UPI Study › Courses › Advanced Social Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 4.6 Free with a free account
Looking Inward: Self-Awareness Theory and the Power of Introspection
Advanced Social Psychology · Chapter 4: The Self and IdentitySection 4.6 · lesson 23 of 8511 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Advanced Social Psychology.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Advanced Social Psychology
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Shaped by the World Around Us: How Social and Cultural Systems Define the Self →← Managing Impressions: Self-Monitoring, Ingratiation, and Self-HandicappingNext lesson: Shaped by the World Around Us: How Social and Cultural Systems Define the Self →
In this lesson
What self-focused attention does, and what introspection cannot tell you.
- Distinguish objective from subjective self-awareness
- Compare private and public self-consciousness
- State the control-theory account of self-regulation
- Evaluate the documented limits of introspective access
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,496 words). Read along, or search it.
The Self and Identity
Looking Inward
Looking inward feels like the most reliable thing you can do. It is your own mind. Who could have better access? This section shows that the intuition is half right, in a specific way. Reports about your experience can be informative. Reports about the process that produced it are often simply invented. We start with Duval and Wicklund, and what happens when attention lands on the self. Then the dispositional version, where some people do this chronically. Then Carver and Scheier, who rebuilt the whole thing as a feedback loop. Then two experiments that constrain how you may read any self-report. And finally mindfulness, which turns out to be a precise subtraction from the classic model.
Two Registers
A State and a Trait
Self-awareness is the capacity of an organism to take itself as an object of attention. That capacity is studied in two complementary registers. Confusing them produces bad reasoning, so keep them separate from the start. The state register goes back to Duval and Wicklund, in nineteen seventy-two. It examines the moment-to-moment direction of attention toward the self. It answers the question, when? The trait register goes back to Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss, in nineteen seventy-five. It examines individual differences in the chronic tendency to attend to the self. It answers the question, for whom? Neither register alone tells you very much. Combined, they specify when self-attention matters, and for which people.
Duval And Wicklund
Objective and Subjective Self-Awareness
Duval and Wicklund proposed that attention can point in two directions. Outward, toward the environment. Or inward, toward the self as an object. They called the outward case subjective self-awareness. You are the subject doing the looking, and you are not in the picture. They called the inward case objective self-awareness. You have become the thing being examined. The naming is counter-intuitive, and it trips up a lot of students. Objective here does not mean accurate. It means the self has been made into an object of attention. As later slides will show, that can distort as easily as it clarifies.
The Engine
Discrepancy, Affect, and Two Exits
So what happens when attention lands on the self? Something automatic. The person engages in spontaneous self-evaluation. The current self gets compared against whatever standards are salient. Note that word, salient. The standard is supplied by the situation. It is not freely chosen by the person doing the comparing. If a discrepancy is detected, the person experiences negative affect. That affect is the fuel for everything that follows. And now there are exactly two exits, which is the theory's sharpest feature. The first exit is to reduce the discrepancy, by changing the behavior. This is the outcome that every intervention is aiming at. The second exit is to escape self-focus altogether. Turn attention outward, leave the situation, or use avoidant means. Here is the uncomfortable part. Both exits reduce the negative affect equally well. Which one a person takes is the entire applied question.
Manipulations
How You Put a Self in Front of Someone
The theory has been operationalized through a small set of devices. Each one reliably increases self-focus, and their crudeness is part of the point. A mirror. A camera. A recording of your own voice. An audience. That is nearly the whole toolkit, and it works. Experimental studies show these manipulations increase consistency. Specifically, consistency between behavior and stated values. They reduce cheating. They increase helping, when prosocial standards are the salient ones. And they intensify conformity to a person's own attitudes. Diener and Wallbom gave the most cited demonstration, in nineteen seventy-six. Mirror exposure sharply reduced cheating on an anagram task. Nobody was watching. A reflection was enough to close the gap.
The Scale
Three Dimensions of Self-Consciousness
Now the trait register, and the instrument that defined it. Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss built a twenty-three item Self-Consciousness Scale. It resolved into three dimensions, not one, which is the interesting result. Private self-consciousness is attentiveness to inner feelings, thoughts, and motives. High scorers show more elaborated self-knowledge. They also show greater consistency between their attitudes and their behavior. And they attend more closely to their internal emotional states. Public self-consciousness is attentiveness to oneself as a social object. The self as viewed by other people, in other words. High scorers show greater concern with social evaluation. They engage in more strategic self-presentation, connecting straight back to section four point four. And they show increased sensitivity to rejection cues. The third dimension is social anxiety, discomfort in the presence of others. Attending to what you feel and attending to how you look are different dispositions.
Trapnell And Campbell
Introspection Is Not One Thing
The most important refinement came in nineteen ninety-nine. Trapnell and Campbell split the private dimension in two. And crucially, the two halves are only weakly correlated. Reflection is curiosity-driven inquiry into the self. It tracks openness, and it tracks well-being. Rumination is threat-driven, repetitive focus on the self. It tracks neuroticism, and depressive symptoms. So the two have opposite mental-health correlates. And from outside, they can look almost identical. This costs the older literature something real. Introspection is a heterogeneous family of activities, not one cognitive operation. Any study that measured self-focus as a single variable was averaging two opposite things.
Carver And Scheier
Self-Regulation as a Feedback Loop
Carver and Scheier rebuilt the whole account, across nineteen eighty-one and ninety-eight. They reframed self-awareness inside a cybernetic control-theory model. Behavior becomes the output of a hierarchy of negative feedback loops. Each loop does the same simple thing. It compares the current state of some input variable against a reference value. The reference value is the standard. Then it acts to reduce whatever discrepancy it found. And here is where self-awareness enters this model precisely. Self-awareness is the operation by which the comparator gets engaged. Without it the loop never runs. The comparison simply does not happen. The hierarchy is the part that makes this useful. Higher-level loops set abstract standards, like be a good parent. Lower-level loops translate those into concrete actions, like call my child. The framework also supplies vocabulary for why self-regulation fails. Velocity of progress, scaling back, and disengagement.
Nisbett And Wilson
The Stockings, and What People Said
Now the corrective tradition, and it is a serious one. It cautions against assuming introspection gives privileged access to mental processes. Nisbett and Wilson's nineteen seventy-seven review is the founding document. Their stocking study is the cleanest illustration. Participants evaluated a row of stockings and chose the best one. The stockings were identical. Every single one. Participants overwhelmingly selected the rightmost item in the row. A position effect, and one entirely invisible to them. Then they were asked why. They uniformly reported quality differences as the reason. Differences that could not possibly have existed. So the general claim is stark. People often have no introspective access to the processes behind their judgments. What they report instead are plausible-sounding inferences. Drawn from cultural theories about why such judgments should arise.
Wilson And Schooler
Introspecting Can Make You Worse
Wilson and Schooler extended the critique in nineteen ninety-one. They moved it from inaccuracy to interference, which is a much stronger claim. Reflecting on your reasons does not merely produce a bad report about the process. It can produce a worse decision. Participants tasted jams and ranked them. One group was asked to articulate why they preferred one to another. The other group simply chose, without verbalizing anything. The verbalizing group's choices diverged more from expert ratings. Thinking about reasons made the judgment less aligned with expertise, not more. The proposed mechanism is worth stating carefully. Verbalization foregrounds features that are easy to articulate. But easily articulable is not the same as diagnostic. The reasons you can say out loud are not the reasons that were doing the work. The lesson is not that introspection is useless. Its reports about process are unreliable, even where reports about experience inform.
The Two Faces
When Self-Focus Helps, and When It Harms
So self-focus is neither uniformly adaptive nor uniformly costly. The moderator is the mode you engage it in. Reflective self-focus is engaged with curiosity and open attention. It supports value-consistent behavior, and emotional clarity. Ruminative self-focus is engaged under threat instead. It narrows attention onto negative self-content, and prolongs distress. Nolen-Hoeksema documented that pattern in two thousand. Now put that together with Duval and Wicklund's manipulations. You get a genuine design warning for applied work. Increasing objective self-awareness in a negative-affect context may amplify the problem. It may make behavior worse rather than better. So advanced applied work designs interventions deliberately. To recruit the reflective mode, and not the ruminative one.
Consolidate
Attention Without the Comparator
That design problem is where mindfulness enters the picture. Mindfulness is present-moment, non-judgmental attention to ongoing experience. It shares reflection's open, exploratory stance. But it adds something specific, and it is a subtraction from the classic engine. An explicit deactivation of evaluative comparison. That is the very operation which, for Duval and Wicklund, generates self-evaluative affect. Turn off the comparator, and the negative affect never arrives. Brown and Ryan linked this to outcomes, in two thousand three. Dispositional and trained mindfulness track reduced rumination. They also track improved emotion regulation, and greater self-concept clarity. So the integrated conclusion is a conditional one. Self-awareness is most beneficial coupled with non-defensive attentional postures. Not with chronic comparison against rigid standards. One habit to carry forward. When someone explains their own behavior, ask what they could know.
About Advanced Social Psychology at UPI Study
Advanced Social Psychology (Psychology 310) is a self-paced online course of 85 video lessons in 12 chapters, from attitudes, persuasion and the self to prejudice, attraction and relationships, conformity and obedience, helping, aggression and social life online. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →
Compare: Social Psychology vs Sociology
Why take it here
Why students take Advanced Social Psychology with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Advanced Social Psychology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Looking Inward: Self-Awareness Theory and the Power of Introspection
What is the difference between objective and subjective self-awareness?
Why does looking in a mirror make people less likely to cheat?
What is the difference between self-reflection and rumination?
Can people accurately explain the reasons behind their own choices?
About the Advanced Social Psychology course
How many college credits is Advanced Social Psychology?
How much does Advanced Social Psychology cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Advanced Social Psychology take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Advanced Social Psychology.
85 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →