Structure, Content and Inter‐relationships between Self‐aspects: Integrating Findings from the Social Identity and Self Complexity Traditions

Kasia Banas,Lillian Smyth

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2760

Abstract

AbstractThe “social cure” literature from the social identity approach, and the self‐complexity literature are both concerned with the structure and content of the self, and their relationship to wellbeing. Our work seeks to integrate these two approaches by investigating the exact characteristics of the self‐concept that are associated with wellbeing, focusing in particular on self‐aspects that are supportive, positive, representative and compatible (“superaspects”). In a pre‐registered correlational study (n = 640) we found that the number of collective superaspects was positively associated with affect balance and quality of life (H1a), but the number of non‐collective superaspects was positively associated only with affect balance (H1b). We found no evidence that similarity between self‐aspects was negatively associated with wellbeing (H2), or that a self‐reported measure of positivity was more strongly associated with wellbeing than a calculated measure (H3). These findings suggest potential avenues for an integrated measurement of the self‐concept and its association with wellbeing.

Highlights

Tajfel and Turner's work on social identity and self-categorisation (e.g. Tajfel et al, 1971; Turner et al, 1987) gave rise to an entire tradition of research focused on the mechanics of how social group memberships become part of the self, and how they are beneficial for psychological health
The social identity approach to health and wellbeing is increasingly recognised as a valuable framework, both for theoretical work and for practical interventions
The current study provides some of the first pre-registered evidence of the relationships between self-structure and wellbeing, combining these two approaches and seeking to delineate the most useful aspects of both, in a large sample

Summary

Introduction

Tajfel and Turner's work on social identity and self-categorisation (e.g. Tajfel et al, 1971; Turner et al, 1987) gave rise to an entire tradition of research focused on the mechanics of how social group memberships become part of the self, and how they are beneficial for psychological health. The majority of the extant “social cure” literature (Jetten et al, 2012) uses self-reported perceptions of belonging to multiple different groups (e.g., the multiple-group-membership subscale of the Exeter Identity Transition Scale; Haslam et al, 2008) rather than an actual count of group memberships. While this is a well-evidenced approach and undoubtedly useful in applied settings, it does not answer fundamental questions about the mechanism of this effect and the quantitative and qualitative attributes of the sense of self that are protective. It limits the application options, as we cannot say with certainty which aspects of existing interventions are having the effect.

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion