Identifying Positives within a Negative Self-Image: What Might Low Self-Esteem Individuals Bring to Romantic Relationships?

Thinking concretely about a compliment prevented LSEs from focusing on whether the compliment is consistent with their self-views, whereas thinking abstractly highlighted discrepancies between the compliment and the LSE’s relevant self-views (2016). The authors suggest that the difference between their findings and those of Marigold et al. (2007) stems from the “non-directive” nature of the manipulation (Kille et al., 2017, p. 48). In other words, the abstract reframing intervention was successful because it guided participants through the process of generalizing a compliment; without this type of direction, the concrete mindset was more useful to LSEs. Thus, without any guidance or intervention, LSEs may be less likely to experience dissonance if they believe that their partners like something specific about them, despite LSEs’ own self-doubts. To summarize, a generally positive evaluation from a romantic partner may be irreconcilable with LSEs’ more negative selfviews, whereas a positive evaluation regarding a specific quality or behaviour may create less self-concept conflict. In addition, it may be more difficult for LSEs to find examples that negate specific (concrete) positive traits or behaviours (for example, being a good listener) than general ones (for example, being a good person). It may be easy for LSEs to recall a time when they were not a “good” person towards their partner, but relatively less easy to recall a IDENTIFYING POSITIVES WITHIN A NEGATIVE SELF-IMAGE specific instance when they ignored their partner. As such, it may be easier for LSEs to believe that they are valuable to their relationships in specific ways than to believe that they are generally good partners. Shared Traits and Values LSEs may come to like qualities in themselves that they also appreciate in their partner. According to the similarity principle of attraction, people tend to like those who are similar to themselves in some way more than those who are dissimilar. This effect has been demonstrated in terms of similarity of attitudes (Byrne, 1961) and physical attractiveness (Feingold, 1988), among other variables. In married couples and dating couples alike, those who are most satisfied in their relationships tend to perceive their partners as similar to themselves (Murray, Holmes, Bellavia, Griffin, & Dolderman, 2002). Perceived similarities, therefore, can drive not only initial attraction, but can also influence the maintenance and continuation of intimate relationships. One might expect that LSEs would be an exception to the rule that “similarity breeds liking,” since LSE seems to imply a dislike of one’s traits and characteristics. However, Hendrick and Page (1970) compared those who had low, moderate, and high levels of selfesteem and found evidence to the contrary. In their study, similarity was measured on the dimensions of attitudes towards certain social issues. Regardless of self-esteem, participants liked similar others more than dissimilar others and rated similar others more positively on dimensions such as intelligence and sincerity (1970). As such, although LSEs have a negative view of themselves, they may still like people who share similar attitudes to themselves and ascribe positive characteristics to those individuals. Because LSEs are attracted to similar others, they may end up in relationships with people with whom they share qualities. Paradoxically, this similarity can benefit their romantic relationships. LSEs in one study felt closer to and more in love with their partners after thinking about a value they shared with their partner compared to thinking about a nonshared value or no values at all (Lomore, Spencer, & Holmes, 2007). Meanwhile, thinking about a shared or non-shared value did not yield any differences in HSEs’ feelings towards their partner compared to the control condition. Concentrating on similarities between themselves and their partners may have reminded LSEs of interdependence in their relationships and eased their concerns about rejection (2007). By thinking about a particular value as being shared by the couple, LSEs also avoid focusing on themselves and making negative evaluations (2007). Recognizing shared values and characteristics might improve overall relationship quality since these qualities concern the couple as a unit, rather than the LSE as an individual. By seeing these similar qualities as a strength of the relationship, LSEs may come to appreciate the traits that they share with their partner. When Murray, Holmes, et al. (2002) investigated the relationship between perceived partner similarity and satisfaction, they did not empirically investigate the role of self-esteem. However, they suggested that even among LSEs, perceiving similarity between oneself and one’s partner could potentially ease concerns about rejection and abandonment (2002). Summary and Hypotheses, Directions for Future Research, and Conclusion Summary and Hypotheses In close relationships, LSE is associated with lower relationship satisfaction (Murray, et al., 2003) and increased rates of relationship termination relative to HSEs (Hendrick et al., 1988). LSE is also associated with negative outcomes in other domains, such as reduced overall life satisfaction and increased incidence of depression (Baumeister et al., 2003; Murrell et al., 1991). It is possible, however, that romantic partners can help LSEs see themselves in a more positive light and improve their relationship quality by IDENTIFYING POSITIVES WITHIN A NEGATIVE SELF-IMAGE encouraging LSEs to challenge their negative self-views. The current literature review sought to identify qualities that LSEs might like about themselves in the intimate relationship context. Research on positive aspects of LSE is limited, perhaps because it seems counterintuitive that having generally negative beliefs about the self would be associated with positive qualities or beliefs. However, LSEs tend to have inaccurate views of themselves. Observers report similar levels of skill for LSEs and HSEs in domains such as social status and interpersonal competence (Baumeister et al., 2003). LSEs may also have specific self-views that are positive, such as a belief about a particular talent (Pelham & Swann, 1989). Additionally, at least one manipulation, which asked LSEs to think abstractly about compliments from their partners, has helped LSEs to see positive qualities in themselves (e.g., Marigold et al., 2007), suggesting that they do have the capacity to develop a less pessimistic self-concept. Despite the scarcity of research on this issue, existing research can inform predictions about what LSEs might value about themselves based on their responses to feedback and the strategies they use within their relationships. LSEs may believe that they contribute positively to their romantic relationships in the following ways: ▪ H1. LSEs may believe that their tendency to seek out and address signs of potential rejection reflects greater commitment and investment to the relationships. ▪ H2. LSEs may believe that their self-reported avoidance of conflict prevents tension in the relationship. ▪ H3. LSEs may value specific, concrete things that they do for their partners over general qualities or characteristics of themselves. ▪ H4. LSEs may value traits in themselves that they believe they share with their partners. Directions for Future Research Moving forward, research should focus on testing the above claims empirically and identifying other ways that LSEs might believe that they bring value to a relationship. Since self-esteem has previously been associated with attachment security (e.g., Feeney & Noller, 1990; Gamble & Roberts, 2005), it may be worthwhile to investigate what people with insecure attachment styles value about themselves. Some research suggests that gender differences might also influence what LSEs value in themselves. For example, Josephs, Markus, and Tafarodi (1992) suggest that men mainly derive self-esteem from personal achievements whereas women mainly derive self-esteem from relationships with others. As such, men and women may define and evaluate their contributions to a relationship differently. This line of research could involve open-ended methods (e.g., asking participants to list qualities in themselves that they perceive to be strengths) or closed-ended (e.g., asking participants to indicate whether they believe they possess certain qualities as well as the extent to which they like those qualities in