171,166 research outputs found
Gaertner, C. an Herman Grimm (1 Brief)
No full textGAERTNER, C. AN HERMAN GRIMM (1 BRIEF)
Gaertner, C. an Herman Grimm (1 Brief) (Br1451)
Brief 1451 (Br1451
Inclusion of theory-relevant moderators yield the same conclusions as Sedikides, Gaertner, and Vevea (2005): A meta-analytical reply to Heine, Kitayama, and Hamamura (2007)
No full textHeine, Kitayama and Hamamura (2007) attributed the Sedikides, Gaertner and Vevea (2005) findings to the exclusion of six papers. We report a meta-analysis that includes those six papers. The Heine et al. conclusions are faulty, because of a misspecified meta-analysis that failed to consider two moderators central to the theory. First, some of their effect sizes originated from studies that did not empirically validate comparison dimensions. Inclusion of this moderator evidences pancultural self-enhancement: Westerners enhance more strongly on individualistic dimensions, Easterners on collectivistic dimensions. Second, some of their effect sizes were irrelevant to whether enhancement is correlated with dimension importance. Inclusion of this moderator evidences pancultural self-enhancement: Both Westerners and Easterners enhance on personally important dimensions. The Sedikides et al. conclusions are valid: Tactical self-enhancement is pancultural
Pancultural self-enhancement reloaded: a meta-analytic reply to Heine (2005)
No full textC. Sedikides, L. Gaertner, and Y. Toguchi (2003; see record 2002-08440-007) reported findings favoring the universality of self-enhancement. S. J. Heine (2005; see record 2005-13803-005) challenged the authors' research on evidential and logical grounds. In response, the authors carried out 2 meta-analytic investigations. The results backed the C. Sedikides et al. (2003) theory and findings. Both Westerners and Easterners self-enhanced tactically. Westerners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of individualism, whereas Easterners self-enhanced on attributes relevant to the cultural ideal of collectivism (in both cases, because of the personal importance of the ideal). Self-enhancement motivation is universal, although its manifestations are strategically sensitive to cultural context. The authors respond to other aspects of Heine's critique by discussing why researchers should empirically validate the comparison dimension (individualistic vs. collectivistic) and defending why the better-than-average effect is a valid measure of self-enhancement
On the motivational primacy of the individual self: “I” is stronger than “We”
No full textThe self-concept is dynamic, with momentary definition shifting from a representation of self as a unique and independent social agent to an undifferentiated and interchangeable group member. Indeed, the individual self and collective self are fundamental components of the self-concept, with each being important and meaningful to human experience. However, are those selves equally important and meaningful? We review a program of research empirically testing three competing hypotheses that suggests that the motivational core of human experience is (a) the individual self, (b) the collective self, or (c) determined by contextual factors that make a given self momentarily accessible. The research furnished unanimous and consistent evidence that the individual self is the motivationally primary form of self-definition
The social self: the quest for identity and the motivational primacy of the individual self
No full text
Socio-cultural influences on self-evaluation
No full textThe need for a positively valued self is a human universal. How that need manifests, however, is shaped by culture, which serves as a powerful form of normative and informational influence. This chapter reviews the empirical literature demonstrating that desire for high self-esteem and the corresponding motivations of self-enhancement and self-protection have (a) pancultural presence, (b) cultural manifestation, and (c) a pancultural function of promoting psychological health
On the panculturality of self-enhancement and self-protection motivation: the case for the universality of self-esteem
No full textDo self-enhancement/self-protection and self-esteem reflect fundamental human motivations or are they culturally bound occurrences? The debate on universalism versus cultural relativism of self-motives and self-esteem shows no sign of abatement. We advance the debate by proposing the extended self-enhancing tactician model. The model aspires to account for two seemingly contradictory phenomena: cross-cultural invariance (equivalence of self-motive strength and self-esteem desire across cultures) and cross-cultural variability (differential manifestations of self-motives and self-esteem across cultures). The model's four foundational tenets address cross-cultural invariance: (1) The individual self is panculturally valued, and it is so over the relational or collective self; (2) The self-enhancement/self-protection motives are equally potent in East and West; (3) The structure of self-enhancement and self-protection strivings is similar across the cultural divide; and (4) the desire for self-esteem is pancultural. The SCENT-R model's four key postulates address cross-cultural variability. First, Easterners assign relative importance to, and report higher, liking-based self-esteem, as well as consider collectivistic attributes important and self-enhance on them, whereas Westerners assign relative importance to, and report higher, competence-based self-esteem, as well as consider individualistic attributes important and self-enhance on them. Second, when constraints on candid self-enhancement are lifted, Easterners behave like Westerners: they report higher modesty and lower self-esteem than Westerners, but, controlling for modesty, differences in self-esteem disappear; they self-enhance in competitive, but self-efface in cooperative, settings; they profit from other-mediated than own-initiated self-enhancement. Third, implicit self-esteem is similarly high across cultures. Fourth, self-esteem and self-enhancement/self-protection confer parallel benefits in East–West, depending in part on domain relevance. Self-enhancement and self-protection, as well as self-esteem, reflect fundamental human motivatio
- …
