The Influence of Positive Appearance and Personality Feedback on Self-Esteem as a Function of Self-Monitoring

Various psychological research has examined self-esteem formation and the importance of positive feedback from others in determining one’s self-worth. Additionally, contingencies of self-worth, or aspects of the self in which people deem important to their self-concept, play an important role in self-esteem formation. The current study expands upon this research by examining how personality traits, specifically the self-monitoring personality characteristic, may moderate fluctuations in self-esteem after receiving positive personality or appearance-based feedback. Participants in the current study completed a self-monitoring questionnaire, and were assigned to one of the following conditions: positive personality-based feedback, positive appearance-based feedback, or no feedback. Self-esteem levels were measured using the Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale after the feedback condition. Results revealed a significant interaction between feedback condition and self-monitoring for women, but not men. The findings of the current study have various implications across clinical and social settings, and shed light on potential gender differences in contingencies of self-worth and self-esteem formation, which should be further explored. Positive Feedback and Self-Esteem as a Function of Self-Monitoring 3 The Influence of Positive Appearance and Personality Feedback on Self-Esteem As a Function of Self-Monitoring Social psychologists examine how others can influence one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. One of the main areas of influence concerns self-esteem: people’s self-evaluations depend, in large part, on feedback from others (Hermann, Lucas, & Friedrich, 2008). It is a common preconception that, in general, positive feedback will positively influence one’s selfesteem whereas negative feedback will negatively influence one’s self-esteem. However, the influence of feedback from others may not always be so straightforward. First, the kind of positive or negative feedback may matter. For instance, feedback about a highly valued aspect of oneself may have a larger influence than feedback about a less valued aspect (Tesser, 1999). Second, personality may matter. Certain individuals may be more sensitive to specific forms of feedback, such as appearance-based feedback, whereas others may be more sensitive to other forms, such as personality-based feedback. There are varying types of both positive and negative feedback that may influence the self-esteem levels of individuals differently. Feedback can have a strong influence in increasing one’s self-esteem levels, however certain individuals may be more sensitive to specific forms of feedback. The personality trait of self-monitoring influences the way individuals act in various social situations. This tendency to either monitor behavior in order to seem more attractive or socially appropriate (high self-monitoring), or the tendency to act similar in all situations based on internal predispositions (low self-monitoring), may be an underlying reason for why certain individuals prefer, or react more strongly to, a particular form of feedback. The current study builds upon this notion and examines whether self-monitoring moderates the influence of appearance-based versus personality-based feedback on self-esteem levels. Positive Feedback and Self-Esteem as a Function of Self-Monitoring 4 Self-Esteem Self-esteem, a term coined by William James in 1980, is often defined as the overall evaluation (positive or negative) of one’s own worth or value (Rosenberg, 1986). Frequently, self-esteem is derived from the evaluations of others and serves as a form of internal index of social acceptance or rejection (Hermann, Lucas, & Friedrich, 2008). Self-esteem is often viewed in terms of high or low, good or bad, and follows the rule that, in general, more is better. Although self-esteem is a relatively stable personality trait, research has shown that it is also a “state”: people display short-term fluctuations in their selfesteem, especially if it is contextually based (e.g., on performance outcomes). Thus, depending on what is happening in a person’s life, self-esteem levels are subject to shift, or change, on a regular basis (Kernis, Grennemann, & Mathis, 1991). Research with regard to the selfenhancement approach has demonstrated that individuals who received favorable feedback experience greater positive emotion and less negative emotion than did those who received negative feedback (Kernis, Cornell, Sun, Berry, & Harlow, 1993). Positive feedback, therefore, could enhance self-esteem levels causing a positive fluctuation on reported self-esteem measures. Although these fluctuations may occur regardless of the type of positive feedback received, there are certain types that may be more influential than others. Contingencies of self-worth. People differ in terms of where they get their self-esteem, partly as a function of their beliefs about who they want to be or what they need to do to be a person of worth (Park & Crocker, 2007). These individual differences in susceptibility to different feedback domains are referred to as contingencies of self-worth (Park & Crocker). Research on contingencies of self-worth has supported the notion that self-esteem fluctuates when people experience either success or failure, but that the more related events are to Positive Feedback and Self-Esteem as a Function of Self-Monitoring 5 contingencies of self-worth, the more self-esteem fluctuations are observed (Crocker, Brook, Niiya, & Villacorta, 2006). When self-esteem is contingent, for example, on performance, then success feels particularly good because it validates one’s self-worth, whereas if self-esteem is contingent on other factors, then success may not be as influential. Thus, highly contingent people invest more time and effort in domains in which their self-esteem seems contingent (Crocker et al.). People often are motivated to prove to themselves and others that they satisfy their contingencies of self-worth and therefore prioritize boosting their self-esteem by proving that they satisfy their self-worth criteria (Crocker et al.). Positive feedback can play a vital role in self-esteem enhancement when the feedback is relative to an individual’s contingencies of self-worth, but additionally, the importance of this feedback type may be related to the amount of contact individuals have with specific forms of feedback (Snyder & Cowles, 1979). Intellectual feedback, for example, is readily available in both academic and professional settings, which provide people with constant feedback pertaining to their capacity to perform cognitive tasks (Snyder & Cowles). When exploring various forms of feedback, research has shown that on average, personality feedback is a rarer phenomenon than intellectual feedback, and therefore people are less certain of their personality makeup (Snyder & Cowles). Thus, personality feedback may have a stronger influence on people, especially on their self-esteem, as it provides a unique opportunity for self-validation (Snyder & Cowles). If one is unfamiliar with where he or she stands in comparison to others as a result of minimal experience with that particular feedback, such as personality, receiving such feedback provides the opportunity to self-validate both internally and externally that they are someone of worth. Positive Feedback and Self-Esteem as a Function of Self-Monitoring 6 Where else do self-esteem contingencies come from? The sociometer theory proposes that normatively self-esteem comes from others. Specifically, the sociometer theory states that self-esteem reflects, in large part, one’s perceptions of how others feel about them (Kavanagh, Robins & Ellis, 2010). Self-esteem can be seen as a marker of one’s relational value to other people, or the degree to which a person is seen as a valuable relationship partner (Leary, 2005). There are, however, still expected to be some differences in degree of influence that other’s opinions have on self-esteem, especially with regard to what domain of self is being evaluated. One possibility to explain these differences may reside in core personality traits. A previously unexamined personality factor likely to influence the contingencies of self-esteem, especially in feedback from others, is self-monitoring level. Self-Monitoring Psychologist Mark Snyder proposed the concept of self-monitoring in 1974. This concept is built upon the notion that there are two distinct orientations that individuals can take as they make behavioral choices in given social contexts (Snyder, Berscheid, & Glick, 1985). Some individuals, categorized as high self-monitors, typically strive to be the type of person called for by each situation in which they find themselves, and therefore are particularly sensitive and responsive to social and interpersonal cues of social appropriateness (Snyder et al.). In contrast, low self-monitors are typically less responsive to situational and interpersonal specifications of social appropriateness and thus choose their behavior based on their internal dispositions and attitudes (Snyder et al.). According to Snyder (1974), a high self-monitor is a skilled impression manager who observes and controls his or her behavior and self-presentation, and is also sensitive to social cues to act in line with situationally appropriate behavior. These individuals appear to be engaged in monitoring or controlling the images of self that they project Positive Feedback and Self-Esteem as a Function of Self-Monitoring 7 in various social interactions. Low self-monitors, on the other hand, are believed to lack the motivation and/or ability to control self-presentation and therefore act in response to internal predispositions as opposed to a concern for public appearance of their behavior (Snyder). The importance of this self-monitoring personality construct has been explored across a variety of behavioral and social setting