Student Research in Psychology
at
Southeast Missouri State University
Chapter
15:
Georgette Johnson Abstract
The
purpose of the investigation
presented in
Chapter 15
was to examine whether people’s intellectual
self-discrepancies (between both their measured and self-perceived
intelligence and their respective ought and ideal intellectual
self-perceptions) would be related to their affect and self-esteem. The
results indicated that intellectual self-discrepancies based on people’s
self-perceived rather than their actual measured intelligence were more
strongly related to their affect.
Chapter
15:
Self
discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1989) is concerned with the relations among
different types of self-beliefs or self-state representations--
self-perceptions that can produce emotional vulnerabilities in people.
Higgins (1987) outlined three types of self-domains: (1) the actual
self, which is one's representation of the attributes that are believed
(by oneself or another) to be possessed by an individual; (2) the ideal
self, which is one's representation of the attributes that someone
(either oneself or another) would like one to possess; and (3) the ought
self, which refers to the attributes that someone (oneself or another)
believes one should possess. Two types of standpoints on the individual
self were also outlined by Higgins: (1) one's own personal standpoint
and (2) the standpoint of a significant other (e. g., mother, father,
close friend). According to Higgins, when discrepancies involve the
domains of the self and standpoints on the self, emotional
vulnerabilities can be heightened (i. e., anxiety, stress, clinical
anger). Self discrepancies vary between individuals. Some people do
not have a large discrepancy between their actual self conception and
their ideal self. These people are presumed to be more motivated and to
have greater self esteem.
Higgins
states that there are two major motivational tendencies associated with
self discrepancy theory. First, self-discrepancy theory assumes that
people are motivated to reach a condition in which their self-concept
matches their personally relevant self-guides, and second, relations
between and among different types of self-state representations
represent different kinds of psychological situations, which in turn are
associated with distinct emotional-motivational states (Higgins, 1989).
Along these lines, Higgins (1990) has examined the relationship between
self-discrepancies and self esteem. His findings suggest that
discrepancy scores derived from idiographic measures of the actual-self
and the ideal-self, respectively, are significant predictors of global
self esteem. Strauman and Higgins (1987) have also researched self
discrepancies as predictors of chronic emotional distress. They found
that people characterized by an actual-ideal discrepancy reported
considerable depressive (i. e., dejection oriented) symptoms, but fewer
anxiety/paranoid (i. e., agitation-related ) symptoms.
Previous
self-discrepancy studies have focused mainly on how self discrepancy
theory addresses some of the emotional and motivational problems that
people have. The purpose of the present investigation was to examine
the relationship between people’s intellectual discrepancies (between
people’s actual measured and their self-perceived intelligence and
both their ideal and ought intellectual self-perceptions) and measures
of their affect and self-esteem. It was hypothesized that intellectual
self-discrepancies based on people’s self-perceived rather than their
actual measured intelligence would be more strongly related to their
affect and self esteem. It was also predicted that a larger discrepancy
between the “ideal” self-perceptions of intelligence and actual measured
intelligence will be positively associated with greater depression and
lower self-esteem.
Method and Procedure
The sample
consisted of undergraduate psychology students from several lower level
classes who signed up for the study as one way to partially fulfill
course requirements. About 48% of the sample were freshman, 22% were
sophomores, and the other 30% consisted of juniors, seniors, and other
academic classifications. The vast majority of the subjects in the
study had never been married. The entire sample reported that they had
no children. The income demographic was spread out among the subjects;
40% of those surveyed reported a family income of over $50,000 per year,
while 30% reported a family income of under $15,000 a year, with the
rest scattered in between. The majority of the sample in this study
were Caucasian American, and others were African American, Hispanic
American, and Oriental. About 88% of the sample consisted of students
between the ages of 16 and 25, and the others were older. Sixty-six
percent of the sample consisted of students who were raised in a town of
50,000 people or less, and the other 34% were raised in larger cities.
The
participants completed the following measures and instruments: (1) A
measure of intelligence (Shipley, 1967); (2) an ad-hoc demographic
survey, (3) a measure of ideal self perceptions of intelligence and a
measure of ought self perceptions of intelligence; (4) the Rosenberg
measure of self esteem (Rosenberg, 1965); (5) The Beck measure of
depression (Beck et al., 1987); (6) the Snell measure of clinical anger
(Snell et al., 1993); and (7) the Symptom Checklist 90 Revised (Derogatis,
1983).
Results
In order to
examine the relationship between the affect (including self-esteem)
measures and the intellectual self-discrepancy measures, a series of
Pearson correlations were computed. The results indicated that
intellectual self-discrepancy measures based on the actual measure of
intelligence (i.e., the Shipley) were unrelated to the affect measures.
By contrast, intellectual self-discrepancy measures based on people’s
self-perceptions of intelligence were found to be significantly related
to the affect measures.
Conclusions and
Implications
This
investigation was concerned with Higgins’ (1987) Self Discrepancy
Theory. The present study showed that there are positive associations
between negative affect and people’s intellectual self-discrepancies
that involve their self-perceptions of their “ideal” intellectual self
and their self-perceived intelligence. Perhaps individuals who suffer
from depression and other mood-related disorders could benefit from
therapeutic interventions which focus on changing and modifying their
extreme and perhaps perfectionistic ideals of intelligence, particularly
since dysphoric symptoms are probably associated with such exaggerated
self perceptions.
An
important implication of the present investigation may involve other
aspects of people’s mental health. For example, the present research
found that symptoms of somatization, obsession, interpersonal
insensitivity, phobia, and paranoia, as measured by the SCL-90-R, were
related to intellectual self-discrepancies associated with ideal
intelligence. Perhaps therapists working with clients who have these
symptoms should examine whether the clients are experiencing any
discrepancy between their perceived intelligence and their ideal
intelligence. Moreover, these symptoms may be associated with overall
self discrepancies versus intellectual self discrepancies. Thus, the
use of Higgins’ Self-Discrepancy Theory in clinical settings may provide
greater insight into the nature of psychopathology.
A variety
of suggestions can be made for future research involving
Self-Discrepancy Theory (Higgins, 1987). Similar to the present
investigation, future researchers may need to consider incorporating
objective measures of the particular aspects of the self that they are
investigating. All of the previous work based on Self-Discrepancy
Theory has been based entirely on people’s self-perceptions of their
self-concept (e.g., how sociable they perceive themselves to be) versus
being based on more objective measures (cf. Alexander & Higgins, 1993;
Brendl, Higgins, & Lemm, 1995; Higgins, 1987, 1988, 1989a, 1989b,
1990a,, 1990b; Higgins & Bargh, 1987; Higgins, Bond, Klein, & Strauman,
1986; Higgins, Klein, & Strauman, 1985; Higgins & Tykocinski, 1992;
Higgins, Tykocinski, & Vookles, 1990; Higgins, Van Hook, & Dorfman,
1988; Higgins, Vookles, & Tykocinski, s, & Tykocinski, 1992; Houston,
1990; Moretti & Higgins, 1990; Newman, Higgins, & Vookles, 1992; Scott &
O’Hara, 1993; Strauman, 1989, 1990, 1992; Strauman & Higgins, 1987,1988;
Strauman, Vookles, Berenstein, Chaiken, & Higgins, 1991).
Intellectual Self Perceptions on
Affective Symptoms and Self-Esteem
Forest Institute
William
E. Snell, Jr.
Southeast
Missouri State University
Acknowledgments.
Portions of this research were presented at the
annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, April
xxxx, Chicago IL. Also, gratitude is
extended to XXX-Editor (xxx) and two anonymous reviewers for their peer-review
commentary (this chapter was previously published in the
xxxxxxx).
Proper citation:
Johnson, G., & Snell, W. E., Jr.
(2002).
Chapter 15: The
impact of measured
intelligence and intellectual
self perceptions
on affective symptoms
and self-esteem. In W. E.
Snell, Jr. (Ed.). (2002). Student research in psychology
at Southeast Missouri State University. Cape Girardeau, MO: Snell Publications. WEB:
http://cstl-cla.semo.edu/snell/books/intimate/intimate.htm.
Intellectual Self Perceptions on
Affective Symptoms and Self-Esteem
William E. Snell, Jr., Ph.D.