Measuring Our Own Worth: Early and Modern Theories of Self-Esteem

UPI Study › Courses › Advanced Social Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 4.3 Free with a free account

Measuring Our Own Worth: Early and Modern Theories of Self-Esteem

Advanced Social Psychology · Chapter 4: The Self and IdentitySection 4.3 · lesson 20 of 8511 min · free with a free account

← Who Am I? Building a Clear Understanding of Self-ConceptNext lesson: Putting Your Best Face Forward: Key Methods of Self-Presentation →

Earn 3 college credits for Advanced Social PsychologyRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Psychology 310 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Advanced Social Psychology · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

Why the self-evaluative system exists, and what it actually predicts.

  • Distinguish trait from state, and explicit from implicit, self-esteem
  • Compare sociometer, terror management, and contingency accounts
  • Explain self-affirmation and defensive responding
  • Evaluate the alleged benefits of high self-esteem

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 (1,553 words). Read along, or search it.

The Self and Identity

Measuring Our Own Worth

Self-esteem is the most popularized construct in all of social psychology. It is also one of the most misunderstood, in a specific and correctable way. The popular version treats it as a quantity you should try to increase. The research version asks a different question first. What is it for? This section takes three serious answers to that question. Sociometer theory, terror management theory, and contingencies of self-worth. We start with James, whose eighteen ninety formula still frames the debate. Then measurement, because how you count it decides what you can find. Then the meta-analytic verdict on whether high self-esteem actually buys anything. The short answer is: less than you were told, and not in the places you expected.

The Construct

Four Cuts Through One Variable

Self-esteem is the evaluative dimension of the self-concept. The degree to which a person regards themselves as worthy, capable, or significant. Four distinctions cut through that one variable, and they matter. Trait self-esteem is a relatively stable disposition, averaged across time. State self-esteem is context-bound, and often transient. That second one is what experiments actually move, so keep the pair straight. Advanced treatments add a further cut, between explicit and implicit. Explicit self-esteem is accessible by self-report. You ask, and the person answers. Implicit self-esteem is inferred from indirect measures instead. The Implicit Association Test, or name-letter preferences, following Greenwald and Banaji. Their nineteen ninety-five work established that framing. And the gap between the two is not measurement noise. It predicts things on its own.

James, 1890

Self-Esteem as a Ratio

William James formalized self-esteem first, in eighteen ninety. And he did it as a ratio, which is still the sharpest way to see it. Self-esteem is the ratio of your successes to your pretensions. Pretensions means the aspirations against which those successes get measured. Two predictions follow immediately, and both are counter-intuitive. First, there are two roads up, not one. You can raise self-esteem by accumulating successes. Or you can raise it by lowering your pretensions. James put it beautifully. How pleasant is the day, when we give up striving to be young. Second, self-esteem is selective. You fail only in the domains where you have staked your claim. A domain you never claimed cannot wound you at all. James therefore anticipated both halves of the modern literature. Domain-specific contingencies of self-worth, and the strategic role of disengagement.

Instruments

How the Field Actually Measures It

Before the theories, a word about the instruments. Modern empirical work is anchored by Morris Rosenberg's scale, from nineteen sixty-five. Ten items, assessing global self-worth. A typical statement reads, on the whole, I am satisfied with myself. It has been translated into more than fifty languages. It remains the field's reference instrument, which makes its problems worth knowing. Its unidimensionality has been challenged. Positive and negative items often load on separate factors. And method effects can be non-trivial, as Marsh showed in nineteen ninety-six. Two other instruments complement it. Coopersmith's Self-Esteem Inventory, from nineteen sixty-seven. And Harter's Self-Perception Profile, from nineteen eighty-five, which is domain-specific. It decomposes self-esteem into academic, social, physical, and other facets. A global number and a facet profile answer different questions. Choose deliberately.

Function One

Sociometer Theory: A Gauge, Not a Goal

Now the functional question. Why should a self-evaluative system exist at all? Leary and Baumeister answered it in two thousand, with sociometer theory. Self-esteem is a psychological gauge. It monitors the degree to which you are being accepted, or rejected, by social groups. The evolutionary argument is straightforward. In an ancestral environment, exclusion was potentially lethal. Individuals who tracked their relational value enjoyed a survival advantage. So on this account, self-esteem is not the goal at all. It is the readout. A dial, not a destination. It rises when you feel valued, and falls when you feel rejected. And the fall is functional. It motivates behavior that restores inclusion. The theory makes a clean prediction, which is its main support. Experimentally induce acceptance or rejection, and state self-esteem shifts predictably.

Function Two

Terror Management: An Anxiety Buffer

There is a rival functional account, and it is far stranger. Greenberg, Pyszczynski, and Solomon proposed terror management theory in nineteen eighty-six. They drew it from Ernest Becker's philosophical anthropology. The starting point is that humans know they are going to die. That awareness generates a potential terror which has to be buffered somehow. The buffer has two parts, and self-esteem is one of them. The first part is a meaning-giving cultural worldview. A story about what the world is, and what matters in it. The second part is a sense that you are a valued participant in that worldview. That sense of valued participation is what self-esteem is, on this account. The signature finding is called the mortality salience effect. Subtle reminders of death, such as a brief writing prompt about one's own dying. Participants then defend their cultural worldview more vigorously. And they pursue self-esteem-enhancing opportunities more actively. Hundreds of experiments have shown this. But volume is not proof. Replication and moderator debates continue, and an advanced reader tracks both.

Adjudicating

Same Answer, Different Question

So we have two functional theories, and they cannot both be the whole story. Both agree that self-esteem is functional. They disagree about the function. For sociometer theory, self-esteem is a monitor of belonging. The relevant threat is social exclusion, and the manipulation is acceptance or rejection. For terror management theory, self-esteem is an existential anxiety buffer. The relevant threat is awareness of death, and the manipulation is mortality salience. Being able to say which framework a given study invoked is a real skill. So is knowing what evidence would distinguish them. But notice that they need not be mutually exclusive. Belonging plausibly contributes to the broader cultural buffer terror management describes. And existential reminders may work partly by threatening relational standing. Two mechanisms can share a variable without either one being wrong.

Where It Is Staked

Contingencies of Self-Worth

Crocker and Wolfe reframed the whole variable in two thousand one. People differ not only in how much self-esteem they have. They differ in where they look for evidence of worth. Crocker, Luhtanen, Cooper, and Bouvrette built a scale for this in two thousand three. It operationalizes seven domains of contingent self-worth. Academic competence, physical appearance, virtue, and others' approval. Then God's love, family support, and competition. Success in a domain inflates self-esteem to the extent that domain is contingent. Failure in that same domain deflates it correspondingly. Here is why the profile beats a single global score. It predicts patterns of vulnerability and motivation that a global number cannot. Two people with identical self-esteem scores can be threatened by completely different events.

The Cost

Pursuing Self-Esteem Is Not Free

Crocker and Park pushed the argument further in two thousand four. The pursuit of self-esteem carries its own costs. This is the finding that most cleanly contradicts the popular advice. First, motivation narrows. The goal quietly becomes proving your worth, rather than doing the work. Second, learning is reduced. Failure has to be avoided instead of used, so information gets discarded. Third, relationships become fragile. And fourth, self-regulation is impaired when a contingency is threatened. The reframe follows directly from that list. Self-esteem is not a scalar quantity to be maximized. It is an emergent property of a contingency system, which can be more or less adaptive.

Defense

Fragile High Self-Esteem, and How to Disarm It

Return now to the explicit and implicit distinction, because it pays off here. Discrepancies between the two have proven predictively informative. Consider someone with high explicit but low implicit self-esteem. This pattern is sometimes called fragile, or defensive, high self-esteem. Jordan, Spencer, Zanna, Hoshino-Browne, and Correll documented it in two thousand three. Those individuals show elevated narcissism and ingroup bias. They also show defensive responses to threat. So the question is whether that defensiveness can be disarmed. Steele's self-affirmation theory, from nineteen eighty-eight, says it can. Buttress global self-integrity, for instance by reflecting on an important personal value. People then respond less defensively to threats in completely unrelated domains. That result tells you something structural about the system. The self-evaluative system is integrated, not a set of sealed compartments. It can be defended at the level of global worth, not only where it was hit.

The Verdict

From Panacea to Caveat

Now the verdict on the popular claim, and it is a sobering one. Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, and Vohs published a major meta-analytic review in two thousand three. They asked what high self-esteem is actually associated with. It is associated with subjective happiness. That much holds. It is also associated with initiative. Now the list of things it is not reliably associated with. Not better academic performance. Not occupational success. And not reduced antisocial behavior. That is a far shorter list than the popular version of this idea promised. It can also run the other way, which is worse. Bushman and Baumeister showed this in nineteen ninety-eight. Unstable or narcissistic high self-esteem predicts aggression in response to ego threat.

Consolidate

Secure Versus Fragile, and Five Terms

So the contemporary view stops asking how much, and asks what kind. Secure high self-esteem is stable, non-contingent, and well-grounded. Fragile high self-esteem is none of those things. The consequences for behavior and relationships are sharply different. Five terms to carry forward from this section. Self-esteem itself, as the evaluative dimension of the self-concept. Sociometer theory, where self-esteem gauges relational acceptance. Terror management theory, where it buffers the anxiety of knowing you will die. Contingencies of self-worth, which predict domain-specific reactivity. And self-affirmation, which defends the whole system rather than the wounded part. One question to ask of any self-esteem claim you meet. Was it measured globally or by domain, and was it trait or state?

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

How other people shape what we think and doAdvanced Social Psychology explains how people think about, influence and relate to one another: attitudes and persuasion, the self, prejudice and intergroup conflict, attraction and close relationships, conformity and obedience, helping and aggression. It is a common upper-level course in psychology and sociology degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

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 UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks 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 Measuring Our Own Worth: Early and Modern Theories of Self-Esteem

What is the sociometer theory of self-esteem?
Sociometer theory, developed by Mark Leary and Roy Baumeister, proposes that self-esteem is an internal gauge of how accepted or rejected a person is by others. It rises when people feel valued and falls when they feel excluded, and that drop motivates efforts to restore belonging. The theory argues that tracking social acceptance aided survival in ancestral groups, and experiments show that inducing acceptance or rejection shifts state self-esteem.
What is terror management theory?
Terror management theory, proposed by Jeff Greenberg, Tom Pyszczynski, and Sheldon Solomon in 1986 and inspired by Ernest Becker, holds that self-esteem helps buffer anxiety about death. People manage that anxiety through a cultural worldview that gives life meaning and a sense of being a valued participant in it. Many studies report that reminders of death increase worldview defense, but some large replication efforts have not reproduced this mortality salience effect.
Does high self-esteem lead to success?
High self-esteem is linked to happiness and initiative but does not reliably produce better academic performance, job success, or less antisocial behavior. That was the conclusion of a 2003 review by Roy Baumeister, Jennifer Campbell, Joachim Krueger, and Kathleen Vohs. Brad Bushman and Roy Baumeister also found in 1998 that narcissism, an inflated and fragile self-view, predicted aggression after an ego threat, so the kind of self-esteem matters as much as its level.
What are contingencies of self-worth?
Contingencies of self-worth are the domains a person's self-esteem depends on, a framework from Jennifer Crocker and Connie Wolfe in 2001. A 2003 scale by Crocker and colleagues measures seven: academic competence, appearance, virtue, others' approval, God's love, family support, and competition. Success in a contingent domain raises self-esteem and failure lowers it. Crocker and Lora Park argued in 2004 that chasing self-esteem can harm learning, relationships, and self-regulation.

About the Advanced Social Psychology course

How many college credits is Advanced Social Psychology?
Advanced Social Psychology (Psychology 310) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Advanced Social Psychology cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 85 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. Students who want several courses choose UPI Study PRO instead.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Advanced Social Psychology take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 85 lessons total about 15 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

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.

Enroll in Advanced Social Psychology →Download the syllabusEvery course with PRO →
Advanced Social Psychology
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →