FlashReportDiscrepant and congruent high self-esteem: Behavioral self-handicapping as a preemptive defensive strategy☆
Section snippets
Present Research
Participants were given the opportunity to preemptively self-handicap after being told of an upcoming test of nonverbal intelligence, which was described as unlike other intelligence tests to create greater performance uncertainty. The test was presented as diagnostic of ability for only either exceptionally high performers (making success diagnostic) or especially low performers (making failure diagnostic). Participants had the opportunity to behaviorally self-handicap by selecting music they
Participants
One hundred forty-three introductory psychology students (72 women) participated for partial course credit.
Self-esteem assessment
Explicit SE was assessed using the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965; in Blascovich and Tomaka, 1991), completed during an initial web-based session (α = .92). Implicit SE was assessed using a self-esteem Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), which measures the extent to which the self is associated with positive or negative words. Following the procedures
Analytical strategy
Following the methods used in previous research (e.g., Jordan et al., 2007) implicit and explicit SE were treated as continuous variables. Continuous predictor variables were standardized (M = 0, SD = 1). One standard deviation above and below the mean of SE variables was used to represent high and low values when testing simple effects.
Regression analyses were conducted using hierarchical steps. In Step 1, implicit SE, explicit SE, and diagnosticity were entered simultaneously. In Step 2, implicit ×
Discussion
Results supported the hypothesis that participants with discrepant HSE would be more likely than others to behaviorally self-handicap, but only when the upcoming test was diagnostic of exceptionally high ability. This suggests that the defensive behaviors observed among people with discrepant HSE extend to the domain of behavioral self-handicapping. Previous research has focused on post-hoc defensive behaviors following a self-relevant threat. In contrast, we found evidence for people with
Conclusion
The current study sheds additional light on the complexities of HSE and the adoption of self-handicapping behavior as a preemptive defensive strategy. These findings demonstrate that the defensiveness of those with discrepant HSE extends to the use of an anticipatory SE buffer, and that this defensiveness may be most likely to be triggered in situations of particular importance for those with discrepant HSE, such as a test diagnostic of exceptionally high ability.
References (29)
- et al.
Measures of self-esteem
- et al.
Procrastination as a self-handicap for men and women: A task-avoidance strategy in a laboratory setting
Journal of Research in Personality
(2000) - et al.
Determinants of reduction in intended effort as a strategy for coping with anticipated failure
Journal of Research in Personality
(1983) - et al.
Narcissism and self-handicapping: Linking self-aggrandizement to behavior
Journal of Research in Personality
(2006) - et al.
Self-defeating behavior patterns among normal individuals: Review and analysis of common self-destructive tendencies
Psychological Bulletin
(1988) - et al.
Drug choice as a self-handicapping strategy in response to noncontingent success
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1978) Toward a state of self-esteem
(1990)- et al.
Adler's psychology (of use) today: Personal history of traumatic life events as a self-handicapping strategy
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1985) - et al.
Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1998) - et al.
Understanding the implicit associations test: I. An improved scoring algorithm
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(2003)
The role of uncertain self-esteem in self-handicapping
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Strategic “alcohol” use: Drinking to self-handicap
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology
When do ego threats lead to self-regulation failure? Negative consequences of defensive high self-esteem
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Cited by (22)
Rethinking preemptive consumption: Building mechanisms of reciprocity, contextuality, and risk hedging across scenarios
2024, Journal of Retailing and Consumer ServicesIdentifying latent classes of self-esteem level, self-esteem stability, and internalized shame among Korean college students: Relations to self-handicapping behaviors
2022, Personality and Individual DifferencesDifferent respect motivates different people: How self-esteem moderates the effects of respect on performance
2021, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :People with incongruent self-esteem are more erratic and reactionary (Di Pierro et al., 2016; Zeigler-Hill, 2006). These individuals seek self-esteem confirmation, especially those people high in explicit and low in implicit self-esteem (Briñol et al., 2006; Lupien et al., 2010). Identity threats particularly affect them because they have an unstable sense of self.
Explicit self-esteem and contingencies of self-worth: The moderating role of implicit self-esteem
2016, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :As the correlation between the implicit and explicit form of SE is a weak one (Hofmann, Gawronski, Gschwendner, Le & Schmitt, 2005; Krizan & Suls, 2008), these two forms are considered to be independent. The differentiation between implicit self-esteem (ISE) and explicit self-esteem (ESE) provided a unique perspective on the relations between ESE and various psychological phenomena like narcissism (Bosson, Brown, Zeigler-Hill, & Swann, 2003; Jordan, Spencer, Zanna, Hoshino-Browne & Correll, 2003), SE instability (Zeigler-Hill, 2006), reactions to social feedback (Jordan et al., 2003; Schröder-Abé, Rudolph, Wiesner & Schütz, 2007), and self-handicapping strategies (Lupien, Seery & Almonte, 2010). All these studies indicated that ISE acts as a moderator of the relations between ESE and such psychological phenomena.
Bringing you down versus bringing me up: Discrepant versus congruent high explicit self-esteem differentially predict malicious and benign envy
2016, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :This suggests that the upward comparison should not have connoted any negative information about participants' own performance quality or capabilities. Nonetheless, findings for malicious envy paralleled those in previous research (e.g., Jordan et al., 2003, 2005; Lupien et al., 2010; McGregor & Marigold, 2003) linking discrepant H-ESE to defensiveness in the face of threat. The lack of support for some of our predictions may stem from aspects of the study's methodology.
Defensive self-esteem impacts attention, attitude strength, and self-affirmation processes
2011, Journal of Experimental Social PsychologyCitation Excerpt :In addition, Bosson et al. (2003) found that defensive self-esteem individuals are more likely to display unrealistic optimism, while Jordan et al. (2003, 2009) found that participants with defensive self-esteem exhibit greater levels of ingroup bias. More recently, Lupien, Seery, and Almonte (2010) found that defensive self-esteem is associated with a greater tendency to engage in self-handicapping. That said, much of the evidence in support of defensive self-esteem appears somewhat indirect, and more upstream evidence would be beneficial.
- ☆
We would like to thank Kimberly Arnold for her assistance in conducting the study and Sandra Murray for her comments on a previous version of this manuscript.