UNDERSTANDING THE SELF GEC1 PROF. EDUARDO L. DOYAOEN THE SELF AND THE FIELD OF PSYCHOLOGY At the end of this learning module, the student is expected to: a. demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analyzing the different psychological theories in the study of the "self" b. expound the self as a cognitive construction c. examine the self as proactive and agentic Introduction Most people would say that they do not want to talk about themselves. But in actuality, most people like hearing life stories of another person as a chance to talk about themselves or to relate self to others. The famous line of "me, myself, and I" is often used in movies, animation and even in social media - as caption to pictures or as shout-outs. The psychology of self focuses on the representation of an individual based on his experiences. These experiences are either from the home, school and other groups, organizations or affiliation he engaged in. Seemingly, the ‘self’ is one of the most heavily researched areas in social and personality psychology, where concepts are introduced that beyond our physical attributes, lies our psychological identity. Questions of 'who am I?' or 'what am I beyond my looks?' are thoughts of many that continuously search for a deeper sense of self which can be traced back from some time of human history. “Drawing on caves suggests that sometime during the dawn of history, human being began to give serious thought to their nonphysical, psychological selves. With the advent of written history, writers would describe this awareness of self in terms of spirit, psyche, or soul.” (Pajares & Schunck, 2002) From ancient to current times, the concept of the self is always an interesting subject for many as it is very personal that it talks about intrapersonal properties. In oxfordbibliographies.com (2-13), it is mentioned that whatever stance one adopts regarding the self’s ontological status, there is little doubt that the many phenomena of which the self is a predicate --self-knowledge, self-awareness, self-esteem, self-enhancement, self-regulation, self-deception, self-presentation ----to name just a few, are indispensable research areas. UNDERSTANDING THE SELF GEC1 PROF. EDUARDO L. DOYAOEN 1. The Self as a Cognitive Construction Cognitive Construction is a cognitive approach that focuses on the mental processes rather than the observable behavior. This approach will assist individuals in assimilating new information to their existing knowledge and will enable to make the appropriate modification to their existing intellectual framework to accommodate their new information. 1.1 William James and the Me-Self, I-Self With the initiative of Wilhelm Wundt, The father of Scientific Psychology, scientific methods in studying what Aguirre et al. (2011) mentioned as 'phenomenon of the consciousness', urged interest in further studies of the self and its role in human behavior. It is in this time that William James' classic distinction between the self as knower (or pure ego) and the self as known (or empirical self) provides a useful scheme within which to view the multitudinous aspects of self-functioning (oxfordbibliographies.com (2013). W. James suggested that "the total self of 'Me', being as it were duplex" is composed of "partly object and partly subject". As a consequence, he differentiated between the self as knower, or the “I”, and the self as known or “Me”. He referred to the "I" as pure ego and suggested that this component of self is consciousness itself. The "Me", on the other hand, is one of the many things that the I may be conscious of, and it consists of three components, one physical or material, one social, and one spiritual (Pajares & Schunck, 2002). Material self - consists of things that belong to us or that we belong to. Things like family, clothes, our body, and money are some of what make up our material selves. Social Self - our social selves are who we are in a given social situation. For James, people change how they act depending on the social situation that they are in. James believed that people had as many social selves as they had social situations they participated in. Spiritual Self - is who we are at our core. The spiritual self is more concrete or permanent than the other two selves. The spiritual self is our subjective and most intimate self. Aspects of an individual’s spiritual self include things like his personality, core values, and conscience that do not typically change throughout a lifetime. UNDERSTANDING THE SELF GEC1 PROF. EDUARDO L. DOYAOEN 1.2 Global versus Differentiated Models There had been postulation that one's self may be fragmented into different parts and different selves which may be in conflict or needs regulation from each other. Although W. James gave a very interesting perspective on the self, and was even among the first writers to coin the term 'Self-Esteem', other theories emerged to study on the selfhood as an integrated part of one's psyche. In the past 30 years, self-esteem has become deeply embedded in popular culture (Brown & Marchall, 2006). It is a person's overall self evaluation or sense of selfworth. Global Self-esteem (a.k.a. Trait self-esteem), is a personality variable that represents the way people generally feel about themselves. It is relatively enduring across time and situations. According to researchers (e.g Crocker & Park, 2004; Crocker & Wolfe, 2001), Global self-esteem is a decision people make about their worth as a person. State Self-Esteem (a.k.a. Feelings of Self-worth), refers to temporary feelings or momentary emotional reactions to positive and negative events where we feel good or bad about ourselves during these situations or experiences. Domain Specific Self-Esteem (a.k.a. Self-evaluations), is focused on how people evaluate their various abilities and attitudes. This is making distinctions or differentiation on how good or bad people are in specific physical attributes, abilities and personal characteristics. 1.3 Real and Ideal Self Concepts The self as the regulating center of an individual's personality and selfprocesses under the guise of id, ego and superego functioning (Pajares & Schunck, 2002), rocked Psychology as the biggest breakthrough in understanding the psychological self. From this milestone, prominent psychologists followed with their own perspectives of the self to contest the roles and functions of ego as the self. These were the landmarks of Contemporary Psychology and the understanding of the internal processes of man. A group of psychologists called for renewed attention to inner experience, internal processes, and self-constructs. These perspectives assert the overall dignity and worth of human beings and their capacity for self-realization (Hall, Lindzey, Loehlin & Manosevitz, 1997). UNDERSTANDING THE SELF GEC1 PROF. EDUARDO L. DOYAOEN Karen Horney with her Feminine Psychology, established that a person has an ‘ideal self’, `actual self’ and the `real self’. She believed that everyone experiences basic anxiety through which we experience conflict and strive to cope and employ tension reduction approaches. Hall, et al. (1997) mentioned that Horney believed people develop a number of strategies to cope with basic anxiety. Because people feel inferior, an idealized self-image - an imaginary picture of the self as the possessor of unlimited powers and superlative qualities, is developed. On the other hand, the actual self, the person one is in everyday life, is often despised because it fails to fulfill the requirement of the idealized image. Underlying both the idealized self and the actual self is the real self, which is revealed only as a person begins to shed the various techniques developed to deal with basic anxiety and to find ways of resolving conflicts. The real self is not an entity but a `force` that impels growth and self-realization. Carl Rogers with his Person-Centered Theory, establish a conception of self, involving the Real Self (a.k.a. Self-concept) and Ideal Self. The Real Self includes all those aspects of one`s being and one`s experiences that are perceived in awareness (though not always accurately) by the individual (Feist, Feist& Roberts, 2013). It is the part of ourselves where we feel, think, look, and act involving our self-image. On the other hand, the Ideal Self revolves around goals and ambitions in life, is dynamic, the idealized image that we have developed over time. This is what our parents have taught us considering: what we admire in others, what our society promotes, what we think are in our best interest. A wide gap between the ideal self and the real self indicates incongruence and an unhealthy personality (Feist et al., 2013). If the way that I am (the real self) is aligned with the way that I want to be (the ideal self), then I will feel a sense of mental well-being or peace of mind. If the way that I am is not aligned with how I want to be, the incongruence, or lack of alignment, will result in mental distress or anxiety. The greater the level of incongruence between the ideal self and real self, the greater is the level of resulting distress. 1.4 Multiple versus Unified Selves Postmodern psychology contends that man has an identity that shifts and morphs in different social situations and in response to different stimuli, as Kenneth Gergen argues that having a flexible sense of self in different context is more socially adaptable than force oneself to stick to one self-concept (ctlsites.uga.edu, 2016, danielew). UNDERSTANDING THE SELF GEC1 PROF. EDUARDO L. DOYAOEN Theorists believed that there is no one answer to the question, “Who am I?” as one person can undergo several transitions in his life and create multiple versions of himself. However, there is still the contention of the importance of mental well-being, of maintaining a unified, centralized, coherent self. Multiple Selves, according to K. Gergen, are the capacities we carry within us from multiple relationships. These are not ‘discovered’ but ‘created’ in our relationship with other people. Unified Selves, as strongly pointed out in Traditional Psychology emphasizes that well-being comes when our personality dynamics are congruent, cohesive and consistent. It is understood that a person is essentially connected with selfhood and identity. In a healthy person the ego remains at the helm of the mind, coherent and organized, staying at the center (ctlsites.uga.edu, 2016, danielcw). 1.5 True versus False Selves Donald W. Winnicott distinguished what he called the ‘true self’ from the ‘false self’ in the human personality, considering the true self as based on a sense of being in the experiencing body and the false self as a necessary defensive organization, a survival kit, a caretaker self, the means by which a threatened person has managed to survive (Klein, 1994). True Self has a sense of integrity, of connected wholeness that harks to the early stage. False Self is used when the person has to comply with external rules, such as being polite or otherwise following social codes. The false self constantly seeks to anticipate demands of others in order to maintain the relationship. The Healthy False Self is functional, can be compliant but without the feeling that it has betrayed its true self. The Unhealthy False Self fits in but through a feeling of forced compliance rather than loving adaptation (changingminds.org 2016). False Selves, as investigated by Heinz Kohut (1971), can lead towards narcissistic personality, which identifies with external factors at the cost of one’s own autonomous creativity. 2. The Self as Proactive and Agentic Social Cognitive Theory takes an agentic view of personality, meaning that humans have the capacity to exercise control over their own lives. People are self-regulating, proactive, self-reflective, and self-organizing and that they have UNDERSTANDING THE SELF GEC1 PROF. EDUARDO L. DOYAOEN the power to influence their own actions to produce desired consequences. People consciously act on their environment in a manner that permits growth toward psychological health. An adequate theory of personality, according to G. Allport must allow for proactive behavior (Feist et al., 2013). Agent Self- The agent self is known as the executive function that allows for actions. This is how we, as individuals, make choices and utilize our control in situations and actions. The agent self, resides over everything that involves decision making, self-control, taking charge in situations, and actively responding. A person might desire to eat unhealthy foods, however, it is his agent self that allows that person to choose to avoid eating them and make a healthier food choice (Baumeister, & Bushman, 2011). Human agency is not a thing but an active process of exploring, manipulating and influencing the environment in order to attain desired outcomes. According to Albert Bandura, the core features of human agency are intentionality (acts a person performs intentionally) forethought (setting goals, anticipation of outcomes of actions, selection of behaviors to produce desired outcomes and avoiding undesirable ones), self-reactiveness (monitoring progress toward fulfilling choices), and self-reflectiveness (examination of own functioning, evaluation of the effect of other people’s action on them). These lead to self-efficacy, the belief that they are capable of performing actions that will produce a desired effect (Feist, et.al.,2013). Self-Efficacy lies in the center of Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory. It is the measure of one’s ability to complete goals. People with high self-efficacy often are eager to accept challenges because they believe they can overcome them, while people with low self-efficacy may avoid challenges, or believe experiences are more challenging than they actually are (appsychtextbk.wikispaces.com, 2014).
