handbook of self and identity - second edition - ch. 4 pp. 69-104 38 pages

8/11/2019 Handbook of Self and Identity - Second Edition - Ch. 4 Pp. 69-104 38 Pages

1/38

C 4 69-1 4 f f C I

Handbool< of

Self and Identity

dited byM rk . L r

Ju Pr T g

TH UI F R PRN w Y k L


2/38

To Mike Kernis and Fred Rhodewalt,hose enthusiasm warm h and contribu ionso the psy ho ogy of the se f are sore y missed

2012 The uilfo d P essA v on of u l o d i at o , Inc.

2 Spr g tr , New York NY 2www.gu l rd c m

All ght erved

N pa o th b kmJy be prod ed r n l t d, sto ed ret i v l tet a tted any m y any m ea el r ,me h al p to opy

ro ng r or i g or ot erw se, w ho wr tt permi o f omth s r

P ted i U ited Sta e o Ame ca

s oo s pr t d d-f p p r

as d gt n m e : 9 8 6 5 3

L r r C gr og g- -P l a o DH o k o elf a ide ti ed ted b Ma k Le ry J eP e Tang nd ed .

mlu l ograp a r f r e d ex

SB 7 - 4 25 3 5- ( ) e . 2.Iden i y (Ps h logy). Lea y,Ma Tangne , u e P ice.

F 97.H 45 2 22 2

2 2


3/38

CHAPTER 4

Self, Self-Concept, and Identity

Daph a O rmaKr E morG org Sm h

W r r d ri or o ly m dh d i? How o o ri ri

owi h o l i mi ? o l li h h y do o d o

io ly w i h h ro d o o hhoi o d idi , h h id i i

ro id m i m i ho h yo w o h y r , d who h y d r

h r hoi h , ho d m l ln y ba d n yong u nI nt sr h r i d h r ri -

, o io , ol , d o i om m r hi h d who o i d i

i o d o h wh do o o h r wh i

o o o , or h r h r o o o wi h o om , h r o o

l o li d o y o om or h -o o o m om d i r

o i h y rovid m i m il d o o ' o o om

o o h r r o h imm d oO rm 2 , 2 , 2 To h-r, id i i m o 's -conc pt

v io y d ri d wh om o mi dwh o hi o o l i r, 1 3

r , 2 ry r, 8 ; T l,1 81 o ' h o y o o o l y

M r o , d wh o

i r o o l m i r, 1or & Willi m , 2 2 ddi io o

l o o l l o ow h m lvi o h w y h h l m

li , w ll im dr w h o h o h ho d li , wh h y l i i l o h ir od i mo io Tho hh w r o h o li io o wh i m o h

l m , 8 /1 2 , h y h r ivl m l io P o l l h

ow h m lv , i h h o o i i h h m lv d h o

o io hi m mo i Fiv h, 2 1A w o i i hi h , hi li

o owi i im or ho h hm io o whi h i i d r o

l y. i h o ow o h l o m d m

hoi , i h l im or l mo i io l d l l

oo Th l o owi o i r o m io o li h

l o o h ryd y l y h ori h d mo orm l ( o i l i

o i o h Y w d ri iho d h l o hi h r, h m io

o y i d y h m il i i i y, d dy m o r io

9


4/38

7 SS G I G

th s lf s m nt l nst d nt t s t th d m s p pl ss m th m t nst d dy m l y nst d

n h m m C s th t f l d nn n n n s t n d n n ss -

l f l d nt y n nt n th s tn Th s l l ty s p f wh t m s s l s f As n d W l mJ m s

(18 0 1 27 , th n s f d n p p m t s n s, s ns v tt n d

t n l ff d s d s n sn th mm d t s nd s th h

n n ss ly t s f h s n ls n th d m nts nd h v ,

hw , 2002, 2007 20 0 P pl d n ts mp y sp d t xt s hth sp ns s h m d t d nd m

d t dy th ff f th s s n wh h y n th m m nt O s m 2007 200 ,200 m s s, W l ,y 20 0

n th s h pt , w ns d h s w ss s th f l n f n w n s f nd

t dyn m ns n f w n s n m m n W s s th t h s lfs n

mp t n m t v t l t l th sh s f f s l st n h , nd

s th d nt t s th nst t t h s f n , dyn m ly nst d n n-

h s lf s s f l s p pllt th d nt t s n m n h s nd

s h s d s s t d, p

m t ,nd t n d th f d n sndnst s f th mm d t t xt s w d v d th s h p nt s -

ns n th st s t ( tt n th , y p t n l wh t s m n y

s f nd d n ty, d w n v wsf m th s nd psy hp sp t s ( nn l v w nd hl s mm s w , 1 ; l ,200 200 M sW f, 8 ;Ow ns,R ns n, m th L v n, 20 0Oys m n, 200 n h s nd s t n ( nd st nd n ss , w ns dwh t ths l s ss m d t st l y t m l lm nt l st t, nd wh ps m nn h w h s f s st d d n h th d s

n h n n s f n w dd ss hs s f s , nd n h f th

s n yn m nst u w t np d t ns t wh h p m t , s

t d p n l nd m d d n t fm n lp ss n mp y f s lf d d nt tyOu n l s n W pp n p nd M v n

w d p d s ll t d s mm y nd

h hl hts wh w s s mp t n nns

Se ing he S age

A m f y s G d M G88 h f lly n t d h th

l t n th s lf s d ll v n tht p s nt s n th y th s thd s h n v s l f R mp lst lt

s , s lf s h s s m w msp n p l s f h y f m t sp

d f th p A n t n l tf th l t t m st l s h f thn v n f nd d t m n pn st n nly f psy h l sts, t

ss th s s n s psy hs l sts n h p l s s, p t

n s s, nd v n n m sts m ft s lf nd d t ty l h l ym ll n t t ns, nd m n f s f ss n l s h n n s { W f

sy N O s ll y lds t s f th s ndt l s n wh s l n p d

n l d d s y w ds h s nw dyn l d s h st d s n wh h s f nd

t ty ss t ds pl n t s nnw s m h n s mp lly sm n p l t d nd d s d s s m s

f s f d nt ty

w t s s s lf d nt ty thmp t lf nd d n y s hn l v d th t th s f s th p

f s t t ns d sh p f h vs ns n s ns f s lf

s, w s, d m y m , nd thth p th sh d t n th w d

s f p j lf nd d nt y ss m h p pl t t ms

w n n w wh th y , nd n s s l n wl d t m s ns f th w

lf nd d nt ty p d t d nwh p pl m t v t d d , h w t

n nd m s s f h ms lv s nds, h t s t y t , nd h fnd ty t n t th

, f n p l m d ls, s B m8 w , wn, 8

& 1 0 ns, 87 8Oysm n, 2007n th s s n p v d s f

p n l ns O s ts m l ty t n m v ss f nd d n y s m t m s s d


5/38

Self Se - oncept and e i y

h n ly nd th r t m d t r r tdi r nt thin S d wh t l nd id n-tity r r tdi r th r nd withinp li ti n Th rd thi m t xt ndt wh th rth nd id ntity in thin -l r r p r l th t , wh th r th r i n rm ltip lv , id ntit , nd l n pt

l v nt r vi w hli htin th ir m i i l p r p tiv ll-r , 00 w n t l , 0 0 r m -i l id ntity p r p tiv r w r 1llm r Sp r & 00 nd r m

i l nd p r n lity p y h l y p r-tiv m i t r 1 8 M r

& W r 8 S d d & r w r 00Sw nn & n, 010 pr v d m n

th r dth th t pi r l n tt tt mpt t r vi it l th r i din th r vi w t r th pr id w r in t n th n tr i rd rt h h i ht w y rw rd n r r h L

G ir nd M G ir 1 88 r l i

t h d l ht n th ld wh t m thl indi p n i l t nd r t ndin h wp pl iv in th w r d m h i ndm m nin th r p r n

Bas c Operationa zat on

S lf

n mm n di r th t rm t n r -r t w rm n w rm in th tm thin i t m r " t -

l tin n n l i th mm n tivi yd m nt l t r q ir th t th i nth t n n d r n t h t i m

h t rm l in l d th th t r whthin I m thin in nd th t

hin in t m M r v r th t rth i t thin nd w r d in

A h phil ph r hn L m yrt d " th n , th r r m Aw r -

n h v n th h m t rAn th r w y t d n t th thr pthin in , in w r thin i nd t

in th l n t r th n in tth t rmr capac yKihl tr m,r Kl in 00 L w , 0 th r

th n t mpt t di tin i h tw n th

m nt l nt nt( nd th p t thm t l p ty thin in ) m d rn th t rm in l d ll th l m nt

m t r 1 8 ll r , 00 Kih tr mt l , 00 M r& W r 87 w n

7

t l 010 Whil th ri nv rn t n th t r l xiv p ity i rith vin l , th ri di r i h

ry n id r d n rv l n th n h nd, th l n

r d prim rily m m ry tr t r th p l h xi t n

p rt l r nt t nd i l tn ntr t, th l n n id

m r ly n tiv p ity h thn tit t th p t l i rin id nd m dd d within m mm m nt it ti n Fr m th l tt r ptiv wh t i t l i n t r ll d nr th r th m v ti n t th l m n n m m ry d t th n t t l

Whil i m w y h lp l th hn in dv rt nt y limit

t n w y n iv n th l wt r nd lini l p y h l i t m h

r d nd dual cn l Wl t di d p pl n thi thin di r nt w y An individ li ti ptiv n h w n i p t

r nt r m th r t p pl n id r h w th y r imil r nd nn

r l ti n hip m tim ll d co cts c p r p An imm r d p r p ti

n th p l nd th mind y t p pl n l th m v n th r w y Th y nh w th y m ht r m di t nth y mi ht l r m th t id in th

th r h p r iv hi hlidr w tt ti n t m p t "

nd m th r p t l li ly t m nd

lt r l p y h l i t h v ti n n tw n i ty d r nli l h d n n th mth p t th l M r

rm n 1 8 y rm n 1 8 r x mp Am ri n r

m r i ly th n E t A i n t tp r p tiv M r & Kit y m

ntr t i l id ntity r r h rtr t th t wh th r n t m

p r p tiv n t x d y n n d y nt t r w r 1

& G rdn r, 00 006i t d ppr h d m n t th t m ll hi t in nt xt in n

r ny n Am ri n r E A in m r " p r p v


6/38

7 I AWAR N SS O N N AND R GU A N

Oy m n, 2 , in p Oy m n, 2 8 2 8 Oy m n n,

2 kin n m n p -p iv in l p p n nd m n l

p d m n lly, w di inh i n l n pn ddi i n k h

p d nd nn d p p iv nh l , p p n l n d h m lv

m imm d di l p p iv K2 K , Ayd k, & Mi h l, 2 5

h i , p pl n n id h m lv d y h nd i i

J n i , 2 nv ly, h yn k p k nd n id h m v

m m di l p p iv pl n id wh h m h vi

h m i h m lv , w ,h h h y h ( hG n ,

2 2 M m in l d h l nd dilp p iv , m dd ndobs vs i d i 8 n

vm m , h k h pp iv n v , in l mh id hi i n h ld

m m , whi h m h i in l p -p iv h wi hin p p iv

i n h , h k hl m m di l p p iv

n i n n n ' d l d v l(W k l k, m, Li m n, p ,2 8 l d m i n l i m nin h l , d in h min i n

h p K , 2 nd p iv d v l pw n h l n w nd h w m ( nin, O v l ,K n dy,2 8

E i l y, tw l -p p iv lik ly d h n

n , 2 2 ki l i p -p i n h l i ik y wi h

k m d l p p i h lin l d wh h mi h i

pp i d vi w h in wl i phi l m m y, hw , Oy m , & h v , 2

H w v ,p pl n nd d k nym in n h p p i , in l din

h p n i y l mm m i n p m nd mp d

p p iv , l i n l nd l im-m d p p iv h l

l h m lv v im nd mm ipl p p iv , p p n l

h m lv i m l ipl d d , p

d h w i l in i n wi l ndl y in n w h

n d nd w n n h i n in l m l ipl m l m l ipl m

h n n id h m l ipl lv ,p id in h h l n p , w pl in n

C c tl n p n vu u hn in l d n n , i d ,

j d m n nd d m k nw d, n i ' p n n i wm n M k , 1 8 Th , i h

n " h hi k nd m hn n h h h , im

p h m n i v lvn p id wh n i wwill m h m n l n p

n n pWh l w h l l n p individ li i

i , p im l imm d, di l h h l n n niv d m , kin wh p pl d

wh n h y d i h m lv d hi iv y h y v h m lv

n pl v l iv j d m nmm n i h n hild n d n , nd yp l y i v lv l

i l in i d m iphy i l pp , hl i ilii n l i i y, p n h p

l i n hip H , h p 3m M h, 1 H w v , n

di d p ly m v l iv j wi h p d d p kin

d i h i n , id , l n p , h i d i d nd

p i l lv vi w m p i l p Oyy , 2 6 h m w y,

h xpli l n l l d h l j d

ypi lly p i n i d ll y nd d ill d v

h p n' n h d min h w ld , nd , 1

k k, h p , hi v lR n

l n p l di in h w d R h h v d


7/38

Self, S l -Concept a d Id i y

iff r n in hi h nt ma arr ani t h i mpl it h

p it an n at f ma nt ran i th l ih that at f a -ti n ar in lf al . n i t

th t u tural impl ati n f h nt ti n i r P p may r a iz ant u t r th i lf n pt ar n m

mai that th r mm nly u t mah m th ir ra r thni ity, th i

n r th i _ i ht th ir a th i _ a a-mi tan h l f h a nf rmat i u t ani lf n pt,p pl may ai t h ma i f th

mai hi h impli hat th y l pr - nf rmati n that l a i m

ui y a f i n ly an m m -t r ha inf mati n that i an t

ar C an t in,Sila i 98t al impl that p pl il a t aythat t th i h ma (Oy ma 8; Oy-

man, i man,Rh ).y n parti ula a p t f t nt, m

p p may f l that all a p t f th lf ar at ;th r ma f that many a p t

f th lf fun ti n in p n ntly ( in ill ,1987) Or a i ati n may h t al n , that a p r n may mpartm ntaliz p iti an n ati f i u h tha i-

n n i a i r ani h a n ti tu th n ha n un f r atl ry n a a m a (Sh r A am n

an, 998pl may ha mu tip f n pti h m tt r an z a a t lat

tha th r anajiP nti 1994 Ept in 9 3; Gr al anaj , 989;a u Wurf 1987; Oy man ,

St u tu ma t an m lfn p ff ti ly fa ilita lf r ulati

h r a th r l a n uln ra l t pr -matu al i n a m nt an att rf lin f th an mp t n Oy r-ma y , T rryHart J hn n ;Oy rman, Harri n y 1;

h in hamm , Stap llant n 6)A n in h ti n f p

pl an n i r th m l fr m a num rf p r p t th i ua i ti "mf h l ti i i " f th t m

p all ar " lf th mp ral yi tal "f t r lf th mm "mi -y f th r r " y f th

lf.Whil mu h f th li atu t mth pr p n i in a h f

7

h a f p ru tu u tipl uru tur a a a a l m m y f u

th u h p pl ar li l t iff r in hi htru tu ar m h n ally a i l

S lf n pt a h ha m nt

hat th r p p f u n a r lan r lati n hip in i i ua t a anhaa t ri ti in i in th m

p n ni antly n h i imm iat ituati nal R ar h r an a ily prim

in t m n ay f th n in a utf n pt r th th .

F r xampl ju t a in a pa a aphth r t p r n ula(1 r u

plural w us)pr n un , un ram inn n ith th , r i -

in iff n u imi a i i t f i n a fami y hif lf n pt -

Tra m T ian t , 99 ;Trian i 89 f a i f h n Oy man 7 8a 8 )

r p imin lf n pt u tuin thi ay in lu n n t ly h p plthin a ut th m l h th y thi

n ally F r ampl in n p r m ntpa ti pant p im ith m r u r l antp n u h 64 unr at j t

n a pa an th ul a tr m m hat th y a h y r al y

at th ta t u prim parti ipantr tt r at th urp i pa t f th m m-y ta n h h y r u p y

a a t al h th j t n th pa (K hn Oy man p im part pa t r m m hath y a ut t th lati hip am -

j t ( al Oy man, S r n n Rh , 9)

d n ityri n 19 19 8 l p a i ly u

m l f i ntity l pm t hat f un l pm nt f i tity a pl rati n

an mmitm nt. Eri n th t mn yin ay yn nym u i h hat th

r ha t m n pH r, tht m n yan al n ptua iz aa ay f ma in f m a p t r part

f f pt A am 99 ; 1999; H; S p 1987 S y &

Ta f l Tur , r amp an ha a r li i u ity that ntain

r l ant t nt an al , u h a hat t hat t a u an h t ha


8/38

AWAR N SS O N T ON A ND R U AT ON

The so ial psy holo i al an so io o i ali entity i e at es ont as pe sonal an so

ial e tit es, also te eco c n(fo a e ie B e eRo as, 2001;

Ho 2003 .Soc n as e ne

by Ta fel 1 81) in ol e the no le e thato e is a e be of a o p, one s feel n sabou oup e be ship an no le e oft e oup s an o status o pa e to o he

oups Thou h this e nit o oes notfo s u o ontent of o p e beship beyon o le e, e a a an ,othe e i ions ha e h li te that so ia

entities in lu e ontent O se an, 2007;Oyse an Ke e e e , F ybe , B osh

Ha t ohnson, 200 ).Just as the e ay be any self o epts

i e titytheo ists iffe in ho o on epta ize ho a y i entities a pe son is i ely o

a e u h as a es 18 0 1 27 es ibeultiple sel es p e i tin hat people ha eas any sel es as they ha e inte a tion pa t-ne s i entity an so ial i en ity theo ists

is ss ultip e i entities base in ul-tiple si uations en ity theo ists S y e ,

80; St y e B e 2000 fo us on hooss si uational stabil ty of i entity on e t

e e es F o t s pe spe ti e, i ent ties a eistin t pa ts of he self on ept,the in e

na ze ean s an e pe tations asso iat-e ith the posi ions one hol s in so ial net-

o sa t e oles one plays In on ast,so ia i entity t eo ists Ab a s, 1 O -o ato Tu ne , 2002 Ta fel 1 8 ; ajfelu ne 200 fo us on oss situational

al eability In i s st on es fo ation soial i enti y theo ies p e i at in ea h e a ion peop e ta e on a iffe ent i entitysee O ens et al 20 0, fo a e ie f o a

so olo i al pe spe ti eIn hin in about entity onte t an

i en i yfun tion so ia i en i y esea he sso eti es fo us on onne ion to an si -la ties ith othe in oup e be s B e e ,200 ;Oyse an e al , 200 Othe t est ey o us on the istin tion bet een he in-

oup an o t oup B e e , 200 ; Spea s,Go i n, i s e huis, & S apel, 200 ; Stapel Koo e , 2001 . he oups e e ,na ionality, a e e hni ity, eli ous e ita e

oups, o s yea psy holo y ajo s onhi hi entities a e base a e li ely to if-

fe in thei on e ity an ho psy holo -ally eanin ful t ey feel a oss ti e a

si ua ions B e e Oyse an, 2007

200 a; Se i i es B e e , 2001 So ii en i y an i entity theo ists also stu y ot e s of i entities, o e i ent tiespe sonal e tit es.Ro n ef e

e be ship i pa i ula oles e

ent, pa ent, p ofess onal tha equi ean-othe pe son o p ay a o p e enta y One anno be a pa ent ithou hil enstu ent itho tea he s o a p ofessio

ithout ie ts o pee s ho e o nize onole son n sefle t t aits oha a te s i s that ay fee sepa ate f

one s so ial an ole i entit es o l nso e o al of these i en ities fo a esee O ens e a , 20 0 .

Th s, pe sonal en i es efe to oqu te iso o phi i h at is ypi ally fe e to as onc pin the psy holo i a

ite a u e. An a an a e in usin the n yathe t a conc p n t is e-a is that i ese es the te conc p

fo b oa e pe spe i es, as e is up e ously afte all, bei a shy pe sonli e y to ean so e n ffe ent

onsi e e as pa t of hat a es one sepaate an iffe ent f o o he s in i i

is i self on ept o as pa t of hat aone elate a si a to othe s olleti se f on ept}

mmSelf self on ep an i entity a besi e e as nes e ele e s, ith aspe tsthe e fo in self o ep s an ities be pa of se f on epts Yet a s often use he te ss an n yas

fthey e e synony s S ann & Bosson,20 ). So eti es the te s a e use in efe en e to he p o ess of a in sense of

o e s of hat atte s o " eto t e onsequen es of so al onte ts on

a ie y of be iefs an pe eptions abo t sel , o si ply to efe to e be ship in s

o e o aphi ate o ies s as eso ial ass able, 1 7) Ot e ti es

s eant is an i p i it sense o a a feen of ele an e an in lusion at e t anol fee of i ele an e a e usi

e. ., Da ies, Spen e ,Stee e 200 ; SteeleSpe e A o son 2002) hus, the te

an an of e a e use to e plain hi t be the p o ess un e y o t o

b t iffe a ati al y in te s of ha ,ifany h n , is assess o a ipula e .


9/38

4. S Sel C c p I y

a sa r s c v r assumas lfs lf c c p a y cfr m

s r ar s r m m ry, a ma -r. W r s r c r s ab u

s lfa ym n n tru t,s codu t a o t n a sc ssm urm f l s c s T s,

s lf s lf c c p a y ar m alc sruc s a ar s ap by c x s

c y v l p a f u cacW a r ss ac f s c r s x

acc m a s r y a s f r ar c s r s lf a

y may ma r s f s c ap s p rase nd dents r ral a va usa s a b

l ra r ar c a spc c rms . s) r r l va

a d Id t ty A M ta Co c ptslf a y r s c v r ass r

a s lf a y ar m al c -s r c s a ss m pr s

ry s capac y v l ps arly Ws r fac s a r r ma y c l ra 8 m s a arly all c l r a2 m s uc f r a s r m va s u b rus ly pr uc by sm ar-

s pa f r a s sr ks , s r sp s s -

rp m a a c l r k ay l k l k a k a sm s u b r f r a s s ma bass f r c s l m fac as a rs als c a s ck r s cr ly

plac r l s ls Su rfSlau r 2006

us c l r s m av s r a v -sual a f y ar m m ry s

ma s k y b u a F rxampl , p pl pr f r v sual ma f

s lv s y ar s s m r ra a rr r ma M a ,

& K , O r s s s a als -v lv m al r pr s a s f s f

m ry. s r a fa s b xp r c s f as p ys cally s c fr mc x a as r ca y ac spac

r s 2000 s v sc ral s s f s lfas a p ys cal bj c av b y par sa c r ll ac s u u arl

v pm v kC , 1 8a r a , M rla k

200 ac s f s lf ar b l v x s

7

's a r s a ur b ly pur , a p ys cal s a c K ub

pr ss us as ar ar u by Ja s8 0/1 2 a s c r s lf s p ys

a ma r al

m r l f s c al ur sc cas a mp p p r br s lf r s s m s ra ff r l

ca s f r s lf r l a pr c ss asass c a v v rsus c sc us a r f c v

r ap r 2 , s v m ; b ma200 l sp c c f ac v parular ral r s s a c ssary f a ur

f s l pr fr al c r x as b ass c a c sc us pr c ss s, a m al a l s yp s supp r pr -c ss s r la sp c asp c s f

a s lf s ass m b a . uscurr r s arc p rams p f all b ac v y as lv c v prc ss s r la s lf Ac va a r r c ula c r x s ass c a r c r a ra s s lf r l va

r Mac a , M a a r a -l K ll y 2004 a r f c

s p rf rma c ss , la ,Pass am 20 M al pr fr al ac-v y c c s lf r pr s a a

may b v sua m al sp c c a l as fs v uals f r a r v s Ma

a , 20 a s am s v als m a p fr al ac a a

a c f c al c c v y b m al pr fr al a v sua c r c s ccursur s lf u m s c mpar rju m s ra r s ar sra r a ar Maa 20

v r, s lf c c p r s arc yp ca lyf cus s s ma c m m ra al ca za bra l r ap

v l p b a a a c v ca-pac s a s capac s c mla ua bas au b rap cal m m r s

F us Hamm , 0 Or ar m m r s s c a rms f a

ma rs a ak s s c l rca b cr a a s ma c ra r av sc al s s f s lf a s, a s supp s F v samm1 0 s als ar r 200 Har r ap r , s v lum . S l c c p r s arch as

yp cally f cus c l s capac y scr b a ra ms l s acr ss mul pm s s. F r xampl by s c ra

c l r ca r p r u pl m s s


10/38

7 AWAR"N=ss GN N AN R U AT N

of t r f o pt (Ma Ba a& Tidm 84 T a abl to a

a t at t a t a d f di t aboutt m l i di r t ro a d o t xt(Hart r r i ou & W it ll

; o ll . m od u drat a impli at t m al o

p b i tud d i a t of rati dmu f o pt r a a umt at

p i it lf r po t of t f a a attitudob t i ful impl i t at f o pt

tabl ro i all a ibl m mora d a d i am wa a ro ituat o . How a di u d i t irt o (T i i ifor oi ) a ofa umptio i op to qu tio (S war

2 ; Stra & D ut 2 4and d t ty A a P du

S f a d id tit t ori o r i ou d-i lf a d id tit o i l o t xt o -t xt al f o f ma b di alpar t pra ti ool t ultut im a p a i w o li t

p ri o a ad arl i f otual ff t o t f al o ma b prox-

imal t p olo i al impli atio of timm d at tuatio o i i ( . or r

i Ho 2 3 2 rma &Ma u 1 8 a &T r r2 4Mod diff r w at o t r r toomfo u o ma ro l l o t x p iall t

i tori al po o i t a d ultur wit iw i o li mpiri al al i of ff tat t i l a i ol i tori al a d ro

oup ompari o but i al o am abltop rim al p imi t iqu (

rma & 2 2 8a 2 8b -rma & U ul 2 8 o t t a al o

b a a middl l ; t o t xt i ludam ool a d bo ood a d t

fami pro a d o iali a io pra tiwit i o r w up H r too a al

ma b d ripti ompara i or xp rim tal ( & 2rma & Yoo 2 ) Fi all o t xt

ma b mor mi ro l l da b damom t to mom t ituatio o xp ri

b u of ru t r a i tit tio

a of l of a al a ooti bot p o o i al a d o olo al p r

p ti a d ib d a o b Jam( 8 27) ool ( 2) a dM a

( 3 ) ool ' d riptio of to ngg s s f ap ulat am ' ( 8 /1 2

i t a ow ot t lf matit at r l t d apprai al w tt r i for or u rm o ' lf a ar mporta t build blo for

lf A lar bod of r ar a xamt i a umptio R ult uppo t t o

o tru tio of lf b o i at p opdo rall i o porat w at tthinkot r t i o t m t lf t o

i w a t p all mor po i i t a oti w (for umma i a d ori i al r a

F l o ; S rau r &S o ma7

G rall p a lf a id tito al p odu t i a l a t t wa . p opl do ot at t m from

rat r w a i po ibl w at impo tw at d to b xp ai d a l om f

o ial o t t from w at ma t r o ot -r T i m a t at p opl a li l to

t m l i t rm of w at i i t r tim a d p a : Group m mb r( li o ra or d r famloo oo at ai m or at l ti p

ould matt r mor or l d p diw at i a u d o ' ultur a i opla wit i o al i ar S o da lf r quir ot r w o dor a d ri or o ' l ood w o affold a t at o lf matt r a d a o

a produ r ult T i m a t at p oou d f l b tt about t m l mor

pab o at ai i t oal a d o oo t x t at provid t affold t

i o t t a do o T ird t a pof o l a id tit t at matt r mom t ar d t rmi d b w at r l ai t mom t

B au tti ot to do od ti i ma r p opl a tba o to t ot r to i t m a i w t m l ( ma 2 7 2

2 b) A l ar wa to i al a id tit iall i to a t i wa t at ar ( t otall ) o r wit i . To t t w tapp r ar a loo for or ituatio i w i a importa t d ti

ambi ou or a ti l und rmi a d if p opl ar mor l l to a t a t

t t ot p i t ir um taxamp bla ildr w o ar wo ri

t at t ar ot i d a Af a Ama a d A ia m ri a o ar wor i


11/38

S l S Co c d

that th y ar n t v a A rican aych tact ay that h lp th t .T t thi pr icti n, in n t f tu -i , th cla b havi r, fri n hip ch ic ,a ch l gra f African A rican anLat n A rican i ch tu nt

r a y r an, Brick an, Byb ,& C li u , 2 6) Th pr cti n a thatchil r n h i n t b li v th y l k ik

ng up b r u b r lik ly tact in ay t r typica l c ngru nt ithth ir acia / thnic i ntity b cau by actinglik a t r typical ingr up b r th yc ul c nvinc th r that th h l th i nt ty I , c par t ark kin tAfrica A rican , light kin t AfricaA rican r p rt f ling l cia ly ac-c pt . Th f lt lack f acc ptanc tran lat-

t acti n; th ir r p rt car h p r aca ic attain t a t ach r rat

th a i b having in cla r . Si larff ct r f un f r Lat chil r n ha th y n t k Latin . Th ch -r n ch l aca ical y ri nt p r

a fri , attain r gra , an rr ik ly t i b hav in cla . Fri n hip

ch ic iat ff ct f king atin aca ic p rf r anc . itt g int th

gr up th y p rc v a act ng t r typi-cally l k th ngr up att r

Rath r than f cu ch b havi r, a -h r t f u f cu f ch c

Gu n l an, Ch ryan, & nin, 2 ) t t th p icti n that p pl ill act

in ay that t r t pica ly t a a biguu r u r ntity, th au h r

ra ly a ig A an A rican c l gtu nt par icipa t t th r b lct th tu y ith ut c t r t r t b

u ri a t h th r th y r A r ca .h qu ry r gar i g th ir A rican i t tyatt r . A ian A rican h r r t

a k if th y r A r can ch r pr -t typical y A rica f t at an aith y lik th f r than th h

r n t r t a kif th y r A rican.Thi ccurr v n th ugh th A r canf r h althy tha th A a n .Thu ,th an r t n f ur p ning quti Want a burg r an fri r ftly

a h an fungi a n t butt a p n h A a A r cani ntity a c n truct in c nt t

ff ct ar n t li it t i r ty gr upan can inv lv un ir a ll a ir

7

i titi . Briti h un rgra uat i t i g t r k l alc h an ti h alth r ati g uri g th c ingaft r b ing in uc t h nk tha Briti h rath r than A rica r ai h p p rath r than c ll g tulatt r gr up r t r typ a unh

arrant & Butl r, 2 A rica ugra uat r p rt that th y ha c nl a c h aft r b g pthat p ct gra uat tu nt

t r typ a n r y a h avy alc hB rg r & a , 8 .

e nd Iden y Are Fo ces o Ac on

A c n th a ng f an ith r t i that th lf att r f r bY t trating that h n thi k

n f pr uc acti n rath r than b ing a c at ith it ha pr v n A c ar ay t n trat that th i u nc b havi r t a ipulat an h p pl think ab ut th lvt h that thi in u nc th r ub havi r. T ak th lf al t, pa t ar a k t it in fr nt f a

arv r & Sch r, 1 7 ) r t l t b ing th lf t i , uch

ing th ir na K ttl& H ubl, n prcribing hat ak th i lar

f r nt fr th r ark , Trat a!., 1 r circling r t p r

pr n un Gar n r, Gabri l, & L , Sui & Ha , 7). Each f th para

hift r p n , but th p ci c na

th c n qu nc f ak ng th lff r act n p n n th int rplay bh ch a p ct f th lf ar br ught t

i th c t t a th a k at ha an, 2 7).T a i th p c r

r arch r ft n anipu at th f a particu ar a p ct f th f. F

a pl , in n tu y, participa t rvi ith rigg f back t in uct b li that th y r g rally ct nt r inc p t nt. hi u c

f t , an th ir lf t th ir ub qu nt pr ju icial r p n

th r Har n n t al., 1 7, n a th r tu y, r arch r r nticipa t f th ir i ntity a p ych l g

nt , th , u ing an ab rat c vl th t b li v that p ych l gy t


12/38

7 I. AWAR N S O N T ON AND R G A ON

r n t r ( r l ss n t t n c mp r s ngr up ( c n m cs stu nts) Stu nts ct

n ys t t t t r psyc l gy stu ntnt ty b n pr s nt t t m c l r ng

m r n tly t r r ng st r s b ut n t-n ss st ns b y r tt n by psyc gy stu-nts n m r m ss ly t s st r s r

ttr but t c n m cs stu nts (Sp rs tl 200 )S m r s rc rs g b y n cum nt ng

cts c nt xt n s c nc pt r s -c nc pt n b r t pr ct t t c nt xt

cts b r by ct ng s l c nc ptc nt nt (s c nc pt c ng m t s t n-

u nc c nt xt n b r F r x mplJ ng n A l 2009) m n pul tc nt x by xp s ng H ng K g n sp rt c p nts t r t r s n numb rsr l t t ng luc ( .g " uc y, numb rstr ngs c nt n ng 8) r t n t ng luc( g "un uc , numb r str ngs c nt n-

ng ) t rsub m n lly r supr l m n llyt r ty c r st r s. T y m n

str t t t b t s r t ng " m luc yp rs n (Stu s n 2 n r s pr r-

nc ( g pr rr ng c nc t s m n yr sur t ng Stu y r s gn c ntly

g r r p rt c p nts r n m y ss gnt t luc y rsus t un uc y c n t nM r r n b t s l r t ng n r s yb r c c r m sur t s mt m t ff ct c n t n n r s pr r-

nc ( .g , ngn ss t p y t p rt c p tn g mb s m t by c ng ns r t ng(Stu s n ) Exp r m nts

suc s t s c r y t t sm ll c ng s nc nt xts s t t l st s m sp cts s sn s r pr m s ng tr n rt W l n c ss r y rt c l nn t tt mpt ng t rt cul t t x ctly sm nt by us t t rmsself r ident y,

xp r m nts t s typ m nstr t c nt xts n u nc m m nt ry p rc pt ns

b ut t s n nt tyT ncr s c g c l l ty s m x-

p r m nt rs c n uct l r s rc n tct nt y n c nt x n y t x

m n cts c nt xt n b r s bys ng p pl t c ns r n nt ty t r

b r r t r t y ng g n n nt tyr nt b r ( ys rm n nt &Ag r,1995 Stu y 2 ys rm n t l 200Stu s n . An t r p ss b l ty s tsubt y pr m p rt cu r b r s t r

l nt r rr l nt t c r nt ty suc

s g n r (Elm r & ys rm n n pr ssrr c ll g stu nts n s m r S

ys rm n, 20 1)r x mp n numb r stu

s stu nts t c mpl t n l m t t r b r r t r s t m t r r c l t n c nt ty ( t t s

m ns n t r r y l s n ts, A r c n Am r c n H sp n c n

t Am r c n (Am r c n n n cm stly scr b t r r c l t n c

n t rms c nn ct n t t ngr up. s scr b c nn ct n t rg r

g n r ly r sp c c lly r p rt t t stt nm nt s p rt t r r c l

nt ty s scr b cn t l rg r s c ty n sc tt

r r r n t m t t s sp c t y t t s t r rst c ns

t r r c l t n c nt ty ( ys rm n1995, Stu y ; Stu y T r st s xp r m nt l m n pu t n s nc r r pl c t t Ar b Im l n g sc l stu nts ( ys r

t l , 00 Stu y .

U e a ing P oce

As m nstr t n t pr us s cct y m str t ng t t t s

u nc s ct n t n n l s m nng c s l c nc pt r nt ty c m

m n P r ps n t r s ns tsuc stu s t s n tur x st s t tt r s ssum t t s l s r l tbl St b l ty c n b ssum t m rg

rly pl st c ty t t s, s c l c nt xts p t s l s t s l p ng but

l p t s l m b cult t cSt b ty c n b ssum n n tp rsp ct s t t rt cul t s l c nc

nt ty s m m ry structur s t t r t n r s t c us n t

t n c ns r p pl s xp ncs l s st bl n s t c t

r m ll b ty n n m c c nstru

Expe ence ab ty

A c nun rum r stu y n un rstng s l n nt ty p r t s t

s l n nt ty c ng , p pl c n xp r nc st b l ty s s

m y n t b p ul. ns r t s


13/38

4. Sel Sel e a d d i y

o a h p ho o n r m n an r pa r tr p ac plan a n .tually allth plan ar r plac . I t th am h pD p n n on ha h qu t on r m anth an r cou b y or no ha th h p u c o a a ay o t th amh p ho h all h compo n arn o t a r nt h p. h l may bcon r nth am ay. r m lan nt t o th r ob. L Plato h pthat p o r abo at r h l t

n h m h r h o o l a n-ty o h r job o ma n m a n ocu -

att nt o an u a n n oal ocl r ulat on. u at th am t m l th

r chan n plan hat l a nt tym a may b y am cal y con ruct Aa r ul hat on ocu o hat o

oal app ar to b a ho o or toa th m chan a ll S l an t ycont n o u ct on thu l n th am

n thou h h co n chan ramatcally. Thu a l n o ab l y can r

h th r p opl ha a mot at on to p rch l a abl or no

The Self as a Stable Essenceopl a um tha p opl th m l n-

cl ha a tabl nc or cor thapr c th r b ha or tha ho th yarematt or ha h y o an that hat th y

o r f ct ho th y ar ArKa a z0 ; Jam 1 90 19 . Th a umpt o

tha p r c co ra n ur ac a-t r orpsychologic esse tialism a ba cco n t or a ch ma that at thcor o cat or at on M & rtony

9 9 pr chool ch l r n a n r

tab l y o tra n nan ma an b oloca cat or rom a l ttl a on ampl

orr G lman 1999; G lmanD ruc 999 . For n anc h y n r

ha am o bu not bat th r younma h up oo a r l arn n that lam

o an b ac b r ar n th am cat oryb r an b n o onc that blac b

th r youn ma h up oo . y a ch l r n r that both b o o cal . ham la o n an p ycho o ca ( . . l

oo pr ty charact r c ran r acron tanc oa oc al cat ory (D ruc

& l ror 011 y a 0 ch r n ar al n a a ult to u p r onal y ra t

( . n rou to pr ct b ha ora conncy o n ua o r m (A o

Kal h 00 ; RholR bl 19 4 .nc tabl h th not on o ncl u ly ob ou an a ult ar qu

to n r th x t nc o n u n poon mo a n p opl b ha or Ro19 an to n r tra t rom th r b ha

or Carl on & S o ron 1994 P oplo t n cr b th m l n t rm o tabl

ra t . nc r ty an act o .loo chan o hom l p opl (Cou n

9 9 n hCh n 011; S m 009h n al n o l app ar ual a thou h h th r p opl u a j ct

or act on rb to cr b th r tra t ah h r h y a um h r tra t apply th

part cu ar tuat o or acro tuat omay a y cro cu turally En l hCh

011S m n 009; al o CroGorChapt r th olum

Is the Sel Stable?S para rom p opl p rc pt on t mr a onabl o a h h r h l a abm al con truct. o t compr h n oc al

c nc h or o h l art culat bottab l ty an f u y a a p c o th

Thu nt ty a oc al t ty th orcr b h a nclu n both a tabl

t o a uat ta ar an a f u chan cr p on th mom nt (Turn r19 6 . In om orm la o both tab la chan ab ty ha b n a paro ma n a n n a abl a po t n

t m (T r 9 ; T rCampb ll 19 or a tabl n o l mor

ral (S a n 19 ; S annuhrm t rChapt r 19 h olum . S nc ma n aa l ma r qu r o ac or co nc o h r o on l pr ntat o(Go man 959 , propo n o om oc olo ca p r p ct ha ar u or ab lo th l o r m a a r ult o tab l to oc al nt ract o S rp 9 S ry

9 0 . Th r om uppor or th npr tat o o xampl S rp 19 ountha col tu nt o ary ho hra col ro nt t ( . co

or a n o r hr ata po t n thr t m t r o co pr umab y b cauh con x coll r ma n th am

n ay o a h qu t o h th r ah al hy or ct l nt a l


14/38

I A AR N SS O N T ON, A ND R AT ON

an n a iant ac ss t m an s tuat ns.S m psych sts ha a u tha th s isth cas , n t n thatth s lf p t cts ts lff m chan f s, s G n al ,

980 a s & Kun a, 986 , chan n

nly h n th c n t ns f lif u tG cas, 98 K hlst m & ant , 984;R s nb , 979 S ann 983, 98 ).Ifthis is th cas , th n th sh ul b in i-

ualiff nc s in s lf stabil ty, an th sff nc s sh ul b c ns q ntia . In ,

K n s an c ll a s (K n s, n l, Sun,B y, & a l , 993 K nis, Pa a is ,Wh ta , Wh atman, & G l man, 000p s nt i nc that p pl ff in hstabl th s lf st m s an that stab l ty sass c at th ll b in . l n that ths lf s n t stabl s n fact n th a n stic c it a f b l n p s na ty s -

b, Zana n , Schmahl, in han,&B hus, 00 ).T am n s stanc t chan , s a ch-s canman pulat f bac p im ntal yf ll p pl t m c mpa -

sp ns s f p pl ac ss a ups t manf nc s ab ut t m . p im ntal m th-

stypically n l t st ps. R s a ch sst btain s f at n s, th n p un -

p ct f bac h a is t s h thp pl fus acc pt f bac that sn th s f ma . n p im ntalm th s als in m than n st p. -th th s a ch t ac s th sampa t cpants t m sampl s pa t c pan s atiff nt a s p nts n th i l f c u s tma nf nc s ab ut stab l ty.

p m n s typ cally n icat that p pl at l n ths p t ct th ma s th y

ha f h ms l s, n n nt p tn c nt a ct y nf mat n an stancn th ms l s f m th s u c f such n-

f mati n a s, 9 S ann, 983,985) S m la stabil ty is nf f m

l n tu na an c ss s ct na stu s.amp , a sh an h s c ll a u s ha

amin th stab ty f ma n sp c cs lf c nc p s, as n ch l n, a sc nts,an y un a ults t sp n t a bat y fs lf p t m asu at n s f th ab liti s

na numb f mains . ., sch l, pati nsh ps, an p bl m s n . R p ts

a lat ly stabl in that th pa t c pantslat an s ma n s m la t m Th y

als sh s m ctuat n, such that h hat n sa p t n a a by ch l n

an lat a sc nts ath than mi ll sc nts a sh, 989 a sh, a

b s, 998)R s a ch n nt ty l pm nt

s n, 95 , 968 assum s th t

stab l ty; hat s, th h chi n hat t s, th a sc nt t a ulth t anis th i as in l n aminat

mp tant i nt ti s Aft t in n p ss b l t s,a l sc n s an y n a ula p ict t sta a cla m t an ity that th n ma ns stabl . A th h cni ant that nt t is a c nt t p nm ntal c nst uct, s a ch n th s t aman pulat s n th s c a c nt t t f cts n nt ty n i ntity t t st ffb ha i . nst a , th f cus is n mpt st n h th ntity chan s t

p ct an , nc an i ntity is c mmt , h th t s stabl . R s a ch s n p at nal in th p c ss f ct n t an nt ty an t stin h thp c ss is b st sc b l n a t a ntity c mm tm nt cycli

pl at n an c mm m nt f lltu n t pl at n .g., B sma & Kun

00 at man, 999) Rath than f stab l ty by ass ss n th t nt t ch l n, a sc nts, an y u a ltth s lf c nc pts f ab lit s in ama ns c ns st ntly m , th s

s s cl s n scal s f s lft nt f pl at n an n a m nt

in sp ci c nt t s . , thn c iOn , u R l!, & Phinn y, 0 0)nt ty as a h l . ., c tti, Rubus, 008).

S ca sta th i s f nl pm nt p s t a att tu ab t

s lf, s m th n that is if c t t cumn th att tu as a h l n attitu s,

s Sch a z, 00 ). n , th s thha n al y fa l t n supp t t st tim ss, Smith, & Pay

00 ) hat s, p pl h s m t n sta f nt ty l pm t ft

p t b n at an a li sta at at n tim ss t a ., 00 St auss & 005). , sta th y s a ch

t n s. ampl , s a ch n acthnic i ntity c mm nly as s h th a

l sc nts m f m p at n t cm nt, as ul b p ct by th th( , K an & ul n , 009 atsu

cht, , & N ay , 0 0)


15/38

4. Self, Se -Concep and Id nti y

The Self as Context Sensitive

Even though lay and theoret cal perspectivesfocus on stab lity it is possible tha a stab ese f s ot necessarily an effective self o

the extent that the self s a too for meaningmaki g maintaining sense of worth a degulati g behavior then an effective self

s ould be sensi ive to new nformat on ands e malleable an v r an across cha ge

features of the ex ernal (time situationa d i ternal (motiva ion environmen heappearance of stabil ty in empirical studies

ay be decep ive Self and ident ty ma ap-pear uite sta le o q e changeable depend-

g on how t ey are assessed Fo exampleffeatu es of he situation matte and f he

situa onis stable self and identi y w ll ap-pea stab e making it impossible o earn if

they are context dependent o eover s ncepeople tend o exper ence the self in contextthey may experience stability even tho ghwh ch aspec s of the self are salient may de-pend on what makes one distinctive n themoment (McGuire & cGuire 9 88 whatma es o e similar to othe s in the moment( rewer 99 a d one's immediate feelingsabout eing simi ar o distinct ( arkus K nda 198 )

mpirically it is possible to d sentanglesitua io based n ar ance from si uationbased va iance y manipulat ng situat onspr or to assess ng self and iden tyEffectscan be s b le In an ea ly es a us and

nda 986 used an elaborate cove s o yto manipulate whe her heir wh e femaleAmerican college st dent par icipants ex-perienced their tastes and preferences (e gabo t colors objects clothes as being dif-

erent from or just like the tastes and prefe -ences of others like them hey were thenshown words and asked o click a buttonmarked me if the word descr bed themand a button marked not me if it did not

ixed w th neut al words were wo ds evokgdifference (e g. ni e differen and

s milarity (e g average follower Lastparticipants we e asked to provide their as-socia ons to six words th ee re evant tobe ng d ffe ent and three re evant o beingthe same as others The man pu at on didnot infl ence how people rated hemse vesThey chose ust as many s m arity wordsa d just as many difference words as mewhether they had ust experienced thei

81

tastes and p eferences as be ng d fferen orust i e others If the resea chers had o y

measu ed the number of "me responsesthese results wo ld suppo t he predic on

hat self concept is stab e Indeed most evi-dence that self concept is stable comes fromrepeated assessmen using a measure such asthat used in th s study

But the researchers in this study also obtained reaction time (how long t took to re-spond me or not me The manipulationdid nfl ence speed of response Part cipantsmade to feel similar to others were faster toendo se "me words re a ing to being dis-t nct Wha comes to m nd ickly may wellinfluence behavior in the momen mo e thanwhat comes to mind more slow y so thatreact on time may matte n rea wo ld set-tings Yet if he goal of research is to makepredictions abo t how the se f and identityfunct on in real ecologies it migh be useful

o s udy rea s tuations rather than arti c alones

Stud ing context sensitivity i schoolfor example would re uire sampling students as they enter varying s t ations (e gthe hallwa homeroom afterschoo activi-ties see Oyserman & Packer 1996) or movethrough hei social netwo ks (e g Kinder-mann 993) aturalistic stud es often ndsurprising sta ility in self concept contentand high predictive power of his con entover t me Fo example A tschu yserman and Bybee 6 found bo h stab l-ity and predict ve power n their assessmentof three elements of racial/ethn c identity(connectedness awareness of racism em-bedded achievement over four measure-ment points Their data collection covered 2school yea s and the trans t on from middleto high school Not only were the three e -ements of racial/ethnic identity sta le overtime b t higher endorsement of hese threeelements of racial/ethnic identity pred ctedbette perfo mance over t me (cont o lingfor prior performance In another study(O serman 008), content of ac a /ethniciden ity in ninth grade p e ic ed academicperformance and in cla s behav or 4 yea slater (controlling for prior pe formance andbehav o .

These stud es clearly demons rate that selfand identity matter for behavior but do theyalso mean hat self and ide tity are basicallys ab e and not context sensitive? We argue


16/38

AW REN S S, COGNIT ON ND R EGULATION

t at nat ral sti stu s typi al y o nota o inf r n s about ont t s nsit v ty or

ont tins nsitivity t is possible at ra-ial/e ni ntity as assess in t s stu

i sis ly s nsitive to on t but t at tonte s not f ps o o ally ff r-nt v n t o ass ssm nts r obta n

a ross iff t ass ooms s oo s ans ool y ars E periments allo res ar

rsto manipulat t os asp ts of onte tpre to b psy o o i a y m aninf nat al s tt n s o not. s nat ra -isti an p rim nta res ar on i nt yprovi information on iffer nt questionsDo st s lf app ar stabl an an t s lfb ma to an e?

How rong Is Emp r ca ppor ?

A i array of so ial s i n e t or s as-sumes t at t self matters fo lif oi san b avior b a sim ar y robus bo yof v en t at is is so as y t to b as-s mbl t eory evi n ap m anst at to at s lf an i ntity t or s mayor may not provi robust mo ls of ats l an i ent ty o an o t ey fun tion

sprob m as b n not n some e. .Bana i Pr nt e1994;Baum ist r 998

arkus Wurf 9 7)but not all r v se. all ro2003 Stets Bu k 200 ).o ver iv n t lar n mb r of publi a-

t ons vokin s lf an i ntity as p anao y fa tors fa l n to atten o t t oryi n eap m ans t at t as a ol

as not ma e as mu pro r ss as mi t bop n un rstan in s lf an i entity as

m n al onstru s an as for s for a t on.is m ans t at onte ff ts on s lf an

i nt tymay o may not ork as t eor ss be t m an s lf an nti y may b

more or less po erf l as m an n makinl ns san motiva o s of a tion an t eor s

es ribe.At orst t e s f may no matt rat a l.

W l r s a on auto ap i a m mory

s onti uin to ro F vus20 )stru ure of s lf on ept s in memory is lessun erstoo r n a Bana i 9 9; -

onn ll 20 A ma n t ns on is b t nt ori s t at assum a sin l i ra i allyor aniz s lf on pt an t ori s t at onot. e alt at ve to a s n se f ierar-

i a lo ani in memor o l b t atp opl ave mult ple only loosely asso iat

s f on pts s or in m mory B t italso b t at p ople ynam ally r at a nself on ept a im one is a lefor. W ileapp alin o a lay sens t at t s lf musta sin ntity a sin le stru tur mo lnot t it o m mory an o n

o k n rall Stra kD u s 2004Wyer Srull 9 9)as onsi r in t et ir se tion. r for rat er t an foon o a sin le f-co c ptmi t be st u -

r n m mory m of t l t atufo s s on o kin on ne o "s lf on pt on s sali nt t ory abouts lf in t moment or fo uses on a part uself on pt o tent rat r an attemptito stu y all self on pts . for r vs e s ba F uson200 Oys rman2007 Sm st rs et a .20 0 W rD

arr e 2009) By root n t e r fo m lationof t e s f n situa an so ial o np rsp tiv sS ar 2007 2009 20 0Sm S min2004 2007Wye Sr l

989 t s t orists a mpt to l v ra eials i n kno le abo t o t minorks to make pr i tions about t s lf a

a m ntal onstru t Oys rman200 Oys-rman D stin20 0 ler D arr

y200 )

So ial Compar on a Co aA lar e bo y of resear as e am n

ont tualiz nat r of se f valuat ons ttin up so ial omparisons a y forlations assume t a p opl neral y trast t ms lv s it ot rs an t at t i

an l a to b t er or o s s lf valuatfor evi s s Blanton200 ollins996 .A ar n mb r of p iments raom y ass n peopl o a no ompaontrol an up ar omparison on tsom on mor su ssful or a ar omparison on ition som on l

su ssf ompare to no omparpart ipan s t os in t p ar ompson on t on repo t mor n at

va uations ss il r R terEpst e2004 aylo ob l 989 , il osn e o n ar ompar son on i i

r po mo pos t v s f rat n s am Wa smut 995).

s sults t t so ial i ent ty tr sts ar um nt t at o n ar out rou

omparisons ontr but pos tiv ly to sontity Ta fel98 )an imply at p op


17/38

4. Self, S f-Conc pt and Ide ti y

may be motivated to nd do n ard com-par sons. But, as t tu s out, peop e donot a ways contrast themselves with oth-ers Conside r the experiments conducted byL ckwood and Kunda 1 997) , who ra dom-l assig ed participants to either read mater als about a superstar stude t or not, andthen judge thei current and future selves Ifpeople alwa s cont ast themse es to others,t en the superstar compar son should haveresulted in more negative self eval ations

hether cons der ng oneself now or in thefuture ndeed, students in the superstarcond tion did rate their current self morenegatively. However, these same studentsrated their future possible self more positive

y. Why were the resul s different whe considering o e's fut re possible self rather thanone s cu rent self? One possibi ty s that inthe present, part c pants cou d clearly seethat they were ot like the superstar, so thesuperstar was then a compar son standard.

oweve , in the uture, he superstar mightbe a role model that is, participants mightbecome like the superstar, so the superstarcould be included in the r self judgment (seealso esser & Collins, 988; esser, Martin,& Cornell, 996).

Inco po at ng Others i to th S lfRather than assume that people contrast

themselves with others, a more appropriate estion is under what circumstancesare people ikely to contrast themselves withothers and u der what circumstances arethey likely to i c ude others n their self-judgments Consider t e social context oschool. n many urban school districts, failu e rates are so high that stude ts are likelyto be a are of many other students who aredoing poorl in school If people routinelycon ast themselves with others, then stu-dents in these schools should ha e plentyof downward social comparison opportu i-ties and consequently judge themse ves qu te

positi e y. Oyserman and colleagues 995,Study 3 tested this pred ction in a sample ofstude ts attending an rban middle schoo .Boys n the co trol condition (not assig edto a social comparison) did indeed j dgethemselves quite pos tively, rating themselves as highly likely to succeed in schoolin the com ng year Academ c identities werej st as highly posit ve for boys assigned to

83

imagine someone they k ew who was succeeding in school and how they were s mlar to this student assimilate positive or toimagine someone they knew who was failingin school and how they were d fferent fromthis student (contrast negative) Effects wereless clear o girls, who seemed more likelsimp yto include others in their self rat ngs,reporting less optimism when consideringothers who were failing and more optimismwhe considering others who were succeed

g.One possibility is that the girls were more

ikely to perce ve themselves as co nectedand related to others (i e , have a re ation-al sel concept Cross & adson, 997;

arkus & Oyserman, 989) his interpretat o was supported in a number of studieswith college students in which women tended to i corporate others' academic outcomesinto the r academic identities (Kemmelmeier& Oyserman, 200 a, Stud es and 2).Women, whether samp ed from an rbancampus w h predominantly rst generationcollege students or from an elite public uni-versity, rated the r academic identities morenegat vely if they were randomly assigned

rst to consider their sim larities th someone they knew who had failed rather thanconsider their d ffe ences from this targetother or make no comparison at all heseef ects were espec ally strong if the compari-

son other was also a woman. Effects were inthe same direction but weaker for meno est the possibility that these effects

were due to relational self concept, Kemmelmeier and Oyserman 200 b) assessedpartic pants' relational self concept (sampleitem: " y close re a o ships are an important reflection of who am ) before assigning them to either an upward comparisonco ditio or a no compar son control. heexpected gender difference in relationa se fconcept was obtai ed (fema es reported be ngmore relat ona than males . owever, whatpreviously seemed to be a gender effect was

real y a relational sel concept effect. elational self concept fully moderated the effectof upward comparison Among participantslow in relational self concept, those in theexper mental conditio ( Thi k of someonewho is succeeding in school ) rated them-selves more negat ve y than those in the con-trol (no comparison condition. he reverseoccurred for participants high re ational


18/38

AWARENESS OGN ON, AND REGU A ON

se f n pt; th s the xp m ntal n-t ate themse ves m e p s t ve tha

th s the nt l n t nTh se f ts e ep ate us n a p m

n pa a m Stapel & K men200

Af e l n the sI m an my n apa a aph uns am l sente s u -

n thes s pa pa s e qu tf us n ff n s et en themse ves an

the s h eve se u afte l nhe swe, our an us n a pa a aph

ns am n se en es n u n heses; t en pa t pants e e qu e t

f us s m a t es en th mselves ath s When p me t ns e th ms v sela na pa t pa ts n lu ne a ve

as ll as p s t ve nf mat a ut theth n the self u m nts. When p me

t ns themse ves n v ual st apa t pan s ex lu e p s t ve as ell as at ve nf mat n a ut t e the f m theself u m nts Thus effe ts t s em t

e m t vate a es t han e fe a t th self

Outs e th la at pe p e ma autma all n e th s th value a t -

u es n self a ent t F exampl al-n a h s llea ues( 9 )t a e ll

stu ents v a s s f f t a e en s.O n s n h h the team n stu

ents e e m l el t ea s h themeh a f t th un v s t as e

O ee e s h h h team l s stu-ents l ss l el t a s h l themeth a e e m e l el t efe t th

un ve s t as the . ple have een f un lu n h s f su ssful sp ts t ams

B nha t, Da s, F e e & u t ,998;B en Va es la & Fe s2002 n-

n p a s B en Van s ae , an -ae , et a .,2002 an su essful ma te sA nett Ge ma ,& Hu t 200 Wh le n

th se stu s p ple n lu su essfu ann t fa e t s n se f n epts, as en te ea e h n ma t f l nne te ,pe pl n u e th p s t v an n at vef atu es f the s n h self.

ary

Se f an e t t ha e ee a u t sta , as e l a s xt se s ve. v enf th p e s s ava la le. Y s mplp v n supp t n ev en e es t a

ess quest ns a u p ss. We ave ust

summa ze ev e ha p p sass m la he s n the s f

t t s a th t mes nt astpa thems v s t these the s an at

the t mes s em t e th . Thuseal quest s ems t n hethetext nflu n es self n ept a ntuh th s happ ns. T a ss thes s

t n t the t n that th n n an a t ulate hat s n a

s a n t n as levant t the tfp e t h a hen ntexts n

n e ent t es an h thes s ap e av

Th g Is fo Do g

A e u ent theme th n s al pss that n t s p a mat n, an s tua e ; that s pe pl th

e a t h n th n s s p fshape th pt ns ava la le an

s t n t (F s e99 P pleth n texts that a ma e up f thuman a t fa s ph s al spa es tas

a ua e Sm th & Sem n,2004 Pe p a esens t ve t m an n fu fea u s f thm at nv nment an a ust the

n an n t hat s ms t xe evant F us n & Ba h2004 s ,992) a en t t e s means t at

f m e eas p ta le f m t tu es an m nts uman u meat nfluen e the f mat

ess le at the m ment e s man hat hat n ma n s a t

S h a 2007 th u mu ments a ut nese f a e s tuate .

e ve men al ns ual matt sp e a t as n h a s tuat n feels

hat t se ms t e a ut esa , & H ns,2004 H s99 S h a200 S h a z B ss W n & Wman 2003 S h a Sanna S u nY n200 Th s mp es at t t mes t m n an a t m ans am al nst u te Wh xpman pu ate sal ent nf mat n t est u a p sses uts e th a

nf mat an e me a ess ap ass at ve net s a sn a t vat n as ell as th u

ve efle t n n ma es s mant als ules a feel n s e e ma2007


19/38

4 l cept d e t

ck & D t ch2 4 w i c nt ction on l p oc ing p t y

c i ntit m com p t of thoci tiv n two k n o com pi y

cc how v , f t of h imm it it t on nfl nc which oth l m nfth oci t v n two k c . h ,h t n nti y ct y m n i lik y to

ff f om t t on to it ionCogn ti n h vio j tm nt toh t cont t m to o t oft n

tom tic n o t i of con cio w nmith & Collin2 mith & Con y,

mith & m n2 4 2 ) him n th t p op m y p i nc lf ni ntity t l , f iling to notic n tiv

j t nt of ntity to p gm tic of thit t on.How v th ff ct of cont t

ly l nt nfo m tion on gm nt c n p ofo n chw z t 2 Wy &

989) mplic tion fo lf n ntity ch th o gho hn th n ct on

In s on-E on

n th p vio ct on w vi w vi-nc th t p opl om tim comp th mlv to oth n nco po t oth into

i ntity op w m to othtom tic ly t n of comp ont th vi nc i not ppo t th -mp ion p op om tim nc n

om tim cl oth f om th g-m nt . o n t n wh n p opl nccon t ly l nt info m tion into th i

gm nt o t h m lv n wh n th yc thi nfo m tion ing t to fo m

t n g n t which to j g th m lv ,w now t n to th oci cognit on litt hnclus on xclus on mod lm kp iction fo wh n ch p oc lik y toocc Bl & chw z,2 l o t mth ss m l on con s mod l- B ton,2 chw .2 3

h inc on cl on mo m k thg n lp iction th t nfo m t on th t f l

l v nt to th gm nt t k c n info m ting th t n fo j gm nto th t g t of j gm nt t f opl l k y to incl oci info m tion nto fj gm nt nl th oci l info m tion im k iff nt no gh f om th fth t it com cl n i cont ing t n . f c nt iff nc

f om h lfm y c y m t onth i non no m iv o t m n y

nfo m t on f ingto p tic n-t nco mp hth n o

c t go y v n th t p c c othp on not on fp opl incl p c c oth

n h i f gm nt on y if th oth f lclo o imi to on fCon i p on li t n ngo l ct .

h gin to won o t h lf o wh tt nt h h n cc f n f o f

n how l k ly h o cc n th f -t ? Wh t v com to m n ik y to

n h lf m nt v wB n chw z2 th i ction ofth cont t in nc c n c i

m t on o cont tAss m l onoccwh n th implic tion of l nt info m tionh po iv tion hip w th th tingj gm ntCon s occ wh n th implc t on of li nt info m t on h n g tivt on hip with th lting gm nt

R t ning to o mp cont l ynt info m ion m y n nc th

wh t h n t nsucc ss to m n inth mom nt th t n of comp i on)o wh ch l tt i t com to min nm king th j gm nt p c of th tg t). Info m t on th t info m th t n

lt in m nt p oc of cont t ngth g t with th info m tion th t comto min . o mpl , h p k m y

o ing o int ting th i nc m y follo ing ong v y o no ing off p -th t c l y. f h i t o ov th t nt y th foc of h tt ntion h w ll

cc ik y fo h n c hp t ng p t y cc f w l Ifo m tion th t nfo m th t g t lt in

m nt l p oc of mil t ng th t g t toth info m tion th t com to min . n thic , h m p k n nc iwil incl into h own j gm nt. o

mp th i nc m y nc t ntf om h coho t o h m o ; th p km y n l mn of th m n g -

t in tit t on h i o th y m y hoth tt i t i th y in t l f vo itco o ) th t f cil t t imil t on h n th

p k vit ty n th nc c p cc n nfo m h o h lf h wh th

p on cont t l nfo m t on cont ting t n on wh ch to g th

f o mil t cont t nfo m t oninto lf gm nt no f t of th n


20/38

AWA SS COG ON AND G A ON

o mat o but rather a re ult o ow the io mat o i o true the mome t O e

importa t way i whi h th ha ee tie b emo trat that people are morelikelyto a mila e w e prime to u e a olle tivi ti relat o al u el o e t aaremore l ke y to o tra t whe prime tou e a i ivi ua i ti eparate me el

o ept O li e e e o i e tity importa tly i ue e by whether ormatio ithe tuat o i i lu e or o tra te withthe i e tity

Meta ogn t ve Exper ence

M c gni iv p i nc s eelithat emer e while thi ki , a o e' i -

erpreta io o the e ee a e a o hermajor our e o o trua People a umethat eeli ou nc ea e ordis u nci ulty tha ari e i the ju me otext are ormative or the ju me t it el .O te thi may be the a e However ule provi e a rea o to o i er our epeople are o e itive to the our e o theirmeta o itive experie e . hi mea thatthey are likely to u e e e irreleva t meta

o itive experie e to i o m ju me tS hwar , 2 ; S hwar & Clore,99 .For examp e i peop e experie e i l

ty thi ki o rea o they are ati e withtheir marria e they i er that they are ot

ati e ; hey experie e i ul y rea ia re ipe they i er that it i more i ult tomake; i t ey ex erie e i ulty rea ia que io they i er that they a e ot o

e t o the a wer S hwar 2 ; So& S hwar 2 8a, 2 8b While the ei ere e may o te be o re , i the eexperime t i ulty wa ma ipulate tobe exter al to a irre eva t or thejume t: Sometime the pri t o t wa i ultto rea , other time parti ipa t were a keto li t ma y rea o a ta a e iatiomore ha the avera e per o otherwi ewoul . T i wa i ult. However u let eir atte tio wa ra to t e ex ra eou

our eo their expe ie e i ulty peoplea ume that their meta o itive experie ewa i o mative

Mu h a meta o itive experie e ie e ju me t i other omaimeta

o itive experie e i ikely to matter iju me to el a i e tity he mea i

att ibute to ue y a ue y a lue y a i ue y ave i ee -

e o ju me about el a iepe i o how the e eel areter

prete What eel ri ht i t e mome t otake o t e ara teri ti o a perthat i be au e it i e ortle y e peri ee e e ar ly t ue hi eel

ortle e tur lea to a eo e ha a e e a true a pe t o

e tity, with the impli atio hat theeli table. A outli e i the ext eo ual pro e i mo el , thi eele ortle e may ari e a a re ult o

iative Sy temrea o i rather ha thetruth value o the o i e i e tity atio o me tal o trual o i e titraw out i e ail i the e tio Dy

Co tru t o .

Dua Proce ng Mode

While ot e i theorie o e a ty ual pro e mo el o automat

o trolle o itio have bee propo eea ly every other omai o p y holoChaike & T ope999 ual pro e i

mo e ti ui h betwee two p oy tem o e hat i e ort u a o

a a other that i e o tle a automChaike & rope,999 .The e ortlexi y tem i volve a o ative l k

are ur e o via prea i a tivatio . e ort ulr c i y tem i volve y teati a eque t al pro e i o itio ieberma 2 7 Stra k & eut2 The e y tem have bee varilabe e Sy tem a Sy tem Sta ovWe t 2 ) i uitio a rea o i

ema 3 a impul ive a eStra k & Deut h 2 ) amo o

termEar ier orm latio o te po tulate t

th ki o ur i o e or the other yhi le t ope the que tio o how thi k

woul h t rom o e y tem to the ot

Emer i ev e e lari e that tho u imulta eou ly i bo h y emi Sy temt e re lex ve y tem, i alwaat work Sy tem 2, the re e tive y tem or may ot be a t e. t be ome a t ve o e ha the time re our e a e i

o i er are ully Stra k & Deut h 2W e both y tem a e wo k , ea h


21/38

4 Sel -C n ept nd de y

cess si s w s yl d w judg- c i is p duc d p c ssi g

u c m ys m wil d p d w c i s p c imm di l

m g c s i sss ci iv x v i g -s l s s m1 s i g ls ui iv

sp us ss s jus l i i my gu i ds ug s.

I c s c iv i i g sul ss m s i g s ul li

sul i i g u d pp i g s u s xplici s g s s v

m ug ui s i g iss m im s ss c d wi u is ic p c ss-i g wi s i judgm s i g

d wi m i s d dwi c -sci us p c ssi g w s s ms di i c sci us ss ccu cy u i sp d

xi ili d i s ms i u l w s i v lv d K m 3 Li -m

B c us xiv p c ssi g s ms ccu wi u i i s

c ll dn tu m s Km 1 3 u l ss ssm s i clud

ss ssm p sic l p i s g sidis cl ud ss s w ll s ss ssm s m s c p p i s c udi g simili c us p p si su p is g ss c-

iv v c .g w s m g is g d d d m d K md ic

2002). s u l ss ssm s im-m di l v il l s s s c c dc i .

c s i l c iv sys m v is lici d s c s u c d c -

s p c ss. s d c si p c ss is ssum d xp c cy v lu

m w 1 us c i g p s c i g mi d w

m c c m is v lu d d w li lc i is p duc u c m c ic

is mu i is c sis wi umps c l gic i s u g l pu sui

i c ud g s s d c i j

& s 1 77 , s p d v jz1 , i s g l ps i lwi u & O i g4

llwi Ki c 1 s l c cs B du 1 ,d xp c

c v lu i s Eccl s l1 3d sc i w s l is i v lv d i c i .

s c i i l s m im s p pl

ull c sid w g ls d w y sd i m m c iv ys mpc ssi g H w i s s ms l l p p g i l w ypic

imid m y sudd l g g jump gi ss ci iv w i g mm i clud m d li

d g y xi ys mp c ssi gc ys mis lw ys w i g d s-

m s p pl u d c g i ivl d p c ss l wi s mu ss

m v d d wis pi p cul ly imp s l g l c m

mi dDu l p c ssi g m d ls m p dic

s m m m m p c ssi gi m i y m m i im

xiv d c iv p c ssi g m ccu i g. i s c i cc d c

wi s d i u li l cu u l ss c m m d m

m . W il pl d i i s c l ly p c iv sys m c is m i sys m ll c p s i x l lly im gi

l ssl d u m ic ly cu c sc sp di g c v i p c p s s d

m m d ss ci iv d c p c p . W c m s mi d s li

d p d w ic ss ci iv l s v c ly c v d x mp s

m l ss w m c cu im g s sw m d u u im g swi s c im B

v d l c iv sys ms i v p c ssi g s m i . W i

w s i i i ll p d c d c d l s s ms v d c v

m u l v d c w sugg s s s l is l c d u l sys ms i v lv

wi l xiv d c iv p cg s du l p c ssi g m d ls w uld p dic

L m m im s p pl u c s d w id i d sc

m d wi g c m m m d

p i g vi s w w w c m O im s ul p c ssi g d s ccu is

pu c li y quic ss ci ivp c ssi g. s si u i s id i

ss c i ly cu d ug sp di g c ivi il l d vi ls ig

c x


22/38

AWAR OG T O A R GU A O

mmarygm t ontextu l ed nd situ ted p

p o hes m ke two iti l points. i stognitivep o esses e ontext sens tive

nd se ond ontext sens tivity does notdependon ons ous w eness hinkingnd tion e n uen ed y wh t omes

to m nd nd eels e ev nt in the momentWh t omes to mind is su set o l one sexistent knowledge his me ns th t psy-

holog ll me ning ul sit t ons in lu-en e ognition Cogn tion eme ges ommoment y moment inte tion with the en-vi onment the th n p o eeding n n utonomo s inv nt ontext ee shion

m th& emin 2004 p. . hinking sin uen ed y the ontext in whi h it o u sin luding physi l nd so l e tu es o the

exte n l ontext s well s the expe ien eo thinking tsel Hum n th nking is notinv i nt nd ontext ee the peop ethink lexi ly nd e esponsive to the im-medi te envi onment he ontext sensit v-ity high ighted y situ ted pp o hes doesnot depend on ons ious w eness o the

mp t o psy ho ogi lly me ning ul etu es o situ tions on ognit on Not only dositu tion l e e ts not e ui e expli t usti

t on ut lso d wing ttention to the po-tenti l n luen e o ontext n h nge the

esponse e.g. ske 2; hw 20072010

he p gm ti ontextu li e nd situted n tu e o ognition nd ts eli n e ondu l p o essing h s num e o impo t ntimp i tions o sel nd ident ty Fi stwpeople think out themselves is in luen ed

y me ning l e tu es o thei mmedi teenvi onment. Like othe judgments judgments out the sel e o med n the moment. e tu es o the envi onment simu tneously ue sso tive nd mo e system tip o esses oth yield ng lues s to who oneis nd why th t m tte s in the moment e -ond the eh vio l onsequen es o s l ent

spe ts o i entity e in uen ed y wh tthe situ tion seems to e out Both the

ontent nd eh vio l imp i tions o nonline i entity e dyn mi lly onst u ted

n the moment he impli tions o dyn mionst u tion o how sel on ept nd iden

tities m tte e ti ul ted in mo e det il nthe next se tion

Dynamic Constructio

We eg n ou h pte with num e o e p e epts noting th t sel nd iden

theo ies onve ge in sse ting th t the ssel on ept nd identity e me t l st u ls so i l p odu ts n o es t on th t eel st le yet e m l e leoutlined how the te ms h ve een used pvided ex mples o the ev den e m sh

o e h nd lled into question the ility to move o w d it does not

integ te with eme ging nde st nd nghow the mind wo ks s o tlined in the pvious se tion hinking Is o o ngthis se tion we onside the possi il ty tsel on epts nd identities e not only m

e e ut tu lly yn mi lly onstwith e h se nd the impli tions o possi lity o the imp t o sel onnd identities on how peop e think nd whthey do. We summ i e ou thoughts usinthe identity sed motiv t on model s o g ni ng mewo k Oyse m n200 200

Ident ty Ba ed Motivat on

eople inte p et s tu tions in w ys th t ong uent with thei u ently ti e i

tities p e e identity ong uent tionsidentity in ong uent ones nd nte p edi u ties they en ounte n light o ide

ong uen e When tion eels identity g uent expe ien ed di ulty in eng gielev nt eh vio s simp y highlights th teh vio is impo t nt nd me ning u

ve se y when tion ee s identity in oent the s me d ulty suggests th t eng

ng in these eh v o s is pointless nd o peop e ike me hese pe ept on

impo t nt downst e m e e ts on me nm king nd eh vio oth n the mom

n ove time.he dentity sed mot v tion model

th ee o e postul tes th t n e te medd -n m ns uc n, on nd du

d n ss nd n n s nd f .F om the st postul te dyn mi onst u tion omes the p edi tion whi h identities ome to mind wh t thei entities e t ken to me n nd the ewhi h eh vio s e ong uent with th

e dyn mi lly onst u ted in ontext


23/38

S l S l C , d Id t

th ugh identities eel st ble nd sep tem ntexts . m the se nd p stul teti n nd p edu l e diness mes the

p edi ti n th t identities e e d ness t tnd t m ke sense the w d in te ms

the n ms v lues nd beh vi s elev nt tthe identity Wh h ti ns e elev nt ndwh t sense t m ke situ ti ns depends nidentity ntent, whi h itsel is dyn mi lly

nst u tedhethi d p stul te, nte p et ti n e se

nd di ulty,inv lves tw spe ts W theg d t the met gnitive expe en e

e se, the p edi ti n is th t e se n b ing ngt mind n identity in pe ming beh vi will be inte p eted s ming the

ent ity the identity nd the identity elev n e the beh vi it eels ight tmust be the t ue me Un tun tely impt nt identities e n t lw ys e sy t ing tmind, nd pe sistently eng ging in identity-

e ev nt beh v s is ely simple. hus, st ight w d p edi ti n m the identity b sed m tiv ti n m del s th t, l thingsbeingeq l pe ple will ten il in theipu suit sel h nge Whi heve identities

met m nd n the m ment nd whi hevebeh vi s e e sily l nked t them e the

nes pe s n will pu sue H weve , the send spe t met gnitive expe en e is

the inte p et ti n expe ien ed di ulty.n identity b sed m tiv ti n m del p edi ts

th t the nsequen e expe ien ed diulty will depend n the questi ns n ex-pe en e di u ty s used t nswe , s

det iled next

Dy am c Co st uc iohe identity b sed m tiv ti n m del p -

ses th t pe ple e m t v ted t nte p etsitu ti ns nd t in w ys th t eel ng u-ent with the identities. But identities edyn mi lly nst u ted, s wh t n iden-tity me ns depends n h w it is mes tmind in the m ment nd wh t di ultiesw king n it e t ken t me n C nside i l/ethni identity On the ne h ndidentity ntent is ss i ted with l ges i l st u t e F ex mple, study the el ti nship between neighb h d el -tive seg eg ti n nd i l/ethni identity

m ng l w in me n me i n ndtin uth in et it und th t seg e

9

g t n is ss i ted with ntent i l/ethni ident ty O se m n & n, 200 )

iving in neighb h d with highe th nity ve ge seg eg ti n w s ss i ted w th

less end sement nd l ing in neighbh d with l we th n ity ve ge seg eg -ti n w s ss i ted with m e end sement

the th ee mp nents i l/ethnidentity elev nt t demi pe m n e

nne tedness w eness ism, ndembedded h evement

On the the h nd, wh t i l/ethniidentity is t ken t me n s ls tive nst u ted n the m ment, s dem nst tedin the ll wing study. In this study lsinv ving l w n me students ese he s

nd mly ssigned hild en t ttend theiegul e e t ve l ss n lte n tive ele -

tive twi e week ve the st weeks the ll m ing pe i d Oyse m n, Bybee& e y 200 ). Child en n the lte n tiveele t ve p ti ip ted in g up t vit es de-s gned t dyn m l y e te ee ing th ts h l used p ssible identities we e ng uent with the imp t nt ident t es nd me ns t tt in des ed nd v id undesi ed

dult identities s p edi ted the s h lused p ssible identities nd ng uen e

these identities with i l identity in-e sed in inte vent n n t nt l y uth

nd these s h l used p ssible identities p edi ted h nge in beh vi n e seds h l sed p ssible identities p edi tedm e in ss p t ip ti n, m e t me spentd ing h mew k nd bette g des nd ttend n e

n the set studies ls inv lving ln me n me i n nd L tin h l

d en d e tly tested the imp t dyn mily e ting sense th t s h l used

p ssible identit es e me ns tt iningdesi ed p ssible selves Destin & Oysem n, 0 0, tudies nd 2 n st study,

w in me students we e sked t ns dethemse ves 10 ye s in the utu e. Resp nseswe e ntent ded whethe they ep ted tt in ng thei utu e sel s dependent n

independent s h l tudents wh s wthei utu e sel s depending n s h l su

ess w ked h de in s h l nd g t betteg des n the se nd study, new s mple

w in me students w s nd mly ssignedt e eive eithe Census in m ti n sh wing the nne ti n between edu t n l t


24/38

90 I. AWAREN ESS COGNI ION, AND RE GULATION

ta nmentand average earnings in their stateor Census nformation on ave age earn ngsfor top athletesnd enterta nrs the futureselvesdescr bed Study as dependent ofschool success As predicted, compared with

ch ldren in he educat on-independent futureself condit on, children n the educat ondependent future self condit on not onlsa dthat they would spend more t me onhomework that night but they were a soe ght imes more ike y to actua y hand nan e tra-c edit assignment

Thus which dentit es come to mi d andwhat they mean in context is a functionof both chron c and situat onal cues w thsome s tuations more ike to cue particu aridentities or constellationsof identities thanothers People's nterpretation of cued identiti es (or dentity constel atio ns) depends on the pragmatic mean ng of these dentitiesinthe par ticular context.

he identity based mo vat on modelshares with socia dent ty ajfel& urner2004} self catego i ation urner Hogg,Oakes Reicher, & Wetherell 987) andsymbolic self completion (Wicklund& Gollw e 19 theories the notion that peopleact to increase fe similarity to sal ent soc aidentities pa ticu arly when membershipmig t feel threate ed ike many theories icultu a psychology riandis, 989,1995

he ident ty based mot vation mode predictsthat differences dentity e pression re lectdiffe ences in the elat ve sal ence of orga

izing self-concept structures, includ ng ind vidua and collective self-concepts

However by a guing fo dynam c construction t e identity-based mot vationmode mves beyond t ese pr or formulations in a number of ways It pred cts thatwhat an dentity means and thereforew at is cong uent with it is dynamical yconstructed in the moment and can mot vate bot positive a d self u dermi ngo even self-destructive behaviors t a sopredicts t at w en behavior feels identitycongrue t, t e experi nc of d f cultyinwo king o the behav r IS likely to be m-terp e edas mea i g that the behavior s animportant part of the process, not an indcation that the be avior s impossible or unnecessary

Evide ce for the rst p emise comes from aser es of studies exam ning the shifting effect

of ident ty on ealth (Oyse ma Fryberg,&Yoder, 2007 n a se ies of studies we Ose man et a 2007 Stud es 1 and 2 donstrated that minority and majority groupsheld the same baseline bel efs about theef

cacy of a heal hy lifest le in reducing hea thrisks eve the ess, mino ty group memberwe e more ikely to identif unhealthy be

av ors suc as eating fried foods drinkingsoda and adding salt as ngroup beha io sand less like y to ident fy as ingroup de ninghealthy behaviors such as f oss g teeth orexe cising as an adult. ese differenceswere striking because part c pants were co

ege stude ts at an elite pr vate u versityMore impo ant their perceptions of whatis or is not an group thing to do made theircorrect baseline beliefs about the ef cacy of ahea thy l estyle vulnerab e to identity basemotivat onal concerns

In follow-up studies we primed minori y(e.g , at no African American, or American ndian and ow come identities anfound that when these de tities were salient pa ticipants' access to informationabout hea th and be ief i the preventive capacity of health behaviors was unde minedLat no and Afr can American child enrandomly ass gned to consider their socialidentities reported higher fatalism abouttheir future health as adults than childrenin the contro group Oyserman Fryberg ea 2007 Study 3 hey were also less scessfu in accessing t e health know edgemaki g more mistakes on a health knowledge qui than child e in the control g oufor whom soc a dent t es were not primed(Oyserman, Fr berg, et al , 2007, Stud4 Moreover smoking, weight ga andhigh sugar consumptio were rated as eslike y to egatively n uence hea h amonAfrican American and Native Americapart cipants randomly assigned to a sociaide tity sa ient co ditio rather than a cont o cond tion Oyserman F be g e a2007 Studies 7

Action and Proc du al R adiness

When an identity is cued what comes tmind is not simply t e content of the ident ty but a so relevant actio s and ways o:th nki g about the wo ld Cons der eseademonst ating that c ronic or momentaril


25/38

4 S S C I y

p imed relationa us sel co cept res tsi assimilati g others' characteris cs asparto thesel KemmelmeierO serman

00 a tapel Koomen 200 More generally prim g people to co sider themselvesa separateand dist ct in l enceshow theyprocessin ormation ge eral y The idea ist at what comes to ind when an dent ty isc ed is not simp y content t also a generalway o making sense o the world ecalt at sel concepts ca be str ct red to oc s

me or s to oc s on the actor s per-spective mind s eye or the obse ver's per-spective eye oanother dentit es take ot ese str ct ral aspects

h s ide tities are predicted to i cl deot o ly content b t also a mindset or wa

of maki g sense of the world People askedto descr be how they are separate and disti ct rom their amily and riends or to cir-cle sing lar me or pl ra us rst persoprono s in a paragraph do ot st describerelevant personal or social elational se -traits a d character stics, they also apply theprimedmindset or sel concept str ct re toother tasks Oyserman et al , 009) hosep imedw th a collectivisticmindset are better at tasks in which integrating helps theyremember where ob ects were located inspace bette tha those primed with a individ alistic mindset Those pr med with ai d vid alistic m dset are better at tasks iwh ch separating helps they are q icker at

troop tasks req iri g that o e ignore someperce t al c es while processing otherssaying o t lo d the color in wh ch the worddis printed req ires ig oring the semantic

meaning as irrelevant)O co rse everyone has an array o denti-

ties some perso a me sel concepts andothers social s se concepts At the sametime as disc ssed n previous sections thereis some e idence o chronic between gro pdi erences n the prope sity or me and

s sel co cep s to be well art c latedMark s and Oyse man 989) reviewed andsynthesi ed the extant literat re on geder d ere ces in mathematical and spat alabilities Men and wome they o nd di

ered in how they navigated and made sense three dimens onal space. Me were more

l kely to report mental mager se aratedrom their ow perspective seeing the world

as the crow flies rather than as they tra

9

versed t These gender di ere ces mappedo to di ferences in per ormance on tasksthat volved rotation o o ects i three-dimensional space

Mar s and Oyserman 989 proposed

that sel concept str cture co ld predic these e ects Altho gh both men andwomencan have soc al ident ties based ingender men and wome may di er i theprope sity to se social a d relational in or-mation in art c lating identities and therefore t e likelihood o access ng me or

s sel co cepts Men were p edicted tobe more like y to de ne the sel as separated

ro contexts and relationsh ps a d womenwere predicted to be more likely to de nethe sel as embedded in co texts and re at onships ender dif erences in self conceptstr c re sho d have implications or whichcognitive proced res are accessible, and thisin t rn sho ld predict di ferences in spat altasks bene ting rom d ere t cognitiveproced res In partic ar separa e mesel str ct re sho ld make separating cogni-tive proced res generally accessible whichsho ld make context easier to ignore andthere ore tasks i olving hree d mensionalrotation in space eas er

Whereas Ma k s and Oyserman s 989)arg ment was based on a review o the gen-der literat re on cognitive style, s bseq e t

oc s shi ted to cross national dif erencesarguing or c lt ral di fere ces in personavers s socia oc s o sel concept Mark sK tayama, 199 ) At the same timec oss national di erences in dgment anddecis on mak ng that were also emergingseemed to parallel the prev o sly describedgender d erences in self concept str ct re

or a rev ew see Oyserman, CoonKem-mel eier 2002) or example ropeanAmericans seem to oc s on the g re and

gnore backgro d i processing vis al inormation generally whereas Chinese Nis-

bett, 2003 and Japa ese Kitayama D f y,Kawam ra, arse 2003) people seem to

oc s on he re ationship between g re a dbackground congruent with a social ide ti-ty foc s on the sel as connected a d relatedWhi e none o these models directly testedmediat on a l mplied an mportant role ofsel concept str ct re

Triand s and his co leagues Tra mo etal 199 riandis, 989) provided an itial


26/38

9 AWA E ESS OG T O , EGU A O

mon a on a ff may b o ynami on r ion of i n i h y

mon a a h y o l lia y ir o l o l mo ona o

o al i n i i o ib h m l byif ing ar i i an n h mom n foon h m l a im ar o or ff r n f om

f i n an fami y h y al o o haon a r ona or o ial i n i y fo a

in on a ion i a lik ly o b again in ano r a on n a 2y a ba i n ing ha b n li a

ng a a i y of i a ional , o inga o l n Ea an W ib

m l ing mor o f r o ial i n ii n ng on hi h i in a gi n

a on fo a , Oy manL2 8a 2 8b

Ho i n i y i ma fo b ha -o h an o on of o r o n ng q -on " o abo off ring a brib o in

a on ra ha b n mon a oary n ing on h h r o l on -r q on af b ng im i h

a "m or an " lf on Ma a &Aggar al 2 11, S y 2 o l an

omly a gn o a a a ag a h anir l "m on ing ar o "

r on ral ono n h y ook onh ol of a al ag n om ng again

o rag n o in a on a an a oi h o off or no o off r a

brib ho in h "m on i ion ll k y o o o h i a a oron ary analy of la g o na ional

a a ho ng a brib ry mo om-mon in o i om a o ina o n i Ma aAgga a 2S y if in i n i y fo hif

a n o a , n in ay o g n ra y a i on

Int p t t on of D cuh fo m la ion of n i y a in ing

bo h on n ha on hink abou h non hink abo on lf an n r a ionof a om an ing m a ogn i ro -fl ion on ho h nking f l a ar

n h r ng of W ll am Jam 89 /1927o n ly o a ogn ion r a a

mon ra h im o an of on i r ngbo on n of o gh an m an

ng a b o f l ng of a o if l ya o ia h o g S ar

2 2 2 2 mag of ona ngr n an f r n i ar in

link i f ling of a o if la h f l ng m an n

q on on a k on f in r garf ling f h q ion i " i io m h n n if l

n r a m an g a aY i im or an o m Ohy am o king o ar Con r

q on " h r ari n if l y may b in r

a m aning ha h an i "no f ling of a a ommonly in ra

r an g n in nCommon in r a ion of f l if

ar a if i i a o h nk of o ah n i l k y o b H

S a Clor 199 hi o l imha n of m a ognl yan a ily b n oo o m an

fo m Ho a n mb ofa o m n ha o h r in r r

ar o ib S h a 2 2 1o i abo n n a

m aning of ri n if l y a n no ga n an n o k

ing g , "Yo mi 1 % of h on ak S milar y h n a m

a ain a ool fo i n i y ogni n of f l y i

in a no h m in r o m an o hi

l an b a a norma h o g "Su i %an 99% i a ion if l y

o i n of og go an hing in lif a h on yoa o ork fo f if y an

along ay ar i a i al a n if l y

handbook of self and identity - second edition - ch. 4 pp. 69-104 38 pages

Documents