Differences In Self-enhancement Research Articles

Who Is Your Biggest Critic? Cultural Variation in Moral Judgments of the Self and Others

People are motivated to punish others who commit immoral actions when they believe the person willingly committed such an act. Compared with European American individuals, East Asian individuals are more punitive of wrongdoings, yet are less likely to attribute actions to the person. Here, we drew on research in cultural psychology to test the prediction that Chinese individuals are more punitive in part because they are more self-critical than European American individuals. This prediction would imply that cultural differences in punishment are most pronounced in judgments of oneself (vs. others) and largely driven by a difference in self-enhancement motives. To test this prediction, we conducted two studies, where 1,563 participants imagined immoral (vs. moral) actions performed by themselves or others. We then measured self-enhancement (how much participants perceived the immoral act impacts self-esteem) and attributions (how much participants perceived the immoral act is due to the person). As predicted, Chinese individuals punished immoral behavior more than European American individuals, which was explained by Chinese individuals being less self-enhancing, as indicated by a greater perception that immoral actions will negatively impact their self-esteem. Dispositional attributions predicted punishment regardless of culture. This work highlights how cultural differences in self-enhancement are key to understanding moral judgments and their cultural variation.

On the Etiology of Self-Enhancement and Its Association With Psychological Well-Being

Self-enhancement, the motive to view oneself in positive light, and its manifestations have received wide attention in behavioral sciences. The self-enhancement manifestations vary on a continuum from a subjective level (agentic narcissism, communal narcissism, narcissistic grandiosity) through an intermediate level (better-than-average judgments) to an objective level (overclaiming one’s knowledge). Prior research has established the heritability of self-enhancement manifestations at the subjective and intermediate levels. The present twin study demonstrated that (1) the objective level of self-enhancement manifestation is also heritable; (2) a common core, which is moderately heritable, underlies the three levels of self-enhancement manifestations; (3) the relation between self-enhancement (manifested at all three levels) and psychological well-being is partly heritable; and (4) environmental influences, either shared by or unique to family members, are evident through (1), (2), and (3). The findings deepen understanding of the etiology of individual differences in self-enhancement and their links to psychological well-being.

A Reconsideration of Hofstede’s Fifth Dimension: New Flexibility Versus Monumentalism Data From 54 Countries

Hofstede’s “long-term orientation” (LTO) may be one of the most important dimensions of national culture, as it highlights differences on a continuum from East Asia to Africa and Latin America, strongly associated with differences in educational achievement. However, LTO’s structure lacks theoretical coherence. We show that a statistically similar, and theoretically more focused and coherent, dimension of national culture, called “flexibility versus monumentalism,” or vice versa, can be extracted from national differences in self-enhancement and self-stability or self-consistency, as well as a willingness to help people. Using data from nearly 53,000 respondents recruited probabilistically from 54 countries, we provide a new national flexibility-versus-monumentalism index that measures key cultural differences on the world’s East–West geographic axis and predicts educational achievement better than LTO or any other known dimension of national culture.

Motivated Happiness

Three studies support the contention that self-enhancement motivation distorts self-reports of subjective well-being (SWB). Both individual differences in self-enhancement (Studies 1 and 2) and experimental manipulations of self-enhancement motivation (Study 2) predicted an increased likelihood of reporting SWB at unrealistically favorable levels relative to others—a “happier-than-average effect.” Study 3a and 3b showed that both trait self-enhancement and experimentally manipulated differences in self-enhancement motivation also affected self-reports on established measures of SWB. Specifically, individuals prone to self-enhancement were more affected than low self-enhancers by the desirability of happiness when reporting SWB. The current studies suggest that reports of SWB are susceptible to the same self-enhancement biases that influence self-reports of other positively valued traits. Implications and recommendations for the measurement of SWB and the use of well-being data in policy decision-making are discussed.

The effects of culture and self-construal on responses to threatening health information

Objective: The current studies examined if cultural and self-construal differences in self-enhancement extended to defensive responses to health threats. Design: Responses to fictitious medical diagnoses were compared between Asian-Americans and European-North Americans in Experiment 1 and between Canadians primed with an interdependent versus an independent self-construal in Experiment 3. In Experiment 2, the responses of Chinese and Canadians who were either heavy or light soft drink consumers were assessed after reading an article linking soft drink consumption to insulin resistance. Main outcome measure: The primary-dependent measure reflected participants’ defensiveness about threatening versus nonthreatening health information. Results: In Experiment 1, all participants responded more defensively to an unfavourable than a favourable diagnosis; however, Asian-Americans responded less defensively than did European-North Americans. In Experiment 2, all high soft drink consumers were less convinced by the threatening information than were low soft drink consumers; however, among high consumers, Chinese changed their self-reported consumption levels less than did European-Canadians. In Experiment 3, interdependence-primed participants responded less defensively to an unfavourable diagnosis than did independence-primed participants. Conclusion: Defensive reactions to threatening health information were found consistently; however, self-enhancement was more pronounced in individuals with Western cultural backgrounds or independent self-construals.

Cultural differences in self- and other-evaluations and well-being: A study of European and Asian Canadians.

Anusic, Schimmack, Pinkus, and Lockwood (2009) developed the halo-alpha-beta (HAB) model to separate halo variance from variance due to valid personality traits and other sources of measurement error in self-ratings of personality. The authors used a twin-HAB model of self-ratings and ratings of a partner (friend or dating partner) to test several hypotheses about culture, evaluative biases in self- and other-perceptions, and well-being. Participants were friends or dating partners who reported on their own and their partner's personality and well-being (N = 906 students). European Canadians had higher general evaluative biases (GEB) than Asian Canadians. There were no cultural differences in self-enhancement or other-enhancement. GEB significantly predicted self-ratings of life satisfaction, but not informant ratings of well-being. GEB fully mediated the effect of culture on self-ratings of life satisfaction. The results suggest that North American culture encourages positive biases in self- and other-perceptions. These biases also influence self-ratings of life satisfaction but have a much weaker effect on informant ratings of life satisfaction. The implications of these findings for cultural differences in well-being are discussed.

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 4 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.

Componential Analysis of Interpersonal Perception Data

We examine the advantages and disadvantages of 2 types of analyses used in interpersonal perception studies: componential and noncomponential. Componential analysis of interpersonal perception data (Kenny, 1994) partitions a judgment into components and then estimates the variances of and the correlations between these components. A noncomponential analysis uses raw scores to analyze interpersonal perception data. Three different research areas are investigated: consensus of perceptions across social contexts, reciprocity of attraction, and individual differences in self-enhancement. Finally, we consider criticisms of componential analysis. We conclude that interpersonal perception data necessarily have components (e.g., perceiver, target, measure, and their interactions), and that the researcher needs to develop a model that best captures the researcher's questions.

Where Is the Evidence for Pancultural Self-Enhancement? A Reply to Sedikides, Gaertner, and Toguchi (2003).

C. Sedikides, L. Gaertner, and Y. Toguchi (2003) maintained that the self-enhancement motivation (as defined by tendencies to view oneself in overly positive terms) is universal. The present article challenges their claim. A review of the literature revealed that many studies contradict their findings regarding the domain-specific nature of East Asian self-enhancement. It is argued that Sedikides et al. did not replicate past research because they did not measure self-enhancement in their studies. The present article provides a theoretical basis for understanding cross-cultural differences in self-enhancement and considers the question of universality by exploring 2 different conceptualizations of positive self-regard.

Why is Self-Enhancement Low in Certain Collectivist Cultures?

The purpose of the present study is to compare two alternative explanations for the low self-enhancement that characterizes collectivist cultures: (a) lack of a self-enhancement motive arising from the perceived centrality of others, and (b) cultural restrictions imposed on the self that are manifested by modesty requirements. The validity of the two explanations was investigated in two studies. Study 1 examined how self-enhancement is related to self-esteem and subjective well-being. Results from four samples showed that self-enhancement measures were significantly and positively related to self-esteem and to indices of well-being in collectivist cultures as well as independent ones, revealing the psychological benefits of self-enhancement in all tested cultures. Study 2 found that cultural differences in modesty, not the perceived centrality of others, best explains cultural differences in self-enhancement. Taken together, the results support the notion that cultural restrictions rather than the lack of a self-enhancement motive are responsible for the low self-enhancement found in certain collectivist cultures. Implications of these results for the conceptualization of the interdependent self were discussed.

Implicit-Explicit Differences in Self-Enhancement for Americans and Japanese

Past research on cross-cultural psychology has shown that North Americans have self-enhancing attitudes, evaluating themselves more favorably than others, including friends. The present research identifies a discrepancy — this self-enhancement in relation to friends did not appear when measured implicitly. Using American and Japanese university students as subjects, the present studies investigated responses to explicit (self-report) and implicit measures (the Implicit Association Test) toward three targets: self, best friends, and fellow university students. Results revealed that North Americans showed more positive implicit attitudes toward best friends than toward self, a very different pattern from the explicit results. For the Japanese, best friends were evaluated slightly more positively than the self on implicit measures, which contrasted with previous findings with explicit measures that showed best friends being evaluated more positively.

Interjudge Agreement, Self-Enhancement, and Liking: Cross-Cultural Divergences

The authors investigated whether the lower self-enhancement found among Japanese is due to them being more accurate in their self-perceptions than Americans. Japanese and American participants were recruited from school clubs, where groups of five people rated each other and themselves. The Japanese sample was overall self-critical, whereas the American sample was overall self-enhancing. Moreover, as the desirability of the traits increased, Americans showed more self-enhancement, whereas Japanese showed more self-criticism. An accuracy account is unable to account for the cultural differences in self-enhancement because Americans showed more accuracy in their self-perceptions (as evidenced by self-peer agreement) than Japanese. Intracultural analyses further revealed that individual self-enhancement can be “unpackaged” by trait measures of independence and interdependence. Exploratory analyses of liking were also con ducted, revealing that American liking hinged on perceived similarity, self-verification, familiarity, and reflected-self-enhancement, whereas Japanese liking was based on familiarity, reflected self-enhancement, lower independence, and interdependence.

Measured Cross-Cultural Differences in Self-Enhancement and the Sensitivity of the Self-Enhancement Measure to the Modesty Response

Two studies show the importance of culturally determined modesty for measured self-enhancement level. The first study shows differences between three self-enhancement measures in their sensitivity to modesty: The measure of academic self-enhancement was found to be the most sensitive to modesty. The above average response was less sensitive, whereas the correlation between criteria for inclusion in a desired group and self-characteristics was found not to be sensitive to the modesty response (n = 346). The second study compared the level of self-enhancement among three cultural groups: Singaporeans (n = 166), Israeli Druze (n = 177), and Israeli Jews (n = 206). The magnitude of cross-cultural differences for the different measures corresponded to their sensitivity to the modesty response. The role of modesty in measured cross-cultural differences in self-enhancement is discussed.

Beyond Self-Presentation: Evidence for Self-Criticism among Japanese

Although a robust finding in cross-cultural research is that Japanese exhibit less self-enhancement than North Americans, all of these studies have employed questionnaire measures susceptible to self-presentational biases. The present study assessed self-enhancement in a laboratory that covertly measured participants’ behaviors. Whereas Canadians were reluctant to conclude that they had performed worse than their average classmate, Japanese were hesitant to conclude that they had performed better. This research provides evidence that cultural differences in self-enhancement and self-criticism go beyond mere self-presentation.

Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism.

Accuracy and bias in self-perceptions of performance were studied in a managerial group-discussion task. Ss ranked their own performance and were ranked by the 5 other group members and by 11 assessment staff members. Although the self-perceptions showed convergent validity with the staff criterion, Ss were less accurate when judging themselves than when judging their peers. On average, Ss evaluated their performance slightly more positively than their performance was evaluated by either the peers or the staff; however, this general self-enhancement effect was dwarfed by substantial individual differences, which ranged from self-enhancements to self-diminishment bias and were strongly related to four measures of narcissism. Discussion focuses on issues in assessing the accuracy of self-perceptions and the implications of the findings for individual differences in self-perception bias and the role of narcissism.

Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism.

Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism.

Depression and Self-Enhancement Among Japanese and American Students

This study examined the cultural generalizibility of the negative relationship between depression and self-enhancement. Japanese (n = 116) and American (n = 125) students completed the Zung (1965) Self-Rating Depression Scale and three measures of self-enhancement (i.e., the tendency to see oneself in a positive light). As expected, Japanese subjects were found to be more depressed and less self-serving than Americans. Negative correlations between depression and self-enhancement measures were obtained for both samples. Regression analyses of the relationships between measures indicated that sample differences in self-enhancement were explained largely by sample differences in depression. It is proposed that, relative to the Americans, Japanese students had a negative self-schema that led to higher depression and lower self-enhancement.