Discussion How Self-schemas Develop With Reference to Both Theory and Evidence Essay Example

standards derived from people who are less fortunate than ourselves, we may gain a positive self-image from it and this self-consciousness from time to time will influence our behavior in life.

Furthermore, in Higgins’s (1987) self - discrepancy theory, we define ourselves through three types of self-schema, which are classified as actual self, ideal self and ought self. The actual self represents the present status of ourselves. The ideal self and ought self is ‘self-guides’ reaction, the ideal self is how we want ourselves to be in an ideal state and the ought self is how we think we should become. Discrepancies between different expectations can motivate changes to reduce the discrepancy, thereby to establish self-regulation. Moreover, these self-discrepancies can make us feel emotionally vulnerable.

When we fail to settle the discrepancy between actual and ideal self, in the absence of positive outcomes, the negative psychological status will be reflected, hence people feel generally dejected and dissatisfied. When we fail to resolve the discrepancy between an actual self to ought self, it will herald the occurrence of the presence of negative outcomes, which leads to the psychological state of agitation or anxiety. Therefore, the self-discrepancy theory assumes that each type of self-difference reflects a specific type of negative psychological situation, thereby associated with a specific emotional problem.

Social comparison occurs when a person feels uncertain towards their ability, and lack of objective assessment within the environment. People tend to compare with others regarding their ability or thinking in order to gain self-understanding thereby excluding the uncertainty within themselves. No doubt, the most straightforward way to learn about ourselves is through introspection and self-perception. However, comparing ourselves with other

people is also a way of fostering self-improvement, self-motivation, and positiveness of self-image. There are many possible tensions between self-evaluation and self-enhancement in many contexts, but research derived from the theory of social comparison Festinger's (1954) has investigated the comparative choices in circumstances that emphasize rational consideration of intellectual abilities under low stress.

To some extent, people have a natural drive to compare their own attributes and abilities with a similar group of people (e.g friends or peer colleagues) and it is common that people express their attitudes and self-concept in the groups to which they feel they belong. When it comes to performance, people are more likely to compare with people who are slightly worse than them and generally create a downward social comparison, which distributes an evaluatively positive self-concept (Wills, 1981). These studies have generally found that individuals choose to compare with others upwardly, or in some cases make multiple choices to assess the spectrum of abilities within their group. However, our choices are limited, everyone has weaknesses or shortcomings, it is common that we don’t always have the freedom to choose who to compare with. Concern by (Wood, 1989), promoting upward comparison can even create a negative effect on self-esteem, this is also a famous unfavorable phenomenon in recent years.

According to Abraham Tesser’s (1998) self-evaluation, maintenance model (SEM), it presumes that individuals are usually driven to maintain positive self-assessment and that self-assessment is partly determined by two antagonistic processes: reflection and comparison. Unless the upward social relation is on appropriate dimensions, however, it can threaten our self-assessment and jeopardize self-esteem (Tesser, 1998). In other words, making mental comparisons to people who are perceived

to be superior to the standard of comparison is considered as an upward comparison. For example, An academic overachiever who has an outstanding academic background may not enjoy meeting a fellow overachiever within the same area of specialty but may enjoy socializing with an individual who is professional in another domain.

Social Identity Theory (SIT) (Hogg & Terry, 2000; Turner, 1982) or Social Categorization Theory (SCT) (Tajfel, 1981; Turner, 1987) plays an important role in the relationship between group composition and group operation. SIT is a theoretical analysis of group processes and intergroup relations that assumes groups influence their member’s self-concepts and self-esteem, particularly when individuals categorize themselves as group members and recognize the identity of the group itself. The process of identification hardly markedly different as individuals hardly builds the perception of others on a trait by trait basis (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). There are two types of identity which are classified as personal identity and social identity; personal identity owns a unique personal attribute which is likely referring to as personal character and relationships, whereas social identity is defined as the part of self-concept or self-image determined by group membership. However, both identities can bring negative effects.

The identification of personal identity can be cognitively categorized based on several logical arrangements, for example, based on phenotype, gender, age, etc. And within each category, the psychological salience in a certain context would further solidify the sense of identity within the group. Hence that person would categorize themselves in particular “in-group”. Moreover, a person can build positive distinctiveness based on the evaluation of social comparison to the “out-group” if that person perceives a positive outcome from the

evaluation. Various other factors, including stereotyping, competition within the “in-group” may also contribute to the development of an individual's self-esteem. For example, a female rights activist may find herself belonging to a group of women who are keen on fighting the rights of their own gender. The social identity of her being a member would deepen whilst successfully evaluated and compared herself against men e.g. taking part in feminist campaigns.

The theory of self-categorization (SCT) shares several concepts with SIT (Turner, 1999), social and personal identity is one of the main premises of the theory of social categorization. Both of the personal and social identity can be a “work and guide” behavior and cognitions simultaneously thereupon. The self-categorization process will also lead to the outcome of 'depersonalization,' where one's sense of self is diminished.

The individual is no longer just a single individual, but a part of the group. This change of self-concept will also affect many team processes, such as regulating internal behavior, group superiority, positive group attitude and cohesion, cooperation, mutual assistance, empathy, collective action, sharing norms and mutual influence. In particular, four mechanisms have been suggested and examined—self-categorization, salience, depersonalization and individuality.

Many studies have argued that when individuals with different social identities form a team, members will differentiate themselves into different social groups through the process of self-categorization, and groups will, therefore, be divided into different subgroups. Byrne's (1971) similarity attraction theory holds that members of the same social identity group are similar to each other in their characteristics, so they get attracted to each other more easily and build a good impression, which forms a strong cohesion between members by having smooth communication.

Members' evaluation of the members of their own identified groups will also be significantly better than that of other groups. They would believe that members of the group are better than other groups, which is likely to trigger hostility and conflict among different social identification groups (Tsui et al., 1992)

In conclusion, through each of the theories mentioned above, the development of the self-schema of an individual is based on self-identity in both private and public perspectives but further enhanced through social interaction with others. The self-image can be influenced in a group, where one's self-esteem could be strengthened or weakened when they categorize and compare themselves among others and configure their self-concept. To develop a positive attitude to understand ourselves and accept the differences between others would be helpful to maintain a good and healthy environment in a society.