Individual differences in self-enhancement and self-protection strategies: an integrative analysis

Research has identified a large number of strategies that people use to self-enhance or self-protect. We aimed for an empirical integration of these strategies. Two studies used self-report items to assess all commonly recognized self-enhancement or self-protection strategies. In Study 1 (N = 345), exploratory factor analysis identified four reliable factors. In Study 2 (N = 416), this model was validated using confirmatory factor analysis. The factors related differentially to the key personality variables of regulatory focus, self-esteem, and narcissism. Expanding this integrative approach in the future can reveal a great deal about the structure and dynamics of self-enhancement and self-protection motivation

Exaggeration in memory: systematic distortion of self-evaluative information under reduced accessibility

The tendency to exaggerate specific information about oneself can stem from reconstructive memory processes that are distinct from motivated self-enhancement or self-presentation. While exaggerations sometimes reflect these motives, they also result from attempts to reconstruct one’s past. Three studies examined test scores as they became less accessible in memory. Study 1 provided a real-world illustration, demonstrating reduced accessibility and increased exaggeration of SAT scores over time. Two experiments utilized test scores randomly assigned in a controlled laboratory setting. Increased exaggeration was observed following distraction (Study 2), and after a one-week delay (Study 3). Distortions in scores reported were consistent with beliefs about the self, rather than uniformly self-serving. Under reduced accessibility, exaggeration was predicted by beliefs about achievement (Study 1) and subjective perceptions of test performance (Study 2). Study 3 manipulated perceived performance. Positive performance feedback caused greater exaggeration under reduced accessibility, whereas negative feedback reduced the tendency to exaggerate

A self-determination theory and motivational interviewing intervention to decrease racial/ethnic disparities in physical activity: rationale and design

Abstract Background Although the mental and physical benefits of physical activity are well-established, there is a racial/ethnic disparity in activity such that minorities are much less likely to engage in physical activity than are White individuals. Research suggests that a lack of motivation may be an important barrier to physical activity for racial/ethnic minorities. Therefore, interventions that increase participants’ motivation may be especially useful in promoting physical activity within these groups. Physical activity interventions that utilized the clinical technique of motivational interviewing (MI) in conjunction with the theoretical background of self-determination theory (SDT) have been effective in increasing White individuals’ physical activity. Nevertheless, it remains unclear the extent to which these results apply to minority populations. Methods/Design The current study involves conducting a 12-week physical activity intervention based on SDT and MI to promote physical activity in a racially/ethnically-diverse sample. It is hypothesized that this intervention will successfully increase physical activity in participants. Specifically, it is expected that minorities will experience a greater relative increase in physical activity than Whites within the intervention group because minorities are expected to have lower baseline levels of activity. Discussion Results from this study will give us a greater understanding of the generalizability of SDT interventions designed to improve motivation for physical activity and level of physical activity. Trial registration Clinical Trials Gov. Identifier NCT02250950 Registered 24 September 2014

Big tales and cool heads: academic exaggeration is related to cardiac vagal reactivity.

Students who exaggerate their current grade point averages (GPAs) report positive emotional and motivational orientations toward academics (Gramzow & Willard, 2006; Willard & Gramzow, 2007). It is conceivable, however, that these self-reports mask underlying anxieties. The current study examined cardiovascular reactivity during an academic interview in order to determine whether exaggerators respond with a pattern suggestive of anxiety or, alternatively, equanimity. Sixty-two undergraduates were interviewed about their academic performance. Participants evidenced increased sympathetic activation (indexed with preejection period) during the interview, suggesting active task engagement. Academic exaggeration predicted parasympathetic coactivation (increased respiratory sinus arrhythmia). Observer ratings indicated that academic exaggeration was coordinated with a composed demeanor during the interview. Together, these patterns suggest that academic exaggeration is associated with emotional equanimity, rather than anxiety. The capacity for adaptive emotion regulation—to keep a cool head when focusing on academic performance—offers one explanation for why exaggerators also tend to improve academically. These findings have implications for the broader literature on self-evaluation, emotion, and cardiovascular reactivity

Perceiving personal discrimination: the role of group status and legitimizing ideology

It was hypothesized that relative group status and endorsement of ideologies that legitimize group status differences moderate attributions to discrimination in intergroup encounters. According to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, the more members of low-status groups endorse the ideology of individual mobility, the less likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from higher status group members to discrimination. In contrast, the more members of high-status groups endorse individual mobility, the more likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from lower status group members to discrimination. Results from 3 studies using 2 different methodologies provide support for this hypothesis among members of different high-status (European Americans and men) and low-status (African Americans, Latino Americans, and women) groups

Self-esteem and favoritism toward novel in-groups: the self as an evaluative base

The self-as-evaluative base (SEB) hypothesis proposes that self-evaluation extends automatically via an amotivated consistency process to affect evaluation of novel in-groups. Four minimal group studies support SEB. Personal trait self-esteem (PSE) predicted increased favoritism toward a novel in-group that, objectively, was equivalent to the out-group (Study 1). This association was independent of information-processing effects (Study 1), collective self-esteem, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and narcissism (Studies 2 and 3). A self-affirmation manipulation attenuated the association between in-group favoritism and an individual difference associated with motivated social identity concerns (RWA) but did not alter the PSE effect (Study 3). Finally, the association between PSE and in-group favoritism remained positive even when the in-group was objectively less favorable than the out-group (Study 4)