documents) (French Edition).
• Self-esteem - Wikipedia.
• Navigation menu!
• .
• The Social Importance of Self-Esteem?

Our modern ideas surrounding self-esteem and personal and social responsibility have a rich heritage. The language has changed, but the ideas inherent in this perspective have not. Indeed, the California task. Leaders, poets, scholars, and historians from the earliest of times believed what we believe today: The scholarly work included in this volume brings academic rigor to this heritage. In addition, the various chapters pose the critical research questions that can significantly increase the depth and clarity of this investigation into self-esteem.

These contributions reflect the productive work that is itself a key ingredient of self-esteem. It is perhaps a romantic notion that self-esteem is related to concepts such as honesty, charity, dignity, faith, intellectual energy, optimism, self-acceptance, courage, and love. But our hope is that self-esteem and personal and social responsibility will be our legacy, what we leave behind for our children.

In doing so, we will have brought to our community, our human family, a very great gift indeed. On behalf of the California Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem and Personal and Social Responsibility, I welcome your participation in our pioneering efforts to address the causes and cures of many of the social ills that plague us today. Our work and our study center on the issue of self-esteem—a quality that most profoundly affects both the lives of individuals and the life of our society. In the s, certain visionaries recognized that we could unlock the secret of the atom.

Our best scientists were enlisted, and our attention, talent, creativity, and resources were focused on that endeavor. In the s, other visionaries mounted the same kind of effort as we attempted to plumb the reaches and mysteries of outer space. Our remarkable success in both these enterprises reveals the power of the human vision, human capacities, and directed collective efforts.

For the s, we owe it to ourselves to seek to unlock the secrets of healthy human development. It is time to plumb the reaches and mysteries of inner space and discover effective strategies that could serve to improve our communities, our personal lives, and the lives of those around us. The issue placed before us has been clearly stated by political economist Thomas Sowell in his book A Conflict of Visions. He points out that the role of a vision is to inform our expectations of ourselves and of life and thereby our choice of practice in every human relationship.

Every political structure and ideology, every pedagogy, every social in-. Sowell argues that, historically and philosophically, there are only two such informing visions: These two visions were clearly articulated for me in two pointed comments. I heard the first in Sacramento in at a community forum on educational goals. An elderly woman rose and said to the gathering, "All this talk about goals is fine, but the real issue concerns the means we choose to attain our goals. And when you realize that little children arrive in this world as monsters needing to be tamed, you know what means to choose.

The second comment was made in , when Carl Rogers, the humanistic psychologist, told a group of guests at a dinner party in Irvine, "You know, I've been practicing psychology for more than sixty years, and I have really come to believe that we human beings are innately inclined toward becoming constructive and life-affirming and responsible and trustworthy. These two contradictory visions represent far more than a philosophical argument. Their practical implications can be seen in every sphere of life, for our choices about how we pursue any human relationship always proceed from the fundamental view of human nature that each of us holds.

It is essential that we recognize for ourselves and acknowledge to others our particular personal vision. It is the latter vision—that human beings are innately inclined toward good and that free, healthy people become constructive and responsible—which underlies the philosophy and work of what has been called the "self-esteem movement.

The term self-esteem implies a deeply felt appreciation of oneself and one's natural being, a trust of one's instincts and abilities. It is that kind. Our hope is that the California Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem will serve as a vehicle to focus our attention and efforts on such goals. Not only the enhancement of individual lives but the cure and prevention of some of society's most serious problems may be at stake. Why has California taken the lead in this endeavor? Historically, California often seems to be on the cutting edge: California is first among the states in population, with twenty-eight million residents, and more added each year.

We are first in the basics of life, from agriculture, which nourishes our bodies, to arts and entertainment, which nourish our spirits. The technological revolution was born here, in Silicon Valley, and we have developed an economy that, were we a separate nation, would have the sixth largest gross national product in the world.

Standing on these foundations, Californians are also engaged in attempts to realize our higher aspirations. In doing so, we find ourselves involved in four remarkable and converging revolutions, which are breaking new ground in developing both individuality and community, as well as providing us with unprecedented opportunities and challenges. First, California is experiencing a revolution of race and ethnicity. We are about to become the first state in the mainland United States with a majority of nonwhites.

In the fall of , for the first time, a majority of the children in our public schools were non-Anglo, and that change will also occur among California's general population shortly after the year California is becoming an "international" state, with the opportunity to create a truly multicultural democracy.

Our ability to do so may depend on each of us developing a healthy sense of self-esteem, so that, instead of being insecure and threatened by persons who differ from us, we can appreciate one another and be enriched by persons of different races, ethnic backgrounds, and cultures. Second, California shares with several other states a leading role in the gender revolution. In education, politics, business, labor, and religion, we are growing to recognize the inherent capacity and rights of women to be fully equal, as well as the inherent capacity and rights of men to be tender, compassionate, and cooperative.

This revolution today encompasses our lives, from individual households to the board-. Again, realizing its potential may depend on the cultivation of self-esteem among both women and men, enabling us to meet one another openly and comfortably, as peers. Third, California shares with Florida a prominent role in the revolution of aging. The fastest growing cohort of Californians is composed of people over the age of eighty-five.

Instead of languishing in retirement, many of these individuals are actively bringing their experience, wisdom, and generosity to the enterprise of building society. Carl Rogers, for example, at the age of eighty-four, spent a month in the Soviet Union advising leaders there, as he had here, about ways to individualize instruction and foster creativity. Fourth, California leads the revolution in developing human potential. From the analyst's couch to the group, and from the Center for the Study of the Person in La Jolla to the Esalen Institute in Big Sur, more of us have openly dared to wonder what it means to be human and to experiment with "becoming a person," exploring dimensions of trust, intimacy, responsibility, and spirituality.

These revolutionary developments have combined with major cultural trends—the social action movements of the s, the personal growth movement of the s, and the entrepreneurial spirit of the s. Together, all these strands now seem to be converging in the self-esteem movement. For all the reasons discussed above, it seems somehow right that this movement should be centered in California—and perhaps it is no accident that so many of its theoretical and practicing pioneers were or are residents of our state: Many individuals and groups had been addressing the issue of self-esteem for some time, of course, but as the author of the legislation creating the task force, I seem to have been the first public official to recognize the centrality of this issue and to propose that government pay attention to it in a systematic way.

As is often the case with our choice of our life's work, my motivations proceed from my own life history. My commitment to the task force is an expression of my own converging needs and interests, both personal and legislative. I grew up in the s in a constrained, traditional, Catholic family. I was educated in both public schools and Catholic Jesuit schools, through college and law school.

In school, I was a high-achiever, receiving awards and excellent grades. In adulthood, I became a prominent. My first campaign for a seat in the state legislature in was successful, and I have now been reelected eleven times. Yet, through it all, I had almost no sense of my self, no self-esteem. I worked for my successes only in a constant attempt to please others. My intellect functioned superbly, but the rest of my self barely functioned at all.

I had been conditioned to know myself basically as a sinner, guiltridden and ashamed, constantly beating my breast and professing my unworthiness. I had so little self-esteem that I lost my first election running for eighth-grade president by one vote—my own. Awakening painfully to this problem, I began in to invest long and difficult years in redeveloping my self-esteem. During the past twenty-two years, I have been involved in various forms of therapy, beginning with Carl Rogers's person-centered therapy, with a priest-psychologist, and continuing today with bioenergetics therapy, all with the aim of opening up and more fully integrating myself as a whole person.

My life and work have become increasingly focused on this compelling issue of self-esteem, not only in relation to my own development but also in terms of enabling others to develop a strong sense of self. My personal experience has taught me how very central and vital healthy self-esteem is. This outlook has become so ingrained within me that it has become essential to my political views and priorities. My legislative record has paralleled and in some ways become a reflection of my personal growth.

In its essence, after all, politics properly understood is nothing more than the making of policy for all of us together, the sum of our individual beings. In , I became head of the California State Assembly's Ways and Means Committee, responsible for reviewing spending legislation and the state's annual budget. Year after year, we spend ever-increasing billions of tax dollars to contain destructive behaviors, to compensate for human failures after the fact—more than a billion dollars each year for building prisons and two billion for operating them, as well as substantial sums for programs to address alcoholism, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, child abuse, welfare dependency, and school dropouts.

It struck me that all these programs were focused on containment and remediation; almost none attempted prevention, much less cure. Most were based on the traditional assumption that we really can't hope to do much better, because people are intrinsically evil. The all-too-frequent failures were self-fulfilling prophecies, in terms of both human misery and financial efficiency. It seemed foolish and tragic to keep. More and more frequently, I found, both the researchers studying social problems and the practitioners dealing with the individuals involved were citing self-esteem as a factor believed to be central to these problems.

In light of the emerging evidence, it seemed both morally and fiscally responsible to create a formalized governmental effort to explore whether in fact self-esteem might be a "social vaccine," a quality capable of strengthening people, making them less vulnerable to problem behaviors. Although I recognized that such a notion might sound "California-weird" and pose some political risks, my interest, my own growing self-esteem, and my supportive relationships outdistanced my caution. I consulted my long-time friend Jack Canfield—a self-esteem expert—who said, "It's time.

Let's do something about it. Somewhat to my surprise, that bill passed the assembly, although it died in the state senate. Nolan had asked, "You really want to help people learn how to live without the government taking care of them? Again, the bill passed the assembly. This time, it also passed in the state senate by a vote of twenty-eight to eleven, but Governor George Deukmejian vetoed it, arguing that self-esteem had already been studied enough and that in any case the task could be accomplished more appropriately by the university than by the state government.

I reintroduced the bill in and focused on developing strategies to ensure its enactment. In an attempt to speak to the concerns of more conservatives, the bill's title and purpose were broadened to include the promotion of "personal and social responsibility. I resisted much urging to abandon the term self-esteem, however; I believed that was precisely what we needed to address, and I wanted the legislation to be straightforward. I personally lobbied every state senator who had voted against the legislation in , and the senate finally passed the bill unanimously.

Our campaign moved on, to focus on Governor Deukmejian. With grassroots organizing, we generated more than four hundred letters, personalized and passionate, urging him to sign the bill. The governor and I had three very intense one-on-one conversations about this bill. The turning point came during our third meeting, when he said, "I know that self-esteem is important, but why should the government get involved in this? Why not the university or somebody else? I responded, "First, Governor, there's so much at stake here that we can't afford to have it hidden away in a university. We need to involve the entire California public.

Only the government can accomplish that. Second, think of it this way: By spending a few tax dollars, we can collect the information and get it out. If that helps even a few persons appreciate and understand self-esteem and how they can live their lives and raise their kids better, we may have less welfare, crime, violence, and drugs—and that's a very conservative use of taxpayers' money. Suddenly the governor replied, "I've never thought of it that way before.

I immediately made a commitment to negotiate them to his satisfaction, and he promised to let me know his decision within a week. For the first time, I left his office feeling hopeful. The next week, the governor's staff called to say that if minor amendments were made, the governor would not veto the bill. The changes were made almost immediately, and Deukmejian signed Assembly Bill into law in September.

The enactment of the legislation occasioned a truly astonishing outpouring of excitement and good will throughout the state. More than four hundred Californians applied for appointment to the task force. Even greater interest and enthusiasm followed cartoonist Garry Trudeau's lampoon in the comic strip "Doonesbury" in March of Ironically, his attention made us famous, providing us with a national stage and a large audience.

I wanted a task force whose work would be seen as legitimate and credible by all Californians, not a group of like-minded individuals whose conclusions could be easily dismissed. To get a well-balanced group, the power of appointing members was distributed. Four state officials—the state superintendent of schools, the cabinet secretary for health and welfare, the state attorney general, and the cabinet secretary. The governor made nine appointments. The Assembly Speaker and the Senate Rules Committee each made six appointments; two of these in each house came from minority party recommendations.

And at its first meeting, the task force elected me and my colleague Senator Art Torres who had carried the legislation on the senate floor as ex officio members. The effort to ensure diversity and balance among the group succeeded.

4.2 The Feeling Self: Self-Esteem

The members of the task force are remarkably varied: The participants have proven remarkably committed and generous, spending as much as four days a month as volunteers. As the task force was forming, Governor Deukmejian called me to his office to discuss appointing a chairperson, pursuant to an earlier pledge. I mentioned several names, but then added, "You know, Governor, if you name one of your own appointees, rather than someone I suggest, it would add a special degree of credibility to the enterprise.

I've heard several people praise your appointee Andy Mecca; it's fine with me if you appoint him. But the next week he appointed Mecca, who has proven to be an excellent chairperson, both toughminded and visionary. Family therapist and teacher Virginia Satir was perhaps the most widely known and the most high-spirited of the task force members, and we owe her a great deal. Shortly before her death in September , the task force voted unanimously that its final report would be dedicated to her.

I was privileged to deliver this news to her less than forty-eight hours before she died. She responded by thanking the task force and asking me to tell the members what a great honor she considered their action to be. Assembly Bill directed the task force to carry out three charges. The first was to compile research concerning the role of self-esteem as a possible causal factor in six areas of major social concern: These are among the most compelling and the most lamentable social ills we face, and.

Collecting and analyzing research on the role of self-esteem in these areas could provide a foundation for designing more effective public policy strategies. Thus the task force began negotiating with the University of California to develop summaries of academic research concerning self-esteem and the genesis of social problems.

University officials recruited the most knowledgeable researchers in the relevant areas and secured their cooperation in preparing the essays in this book. Our hope is that this volume will analyze and clarify our intuition regarding the importance of self-esteem and that it will establish self-esteem at the center of our social science research agenda.

Many additional insights and proposals involving self-esteem are emerging from ongoing work in the field; some have not yet been systematically researched within the academic community. For this reason, the task force is also compiling supplementary material from operating programs in the six subject areas. The second charge given to the task force was to compile current knowledge about how healthy self-esteem is developed, how it is damaged or lost, and how it can be revitalized.

On May 4, , the task force convened a brainstorming session in San Francisco, bringing together twenty practicing experts in the field of self-esteem, including Nathaniel Branden, Jack Canfield, Tom Gordon, George McKenna, Uvaldo Palomares, Scott Peck, Virginia Satir, and other men and women of various backgrounds, races, and professions.

From that beginning, the task force is now developing a document concerning the "how-to" aspect of self-esteem. The task force's third charge was to identify model self-esteem programs, including institutions to which people can turn when they need help for themselves or their families. We have begun to develop an inventory of available programs and materials and a set of criteria Californians can use to assess the legitimacy and likely value of these resources.

The state task force holds regular meetings every six weeks. After two years of meetings, our average attendance is twenty-three of the twenty-five members. We are also holding public hearings around California to give local residents an opportunity to contribute their knowledge and views to the task force's work.

In addition, twenty-two departments and agencies of the state government have liaison officers who provide the task force with ongoing data about the role of self-esteem in the programs they operate. Because of the enthusiasm and interest generated by the state task force, I introduced a resolution coauthored by six key legislative leaders of both parties and both houses encouraging each of California's fifty-eight counties to create a local task force on self-esteem.

These local task forces are charged with connecting local experts on self-esteem with the human services programs in each county and serving as vehicles to bring the results of the state task force's work into communities throughout California. Already, forty-five counties have created such local bodies. Individual responses to our work have also been extremely heartening. Shortly after the creation of the task force, we received a letter from a woman in Oakland which read: I'm eighty-seven years old, and I've been waiting a long time for the government to do something worthwhile.

But perhaps the most impressive response was an unexpected one: The superintendent of schools in Riverside County has asked the county sheriff for the names of ten county jail inmates who can be involved in a self-esteem program that might enable them to steer their lives away from crime.

Because of your task force, I did a self-esteem weekend workshop. Since then, I'm treating my children better! Recently, three hundred fifty participants attended a two-day symposium, "Self-Esteem and the Community," at Humboldt State University. It seems clear that the self-esteem movement is becoming a broad-based social movement, engaging Californians at every level.

The work of our task force has touched a deep nerve among the public, leading many individuals to enlist in this effort to look anew at who we are and how we address our problems. Nationally, reports from across the United States indicate that our endeavor has also served to legitimate the notion of self-esteem as a respectable focus of concern and analysis.

We are proud to present this volume, then, as an integral part of our work. We hope that it will serve to move the concept of self-esteem to center stage in social science research, to lay a solid foundation for fu-. Perhaps most important, however, we also hope that it will, in conjunction with the other work of the task force, help to educate and encourage many individual Californians in the development and practice of self-esteem in their everyday lives. Research and science can discover the trail and point the way, but it is left to each of us to make the importance of self-esteem a reality in how we lead our lives and improve our society.

My father, who was an educator, early on taught me a lesson whose significance I recognize more each day: Your own self-esteem and practice of responsibility inevitably affects these qualities and actions in others. Developing self-esteem and responsibility—a potential "vaccine" against the social problems we face—may be the most compelling of human ventures. The well-being of society depends on the well-being of its citizenry. This is the central proposition on which the chapters in this volume—as well as the work of the California Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem and Personal and Social Responsibility—are based.

This proposition is somewhat unorthodox, because a great deal of Western social and political thought would have it the other way around. Classical economic theorists, for example, regarded the productive and market arrangements of capitalism as an apparatus by which the greatest good for the greatest number could be realized; classical democratic theorists regarded the perfect democratic polity as the set of arrangements that would bring forth the best and most rational choices from an informed electorate. The more particular proposition that informs our enterprise here is that many, if not most, of the major problems plaguing society have roots in the low self-esteem of many of the people who make up society.

It is supposed that those citizens who appreciate themselves and have a sense of personal empowerment will cultivate their own personal responsibility and will attend to the tasks that are necessary for the welfare of the community and the society.

Maintaining and Enhancing Self-Esteem

It is further supposed that those in society who are burdened with the conviction that they are not worthy will take refuge in behaviors that are unproductive, costly, deviant, and dangerous to society and will, by that measure, contribute disproportionately to serious social problems. Bearing these two propositions in mind, it becomes essential for the leaders of society, first, to. That is the agenda of the California Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem, and that is the agenda that we in this special volume on self-esteem and social problems are putting to the best critical test in light of the best social scientific literature available to us.

My task in this introductory essay is to develop a statement that synthesizes the issues raised and discussed, the knowledge compiled, and the conclusions assessed by the individual contributors to this volume. This will mean covering some of the same ground they do, but from a more general point of view. To that end, I will consider several major questions:. In our accepted ways of thinking, a social problem is a kind of carbuncle on the social body, a tear in the social fabric that signals some kind of malfunctioning in society and sets up demands for its own amelioration.

A social problem is some kind of tangible, identifiable, unwanted thing in society. This conceptualization of a social problem, which treats the existence of a problem as a matter of verifiable fact, is, I argue, unrealistic. First, behavior that we identify as constituting a social problem must be relevant to some institution that we endow with cultural value. Pregnancy out of wedlock, for example, is a problem in large part because it stands in violation of the value we place on the family as the legitimate locus for childbearing and child-rearing. Dropping out of the educational system is a problem because of the value we place on learning, both in itself and as preparation for entering the occupational structure.

Chronic welfare dependency is a problem in part because it involves not participating in an established job or career; it is an interruption of involvement in that valued social role. Second, behavior that becomes defined as a problem is also regarded as deviant in relation to some role expectation. This is clearest with respect to violence and crime, which are deviant because they are against the law; the same can be said for the use of illegal drugs.

Dropping out of school also may be illegal because it deviates from the established code calling for compulsory schooling up to, say, age sixteen. Other behaviors, such as excessive alcohol consumption, teenage pregnancy, and being out of work, are not illegal, but they violate social norms relating to substance dependency, premarital sexual and childbearing behavior, and holding a job.

A social problem thus involves some kind of social deviance. The necessity of these value and normative references means that even though a certain kind of behavior may be prevalent in society, it is not considered a social problem unless and until these linkages are established. Child labor, for example, has always existed, but it did not come to be viewed as a social problem until moral crusaders holding humanitarian values deemed it one, and until child labor legislation supplied norms against which it could be considered deviant.

The same is true of child abuse: It follows that social problems may become such by virtue of value and normative drifts in society as much as by virtue of the appearance of new kinds of behavior. It is the linkage of a behavior to relevant value and normative considerations that gives it its character as a social problem. The isolated occurrence of mass murders by snipers, for example, is not customarily defined as a social problem; rather, it is seen as a matter of individual psychopathology. The fact that almost all authors in this volume begin their expositions by referring to "the scope of the problem" also emphasizes the importance of incidence.

A further ingredient, though not always an essential one, is evidence that the kind of behavior in question—drug dependency, mental illness, dropping out of school, child abuse—has been on the increase in the recent past. And a final part of this "numbers" aspect is that in order for a behavioral phenomenon to be considered a social problem, a sizable number of people have to be able to successfully define it as such and to make the required symbolic linkages to the relevant cultural and normative references; otherwise, it will not be perceived as a social problem, but only as the private and perhaps idiosyncratic preoccupation of a few.

Another element that goes into identifying a social problem is that it must be regarded as involving some economic or social cost. Crime is a good example: Observation about the self and storage of those observations by the I-self create three types of knowledge, which collectively account for the Me-self, according to James. These are the material self, social self, and spiritual self. The social self comes closest to self-esteem, comprising all characteristics recognized by others.

The material self consists of representations of the body and possessions, and the spiritual self of descriptive representations and evaluative dispositions regarding the self. This view of self-esteem as the collection of an individual's attitudes toward oneself remains today. In the mids, sociologist Morris Rosenberg defined self-esteem as a feeling of self-worth and developed the Rosenberg self-esteem scale RSES , which became the most-widely used scale to measure self-esteem in the social sciences.

In the early 20th century, the behaviorist movement minimized introspective study of mental processes, emotions and feelings, replacing introspection with objective study through experiments on behaviors observed in relation with environment. Behaviorism viewed the human being as an animal subject to reinforcements, and suggested placing psychology as an experimental science, similar to chemistry or biology. As a consequence, clinical trials on self-esteem were overlooked, since behaviorists considered the idea less liable to rigorous measurement.

Self-esteem then took a central role in personal self-actualization and in the treatment of psychic disorders. Psychologists started to consider the relationship between psychotherapy and the personal satisfaction of persons with high self-esteem as useful to the field. This led to new elements being introduced to the concept of self-esteem, including the reasons why people tend to feel less worthy and why people become discouraged or unable to meet challenges by themselves.

In the political scientist Francis Fukuyama associated self-esteem with what Plato called thymos - the " spiritedness " part of the Platonic soul. As of [update] the core self-evaluations approach included self-esteem as one of four dimensions that comprise one's fundamental appraisal of oneself - along with locus of control, neuroticism, and self-efficacy. The importance of self-esteem gained endorsement from some government and non-government groups starting around the s, such that one can speak of a self-esteem movement.

A leading figure of the movement, psychologist Nathaniel Branden , stated: Self-esteem was believed [ by whom? Vasconcellos argued that this task force could combat many of the state's problems - from crime and teen pregnancy to school underachievement and pollution. The task force set up committees in many California counties and formed a committee of scholars to review the available literature on self-esteem. This committee found very small associations between low self-esteem and its assumed consequences, ultimately showing that low self-esteem is not the root of all societal problems and not as important as the committee had originally thought.

However, the authors of the paper that summarized the review of the literature still believe that self-esteem is an independent variable that affects major social problems. Many early theories suggested that self-esteem is a basic human need or motivation. American psychologist Abraham Maslow included self-esteem in his hierarchy of human needs.

He described two different forms of "esteem": According to Maslow, without the fulfillment of the self-esteem need, individuals will be driven to seek it and unable to grow and obtain self-actualization. Maslow also states that the healthiest expression of self-esteem "is the one which manifests in respect we deserve for others, more than renown, fame and flattery". Modern theories of self-esteem explore the reasons humans are motivated to maintain a high regard for themselves. Sociometer theory maintains that self-esteem evolved to check one's level of status and acceptance in ones' social group.

According to Terror Management Theory , self-esteem serves a protective function and reduces anxiety about life and death. Self-esteem is important because it shows ourselves how we view the way we are and the sense of our personal value. Thus, it affects the way we are and act in the world and the way we are related to everybody else.

Carl Rogers , an advocate of humanistic psychology , theorized the origin of many people's problems to be that they despise themselves and consider themselves worthless and incapable of being loved. This is why Rogers believed in the importance of giving unconditional acceptance to a client and when this was done it could improve the client's self-esteem.

1. The Social Importance of Self-Esteem!
2. Self-esteem.
3. Das Abenteuer der Inspiration: Porträts deutscher Dichter von Lessing bis Dürrenmatt (German Edition)?
4. The Acts of the Apostle Mar-Enoch (Book of Sermons 1).

One of the most widely used instruments, the Rosenberg self-esteem scale RSES is a item self-esteem scale score that requires participants to indicate their level of agreement with a series of statements about themselves. An alternative measure, The Coopersmith Inventory uses a question battery over a variety of topics and asks subjects whether they rate someone as similar or dissimilar to themselves.

If those answers reveal some inner shame, it considers them to be prone to social deviance. Implicit measures of self-esteem began to be used in the s. When used to assess implicit self-esteem, psychologists feature self-relevant stimuli to the participant and then measure how quickly a person identifies positive or negative stimuli. Experiences in a person's life are a major source of how self-esteem develops.

These feelings translate into later effects on self-esteem as the child grows older. Although studies thus far have reported only a correlation of warm, supportive parenting styles mainly authoritative and permissive with children having high self-esteem, these parenting styles could easily be thought of as having some causal effect in self-esteem development. Experiences that contribute to low self-esteem include being harshly criticized, being physically, sexually or emotionally abused, being ignored, ridiculed or teased or being expected to be "perfect" all the time.

During school-aged years, academic achievement is a significant contributor to self-esteem development. As children go through school, they begin to understand and recognize differences between themselves and their classmates. Using social comparisons, children assess whether they did better or worse than classmates in different activities. These comparisons play an important role in shaping the child's self-esteem and influence the positive or negative feelings they have about themselves.

Adolescents make appraisals of themselves based on their relationships with close friends. Social acceptance brings about confidence and produces high self-esteem, whereas rejection from peers and loneliness brings about self-doubts and produces low self-esteem. Adolescence shows an increase in self-esteem that continues to increase in young adulthood and middle age.

High levels of mastery, low risk taking, and better health are ways to predict higher self-esteem. In terms of personality, emotionally stable, extroverted, and conscientious individuals experience higher self-esteem. However, during old age, they experience a more rapid decline in self-esteem. Shame can be a contributor to those with problems of low self-esteem.

A poor performance leads to higher responses of psychological states that indicate a threat to the social self namely a decrease in social self-esteem and an increase in shame. There are three levels of self-evaluation development in relation to the real self, ideal self, and the dreaded self. The real, ideal, and dreaded selves develop in children in a sequential pattern on cognitive levels.

This development brings with it increasingly complicated and encompassing moral demands. Level 3 is where individuals' self-esteem can suffer because they do not feel as though they are living up to certain expectations. This feeling will moderately effect one's self-esteem with an even larger effect seen when individuals believe they are becoming their Dreaded Self [47].

People with a healthy level of self-esteem: A person can have a high self-esteem and hold it confidently where they do not need reassurance from others to maintain their positive self view, whereas others with defensive, high self-esteem may still report positive self-evaluations on the Rosenberg Scale, as all high self-esteem individuals do; however, their positive self-views are fragile and vulnerable to criticism.

Defensive high self-esteem individuals internalize subconscious self-doubts and insecurities, causing them to react very negatively to any criticism they may receive. There is a need for constant positive feedback from others for these individuals to maintain their feelings of self-worth. The necessity of repeated praise can be associated with boastful, arrogant behavior or sometimes even aggressive and hostile feelings toward anyone who questions the individual's self-worth, an example of threatened egotism. Implicit self-esteem refers to a person's disposition to evaluate themselves positively or negatively in a spontaneous, automatic, or unconscious manner.

It contrasts with explicit self-esteem , which entails more conscious and reflective self-evaluation. Both explicit self-esteem and implicit self-esteem are subtypes of self-esteem proper. Narcissism is a disposition people may have that represents an excessive love for one's self. It is characterized by an inflated view of self-worth. Individuals who score high on Narcissism measures, Robert Raskin's 40 Item True or False Test , would likely select true to such statements as "If I ruled the world, it would be a much better place.

Threatened egotism is characterized as a response to criticism that threatens the ego of narcissists; they often react in a hostile and aggressive manner. Low self-esteem can result from various factors, including genetic factors, physical appearance or weight, mental health issues, socioeconomic status, significant emotional experiences, peer pressure or bullying. A person with low self-esteem may show some of the following characteristics: Individuals with low self-esteem tend to be critical of themselves.

Some depend on the approval and praise of others when evaluating self-worth. Others may measure their likability in terms of successes: