Acceptance is in the eye of the beholder: Self-esteem and motivated perceptions of acceptance from the opposite sex.

Social risk elicits self-esteem differences in signature social motivations and behaviors during the relationship-initiation process. In particular, the present research tested the hypothesis that lower self-esteem individuals' (LSEs) motivation to avoid rejection leads them to self-protectively underestimate acceptance from potential romantic partners, whereas higher self-esteem individuals' (HSEs) motivation to promote new relationships leads them to overestimate acceptance. The results of 5 experiments supported these predictions. Social risk increased activation of avoidance goals for LSEs on a word-recall task but increased activation of approach goals for HSEs, as evidenced by their increased use of likeable behaviors. Consistent with these patterns of goal activation, even though actual acceptance cues were held constant across all participants, social risk decreased the amount of acceptance that LSEs perceived from their interaction partner but increased the amount of acceptance that HSEs perceived from their interaction partner. It is important to note that such self-esteem differences in avoidance goals, approach behaviors, and perceptions of acceptance were completely eliminated when social risk was removed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Snatching Defeat From the Jaws of Victory: Self-Esteem Differences in the Experience and Anticipation of Success.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 90(6) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2007-16792-001). There are typographical errors in Table 2 (certain values should not have been in bold face). The corrected table is provided in the erratum.] Successes--defined broadly as meeting important standards or receiving positive evaluations--are widely assumed to be enjoyed equally by people with high self-esteem (HSEs) and low self-esteem (LSEs). Three studies examined the contradictory hypothesis that HSEs react more favorably to success than do LSEs and that success brings about certain unfavorable consequences for LSEs. Undergraduate participants reacted to a laboratory-manipulated success (Studies 1 and 2) or imagined highly positive events in the future (Study 3). Self-esteem differences emerged in anxiety, thoughts about the self, and (in Study 3) thoughts about non-self-related aspects of the event. LSEs were more anxious than HSEs after succeeding, success improved HSEs' self-relevant thoughts but not LSEs', and LSEs focused more on success's negative aspects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: Self-esteem differences in the experience and anticipation of success": Correction to Wood et al (2005).

Reports an error in "Snatching Defeat From the Jaws of Victory: Self-Esteem Differences in the Experience and Anticipation of Success" by Joanne V. Wood, Sara A. Heimpel, Ian R. Newby-Clark and Michael Ross (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2005[Nov], Vol 89[5], 764-780). There are typographical errors in Table 2 (certain values should not have been in bold face). The corrected table is provided in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2005-15658-009.) Successes--defined broadly as meeting important standards or receiving positive evaluations--are widely assumed to be enjoyed equally by people with high self-esteem (HSEs) and low self-esteem (LSEs). Three studies examined the contradictory hypothesis that HSEs react more favorably to success than do LSEs and that success brings about certain unfavorable consequences for LSEs. Undergraduate participants reacted to a laboratory-manipulated success (Studies 1 and 2) or imagined highly positive events in the future (Study 3). Self-esteem differences emerged in anxiety, thoughts about the self, and (in Study 3) thoughts about non-self-related aspects of the event. LSEs were more anxious than HSEs after succeeding, success improved HSEs' self-relevant thoughts but not LSEs', and LSEs focused more on success's negative aspects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and the cognitive accessibility of strengths and weaknesses after failure

People with high self-esteem (HSEs) respond less negatively to failure than people with low self-esteem (LSEs). This difference may occur because HSEs overcome the natural tendency to focus on negative thoughts after failure, and instead focus on their strengths. In 2 experiments, participants with high and low self-esteem received failure, success, or no feedback. Accessibility of strengths and weaknesses was measured by response latency on an unrelated task. Results confirmed that although strengths were typically more accessible than weaknesses for both groups, the discrepancy was larger for HSEs after failure feedback than after no feedback. This heightened discrepancy appears to result from HSEs recruiting their strengths and suppressing their weaknesses. In contrast, LSEs' weaknesses appeared to become especially accessible after failure. These results have implications for the mood-congruent cognition and self-esteem literatures.     

Self-serving attributions in social context: Effects of self-esteem and social pressure.

Examined attributions (ATs) of Ss high (HSEs) and low (LSEs) in self-esteem in contests where (a) they were low or high in the motivation to make a positive impression on an audience, (b) the audience was perceived as supportive or critical, (c) Ss' accounts were public or private, and (d) Ss had succeeded or failed on a previous task. HSEs were most egotistical when evaluative pressures were greatest (i.e., they were motivated to make a good impression and had the opportunity to account publicly), whereas LSEs were least egotistical under these conditions. HSEs tended to internalize success by raising self-ratings, whereas LSEs tended to internalize failure by lowering self-ratings. A critical audience seemed to activate concerns about the defensibility of ATs, producing more caution and less explicit boastfulness. Factor analysis of Ss' responses suggested that they conceptualized the situation in terms of its implications for evaluating identity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-image resilience and dissonance: The role of affirmational resources.

Predicted that high self-esteem Ss (HSEs) would rationalize an esteem-threatening decision less than low self-esteem Ss (LSEs), because HSEs presumably had more favorable self-concepts with which to affirm, and thus repair, their overall sense of self-integrity. This prediction was supported in 2 experiments within the "free-choice" dissonance paradigm: one that manipulated self-esteem through personality feedback and the other that varied it through selection of HSEs and LSEs, but only when Ss were made to focus on their self-concepts. A 3rd experiment countered an alternative explanation of the results in terms of mood effects that may have accompanied the experimental manipulations. Results were discussed in terms of the following: (1) their support for a resources theory of individual differences in resilience to self-image threats—an extension of self-affirmation theory, (2) their implications for self-esteem functioning, and (3) their implications for the continuing debate over self-enhancement vs self-consistency motivation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

This mood is familiar and I don't deserve to feel better anyway: Mechanisms underlying self-esteem differences in motivation to repair sad moods.

Why are people with low self-esteem (LSE) less motivated than people with high self-esteem (HSE) to improve sad moods? The present research examined whether feelings of personal deservingness contribute to this difference. Four experiments with undergraduate participants involved a sad mood induction, a manipulation of personal deservingness, or both. Results suggested that (a) LSEs feel less deserving of positive outcomes and of positive moods than do HSEs, (b) feelings of personal deservingness can vary with the situation, and be lowered through reminders of social rejection and personal flaws, and (c) feeling relatively undeserving dampens LSEs', but not HSEs', motivation to repair sad moods. These results have implications for the emotion regulation, self-esteem, and social justice literatures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Postplacement relationships between birth mothers and their romantic partners.

Using a mixed-methods approach, the understudied population of birth mothers who placed their infants for adoption 12–20 years ago was explored in the context of their romantic relationships. In a semistructured interview, 104 birth mothers answered detailed questions about their romantic relationships and adoption-related experiences. All birth mothers had disclosed the adoption placement to their romantic partners, and most had done so early because they wanted to be truthful about their past. On average, the birth mothers were satisfied with their romantic relationships and almost half did not believe that the adoption had affected it. Regarding contact in the adoption, a majority of the birth mothers' romantic partners (63.5%) were not directly involved in contact with the adoptive family or adopted youth. Implications about how adoption is perceived and processed within intimate relationships are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

When and why do ideal partner preferences affect the process of initiating and maintaining romantic relationships?

Three studies explored how the traits that people ideally desire in a romantic partner, or ideal partner preferences, intersect with the process of romantic relationship initiation and maintenance. Two attraction experiments in the laboratory found that, when participants evaluated a potential romantic partner's written profile, they expressed more romantic interest in a partner whose traits were manipulated to match (vs. mismatch) their idiosyncratic ideals. However, after a live interaction with the partner, the match vs. mismatch manipulation was no longer associated with romantic interest. This pattern appeared to have emerged because participants reinterpreted the meaning of the traits as they applied to the partner, a context effect predicted by classic models of person perception (S. E. Asch, 1946). Finally, a longitudinal study of middle-aged adults demonstrated that participants evaluated a current romantic partner (but not a partner who was merely desired) more positively to the extent that the partner matched their overall pattern of ideals across several traits; the match in level of ideals (i.e., high vs. low ratings) was not relevant to participants' evaluations. In general, the match between ideals and a partner's traits may predict relational outcomes when participants are learning about a partner in the abstract and when they are actually in a relationship with the partner, but not when considering potential dating partners they have met in person. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem, construal, and comparisons with the self, friends, and peers.

Extending the better than average effect, 3 studies examined self-, friend, and peer comparisons of personal attributes. Participants rated themselves as better off than friends, who they rated as superior to generalized peers. The exception was in direct comparisons, where the self and friends were not strongly differentiated on unambiguous negative attributes. Self-esteem and construal played moderating roles, with persons with high self-esteem (HSEs) exploiting both ambiguous positive and ambiguous negative traits to favor themselves. Persons lower in self-esteem exploited ambiguous positive traits in their favor but did not exploit ambiguous negative traits. Across self-esteem level, ratings of friends versus peers were exaggerated when attributes were ambiguous. HSEs seemed to take advantage of ambiguity more consistently to present favorable self-views; people with low self-esteem used ambiguity to favor their friends but were reluctant to minimize their own faults. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Does self-love lead to love for others?: A story of narcissistic game playing.

Five studies investigated the links among narcissism, self-esteem, and love. Across all studies, narcissism was associated primarily with a game-playing love style. This link was found in reports of general love styles (Study 1a) and of love in ongoing romantic relationships (Studies 1b-3, 5). Narcissists' game-playing love style was the result of a need for power and autonomy (Study 2) and was linked with greater relationship alternatives and lesser commitment (Study 3). Finally, narcissists' self-reports of game playing were confirmed by their partners in past and current relationships (Studies 4, 5). In contrast, self-esteem was negatively linked to manic love and positively linked to passionate love across studies. Implications for the understanding of narcissism in relationships are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Depressive symptoms and close relationships during the transition to adulthood: Perspectives from dysphoric women, their best friends, and their romantic partners.

Late adolescent women's depressive symptoms and interpersonal functioning were assessed using reports from participants, their best friends, and their romantic partners. As predicted, the associations between relationship dysfunction and dysphoria were stronger in romantic relationships than in friendships. Unlike friends, romantic partners perceived dysphoric women as having poorer social skills. Romantic partners also reported providing less emotional support to dysphoric women, whereas friends reported providing more. Finally, romantic partners of dysphoric women had more Cluster A (odd-eccentric) personality disorder symptoms; these symptoms mediated the relation between women's depression and partners' nonsupportiveness. The findings suggest that dysphoric women may find themselves in emotionally nonsupportive romantic relationships because they have paired (through assortative pairing or mutual influence) with symptomatic partners. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Defensive Zeal and the Uncertain Self: What Makes You So Sure?

In Studies 1-3, undergraduates with high self-esteem (HSEs) reacted to personal uncertainty-threats with compensatory conviction about unrelated issues and aspects of the self. In Study 1 HSEs reacted to salience of personal dilemmas with increased implicit conviction about self-definition. In Study 2 they reacted to the same uncertainty-threat with increased explicit conviction about social issues. In Study 3, HSEs (particularly defensive HSEs, i.e., with low implicit self-esteem; C. H. Jordan, S. J. Spencer, & M. P. Zanna, 2003) reacted to uncertainty about a personal relationship with compensatory conviction about social issues. For HSEs in Study 4, expressing convictions about social issues decreased subjective salience of dilemma-related uncertainties that were not related to the social issues. Compensatory conviction is viewed as a mode of repression, akin to reaction formation, that helps keep unwanted thoughts out of awareness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Through the looking glass darkly? When self-doubts turn into relationship insecurities.

The authors argue that individuals regulate perceptions of their relationships in a self-protective way, finding virtue in their partners only when they feel confident that their partners also see virtues in them. In 4 experiments, the authors posed an acute threat to low and high self-esteem individuals' feelings of self-worth (e.g., guilt about a transgression, fears of being inconsiderate or intellectually inept). They then collected measures of confidence in the partner's positive regard and acceptance (i.e., reflected appraisals) and perceptions of the partner. The results revealed that low self-esteem individuals reacted to self-doubt with heightened doubts about their partners' regard, which then tarnished impressions of their partners. In contrast, high self-esteem individuals reacted to self-doubts by becoming more convinced of their partners' continued acceptance, using their relationships as a resource for self-affirmation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Calibrating the sociometer: The relational contingencies of self-esteem.

A longitudinal daily diary study examined how chronic perceptions of a partner's regard for oneself might affect the day-to-day relational contingencies of self-esteem. Married partners each completed a diary for 21 days, and completed measures of satisfaction twice over the year. Multilevel analyses revealed that people who chronically felt more positively regarded compensated for one day's acute self-doubts by perceiving greater acceptance and love from their partner on subsequent days. In contrast, people who chronically felt less positively regarded by their partner internalized acute experiences of rejection, feeling worse about themselves on days after they feared their partner's disaffection. Over the year, such self-esteem sensitivity to rejection predicted declines in the partner' s satisfaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Balancing connectedness and self-protection goals in close relationships: A levels-of-processing perspective on risk regulation.

A model of risk regulation is proposed to explain how low and high self-esteem people balance the tension between self-protection and connectedness goals in romantic relationships. This model assumes that interpersonal risk automatically activates connectedness and self-protection goals. The activation of these competing goals then triggers an executive control system that resolves this goal conflict. One correlational study and 8 experiments manipulating risk, goal strength, and executive strength and then measuring implicit and explicit goal activation and execution strongly supported the model. For people high in self-esteem, risk triggers a control system that directs them toward the situations of dependence within their relationship that can fulfill connectedness goals. For people low in self-esteem, however, the activation of connectedness goals triggers a control system that prioritizes self-protection goals and directs them away from situations where they need to trust or depend on their partner. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Beyond the birds and the bees and was it good for you?: Thirty years of research on sexual communication.

Sexual experience and expression is of fundamental importance to most people. However, most people do not communicate effectively about sexuality even when it is important to do so. For example, many parents see it as their responsibility to talk to their children about sexuality and yet do not engage in in-depth discussions with their children about sexual topics. Most romantic partners have difficulty telling each other what pleases and displeases them sexually. Many health care professionals do not meet their patients' needs for information about the sexual changes they experience as a result of their disease or treatment. Many psychologists also are not doing a good job of addressing sexuality in the classroom, in practicum and internship settings, and/or with clients. These instances of poor sexual communication are unfortunate as effective sexual communication can have a range of positive outcomes such as more satisfying relationships and positive sexual health and well-being over the life span. This paper reviews sexual communication in all of these contexts, focusing on findings from my program of research spanning more than 30 years. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships.

People who are sensitive to social rejection tend to anxiously expect, readily perceive, and overreact to it. This article shows that this cognitive-affective processing disposition undermines intimate relationships. Study 1 describes a measure that operationalizes the anxious-expectations component of rejection sensitivity. Study 2 provides experimental evidence that people who anxiously expect rejection readily perceive intentional rejection in the ambiguous behavior of others. Study 3 shows that people who enter romantic relationships with anxious expectations of rejection readily perceive intentional rejection in the insensitive behavior of their new partners. Study 4 demonstrates that rejection-sensitive people and their romantic partners are dissatisfied with their relationships. Rejection-sensitive men's jealousy and rejection-sensitive women's hostility and diminished supportiveness help explain their partners' dissatisfaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Equity and premarital sex.

Investigated whether formal equity theory can provide insight into dating couples' intimate romantic and sexual relationships. It was hypothesized that if people feel they are getting less from a relationship than they deserve, they feel entitled to "call the shots" sexually. In light of the double standard, underbenefited males were expected to demand that their partners go fairly far sexually. In contrast, underbenefited females were expected to insist that their partners wait until they were ready for sex. Interview and questionnaire data were obtained from 227 men and 310 women who were casual or steady daters. Data were analyzed as to (a) relationship equity/inequity, (b) contentment/distress, (c) the existence of a double standard, (d) the degree of sexuality in the relationship, and (e) the stability of the relationship. Results do not confirm the hypotheses: Couples were most intimate in the equitable relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-esteem and the quest for felt security: How perceived regard regulates attachment processes.

The authors proposed that personal feelings of self-esteem foster the level of confidence in a partner 's regard critical for satisfying attachments. Dating and married couples described themselves, their partners, how they thought their partners saw them, and how they wanted their partners to see them on a variety of interpersonal qualities. The results revealed that low self-esteem individuals dramatically underestimated how positively their partners saw them. Such unwarranted and unwanted insecurities were associated with less generous perceptions of partners and lower relationship well-being. The converse was true for high self-esteem individuals. A longitudinal examination of the dating couple revealed that the vulnerabilities of lows were only exacerbated over time. A dependency regulation model is proposed, wherein felt security in a partner's perceived regard is suggested as a prime mechanism linking self-esteem to relational well-being. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)