The proposition that desires, needs, and goals influence people's thoughts, attitudes, and judgments is endemic to many social psychological theories. Researchers have continually struggled, however, to establish these motivational phenomena vis-a-vis alternative information-processing explanations. This struggle is necessitated by the difficulties that motivational theories have introduced throughout psychology's history. Instinct theories in the 1920s, for example, threatened to discourage investigation into other behavioral antecedents. Drive theories in the 1950s complicated functional behavioral laws and were difficult to confirm empirically. In fact, Skinner was able to forge a behavior theory that was arguably more powerful than those of his contemporaries while dispensing completely with motivational terms. Despite these difficulties, most psychologists, Skinnerians notwithstanding, have found the motivation concept indispensable. As the articles in this symposium demonstrate, motivational concepts are ascendant in social psychology. Social psychologists have deployed the motivation concept primarily to explain people's need to forge, maintain, or recoup positive self-concepts. In addition to self-enhancement and self-protection needs (Dunning, this issue), the authors in this symposium discuss the need to maintain favorable views of one's peers (Kunda & Sinclair, this issue) or relationship partners (Murray, this issue). Ultimately, these needs also subserve self-enhancement in that the desire to view close others positively accrues self-benefits. Having convincingly surmounted alternative explanations of motivational phenomena, researchers have begun to address the conditions in which different motives prevail. Sedikides and Strube (1995), for example, considered the circumstances under which four self-related motives-self-enhancement, self-verification, self-assessment, and self-improvement-are most likely to be activated. They assume, for example, that self-assessment needs predominate with highly diagnostic tasks, whereas self-enhancement prevails with ambiguous tasks. Presumably, diagnostic tasks enable accurate assessment of abilities and characteristics, whereas ambiguous tasks provide the latitude to define one's characteristics self-servingly. In addition to coordinating motives with situations, researchers have examined how different motives influence the kinds of information people seek. Taylor, Neter, and Wayment (1995), for example, showed that people seeking self-improvement tend to compare themselves with superior others, whereas those seeking self-enhancement prefer inferior comparison targets. In this article, I outline an expanded view of self-related motives couched in terms of six self-orientations. Self-orientations are evoked by challenges to the self s integrity or opportunities for self-advancement. The self-orientation perspective assumes that internal processes, such as thinking about one's behavior, characteristics, or circumstances, or external events, such as social or task feedback, evoke cognitive and emotional states that favor, but do not dictate, particular motivated strategies. A person who receives unfavorable social feedback, for example, may become sad, angry, or energized, leading to exceptional openness (e.g., self-evaluation or self-improvement motives) or defensiveness (e.g., self-verification or self-enhancement motives) in self-evaluations and social judgments. Whether a person favors relatively biased or unbiased selfand social judgments depends on the strength of the orientation, the type of information that is available to assess self and others, and personality factors. A single person may enter into different self-orientations within a relatively short time frame, and people vary in their chronic tendencies to occupy each self-orientation. The six basic self-orientations are the habitual self, the beleaguered self, the exalted self, the analytic self, the malleable self, and the existential self. The habitual self refers to people's usual selfand social judgment tendencies, whereas the other five orientations represent special self-threats or opportunities. In terms of the self-orientation approach, Kunda and Sinclair's target article in this issue describes circumstances in
Read full abstract