Self Discrepancy Theory

22
8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 1/22 Psycholo0cal Review Copyright 1987 by the Am erican Psychological Association, Inc. 1987, Vol. 94, No. 3, 319-34 0 0033-295X/87/$00.75 Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect E. ToryHiggins New York University This article presents a theory of how different types of discrepancies between self-state representa- tions are related to different kinds of emotional vulnerabilities. One domain of the self (actual; ideal; ought) and one standpoint on the self (own; significant other) constitute each type of self-state representation. It is proposed that different types of self-discrepancies represent different types of negative psychological situations that are associated with different kinds of discomfort. Discrepan- cies between the actual/own self-state (i.e., the self-concept) and ideal self-states (i.e., representations of an individual's beliefs about his or her own or a sitmifieant other's hopes, wishes, or aspirations for the individual) signify the absence of positive outcomes, which is associated with dejection-related emotions (e.g., disappointm ent, dissatisfaction, sadness). In contrast, discrepancies between the ac- tual/own self-state and ought self-states (i.e., representations of an individual's beliefs about his or her own or a significant other's beliefs about the individual's duties, responsibilities, or obligations) signify the presence of negative outcomes, which is associated with agitation-related emotions (e.g., fear, threat, restlessness). Differences in both the relative magnitude and the accessibility of individu- als' available types of self-discrepancies are predicted to be related to differences in the kinds of discomfort people are likely to experience. Correlational and experimental evidence supports the predictions of the model. Differences between self-discrepancy theory and (a) other theories of in- compatible self-beliefs and (b) actual self negativity (e.g., low self-esteem) are discussed. The notion that people who hold conflicting or incompatible beliefs are likely o experience discomfort has had a long history in psychology. In social psychology, for example, various early theories proposed a relation between discomfort and specific kinds of"inconsistency" among a person's beliefs (e.g., Abelson & Rosenberg, 1958; Festinger, 1957; Heider, 1958; McGuire, 1968; Newcomb, 1968; Osgood & Tannenbaum, 1955). And various classic theories relating self and affect proposed that self-conflicts or self-inconsistencies produce emotional prob- lems (e.g., Adler, 1964; Allport, 1955; Cooley, 1902/1964; Freud, 1923/1961; Hom ey, 1939, 1946; James, 1890/1948; Lecky, 1961; Mead, 1934; Rogers, 1961). The theory to be pre- sented here, self-discrepancy theory, has close ties to this histor- ical tradition. But its construction was guided by a distinct set of aims: (a) to distinguish among different kinds of discomfort that people holding incompatible beliefs may experience, (b) to relate different kinds of emotional vulnerabilities systemati- cally to different types of discrepancies that people may possess among their self-beliefs,and (c) to consider the role of both the This research was supported by Grant MH 39429 from the National Institute of Mental Health. I am grateful for financial support provided by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. I would like to thank Diane Ruble, Yaacov Trope, Robin Wells, and Henri Zukier for their helpful comments and suggestions on earlier ver- sions of this article. The final revision of this article was prepared while I was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sci- ences. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to E. Tory Higgins, Department of Psychology, New Y ork University, 6 Wash- ington Place, 7th Floor, New York, New York 10003. 31 9 availability and the accessibility of different discrepancies peo- ple may possess in determining the kind of discomfort they are most likely to suffer. Although many different types of belief incompatibility have been described in the literature--for example, dissonance (e.g., Aronson, 1969; Festinger, 1957), imbalance (e.g., Heider, 1958; Newcomb, 1968), incongruity (e.g., Osgood & Tannenbaum, 1955), and self-inconsistency (e.g., Epstein, 1980; Lecky, 1961)--the emotional consequences have typically been de- scribed only in very general terms, such as tension, unpleasant- ness, pressure, conflict, stress, or discomfort. And yet it is clear from the general psychological literature that distinct emotional clusters or syndromes exist. From factor analysis, cluster analy- sis, and circular scaling, researchers have reported that dissatis- faction, feeling discouraged, feeling pitiful, feeling sad, feeling gloomy, and feeling miserable tend to cluster (e.g., Cattell, 1973; DeRivera, 1977; Ewert, 1970; Kemper, 1978; Zuckerman & Lubin, 1965), whereas guilt, anxiety, worry, fear, feeling tense, feeling alarmed, and feeling threatened form another cluster (Ausubel, 1955; Bibring, 1953; Cattell, 1973; DeRivera, 1977; Ewert, 1970; Kemper, 1978; Russell, 1980; Zuckerman & Lubin, 1965). This basic distinction between dejection-related emotions and agitation-related emotions has also been made frequently in the clinical literature, not only to distinguish be- tween depression and anxiety but also to distinguish between different kinds of depression (see, e.g., Beck, 1967, 1983; Cam- eron, 1963; White; 1964). Thus previous theories of belief incompatibility are limited in that they do not consider that distinct kinds of discomfort may be associated with belief incompatibility. These theories, then, cannot predict which kind of discomfort or emotional problem will be induced by a particular type of belief incom-

Transcript of Self Discrepancy Theory

Page 1: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 1/22

Psycholo0cal Review Copyright 1987 by the Am erica n Psychologica l Associa tion, Inc .1987, V ol . 94 , N o . 3 , 319 -34 0 0033 -295X /87 /$0 0 .75

Se l f-Discrepancy: A Th eory Re la t ing Se l f and A f fec t

E . Tory HigginsN e w Y o r k U n i v e r s i t y

This artic le presents a th eory o f how different typ es of discrepancies between self-state representa-

tions are related to different kinds o f emotion al vulnerabilities. One dom ain o f the self (actual;

ideal; ought) and one s tandpo int on the se lf (own; s ignificant other) constitute each type o f self-s tate

representation. It is pr oposed tha t different types o f self-discrepancies represent different typ es ofnegative psychological s ituations that a re associated w ith different kin ds of discomfort. Discrepan-

cies between the act ual/ ow n self-state (i.e., the self-concept) and ide al self-states (i.e., repr esent ation s

of an ind iv idua l ' sbeliefs about his or her own or a s itmifieant other's hopes, wishes, or aspirations for

the individual) signify the absence o f positive outcomes, w hich is associated w ith dejection-related

em otio ns (e.g., disa ppo intm ent, dissatisfaction, sadness). In contrast, d iscrepancies between the ac-

tual/ow n self-s tate and ought self-s tates (i .e. , representation s of an individ ual 's beliefs about his orher own o r a s ignificant other's beliefs about the individ ual 's dutie s, responsibilities, o r obligations)

signify the presence of negative outcomes, w hich is associated with agita tion -relat edemo tions (e .g.,fear, threat, restlessness). Differences in both the relative magnitu de an d the accessibility o f individ u-

als ' available types of self-discrepancies are predicte d to be related to differences in the k inds o fdiscom fort people are likely to experience. C orrelation al and e xperim ental evidence suppo rts thepredictions of the model. D ifferences between self-discrepancy theory and (a) other theories o f in-

com pati ble self-beliefs and (b) act ual se lf negativity (e.g., low self-esteem) are discussed.

T h e n o t i o n t h a t p e o p l e w h o h o l d c o n f l i c t in g o r i n c o m p a t i b l e

b e l i e fs a r e l i k e l y o e x p e r i e n c e d i s c o m f o r t h a s h a d a l o n g h i s t o r y

i n p s y c ho l o g y . I n s o c i a l p sy c h o l o gy , fo r e x a m p l e , v a r i o u s e a r l y

t h e o r i e s p r o p o s e d a r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n d i s c o m f o r t a n d s p e c i f i c

k i n d s o f " i n c o n s i s t e n c y " a m o n g a p e r s o n ' s b e l ie f s ( e .g . , A b e l s o n

& R o s e n b e rg , 1 9 5 8 ; F e s t in g e r , 1 9 5 7 ; H e id e r , 1 9 5 8 ; Mc G u i re ,

1 9 68 ; N e w c o m b , 1 9 68 ; O s g o o d & T a n n e n b a u m , 1 9 55 ) . A n d

v a r i o u s c l a s s i c th e o r i e s r e l a t i n g s e l f a n d a f f ec t p r o p o s e d t h a t

s e l f- c o n f li c t s o r s e l f - in c o n s i s te n c i e s p r o d u c e e m o t i o n a l p r o b -

l e m s (e . g . , A d le r , 1 9 6 4 ; A l lp o r t , 1 9 5 5 ; C o o le y , 1 9 0 2 /1 9 6 4 ;

F re u d , 1 9 2 3 /1 9 6 1 ; H o m e y , 1 9 3 9 , 1 9 4 6 ; J a m e s , 1 8 9 0 /1 9 4 8 ;

L e c k y , 1 9 6 1 ; Me a d , 1 9 3 4 ; R o g e r s , 1 9 6 1 ). T h e th e o ry to b e p re -

s e n te d h e re , s e l f -d i s c re p a n c y th e o ry , h a s c lo s e t i e s t o th i s h i s to r -

i c a l t r a d i t i o n . B u t i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n w a s g u i d e d b y a d i s t i n c t s e t

o f a i m s : ( a ) t o d i s t i n g u i sh a m o n g d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f d i s c o m f o r t

t h a t p e o p l e h o l d i n g i n c o m p a t i b l e b e l i e fs m a y e x p e r i e n c e , ( b ) t o

r e l a t e d i f f e re n t k i n d s o f e m o t i o n a l v u l n e r a b i l i t i e s s y s t e m a t i -

c a l l y t o d i f f e r en t t y p e s o f d i s c r e p a n c i e s t h a t p e o p l e m a y p o s s e ss

a m o n g t h e i r s e l f -b e l ie f s , a n d ( c ) t o c o n s i d e r t h e r o l e o f b o t h t h e

This research was supported by Gran t MH 39429 from the Na t iona l

Institute of Mental Health. I am grateful for financial suppo rt provided

by the John D. and Ca ther ine T . MacArthur Founda t ion and by theAlfred P. Sloan Foun dation.

I would like to thank Dian e Ruble, Yaacov Trope, Rob in W ells, andHen ri Zu kier for their helpful comm ents and suggestions on earlier ver-

s ions o f this artic le. The final revis ion o f this artic le was prepared whileI was a Fellow at the Center fo r Advanced S tudy in the Behavioral Sci-ences.

Correspondence concerning th is artic le should be addressed to E.Tory Higgins, Dep artm ent o f Psychology,New Y ork University, 6 W ash-

ington Place, 7th F loor, New York, New York 100 03.

31 9

a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d t h e a c c e s s i b il i t y o f d i f f e r e n t d i s c r e p a n c i e s p e o -

p l e m a y p o s s e s s i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t t h e y a r e

m o s t l i k e ly to s uf fe r.

A l t h o u g h m a n y d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f b e l i e f i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y h av e

b e e n d e s c r i b e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e - - f o r e x a m p l e , d i s s o n a n c e ( e .g . ,

A r o n s o n , 1 9 6 9 ; F e s t in g e r , 1 95 7 ) , im b a l a n c e ( e .g . , H e id e r , 1 9 5 8 ;

N e w c o m b , 1 9 68 ) , i n c o n g r u i t y (e .g . , O s g o o d & T a n n e n b a u m ,

1 9 5 5 ), a n d s e l f - in c o n s i s t e n c y ( e . g. , E p s te in , 1 9 8 0 ; L e c k y ,

1 9 6 1 ) - - t h e e m o t i o n a l c o n s e q u e n c e s h a v e t y p i c a l l y b e e n d e -

s c r i b e d o n l y i n v e r y g e n e r a l t e r m s , s u c h a s t e n s io n , u n p l e a s a n t -

n e s s , p re s s u re , c o n f l i c t , s tr e s s , o r d i s c o m fo r t . A n d y e t i t i s c l e a r

f r o m t h e g e n e r a l p s y c h o lo g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e t h a t d i s t i n c t e m o t i o n a l

c l u s t e rs o r s y n d r o m e s e x i s t. F r o m f a c t o r a n a l ys i s , c l u s t e r a n a l y -

s is , a n d c i r c u l a r s c a l in g , r e s e a r c h e r s h av e r e p o r t e d t h a t d i s s a t i s-

f a c t io n , f e e l in g d i s c o u ra g e d , f e e l in g p i t i fu l , f e e l in g s a d , f e e l in g

g lo o m y , a n d f e e l in g m is e ra b l e t e n d to c lu s t e r ( e .g . , C a t t e l l , 1 9 7 3 ;

D e R i v e r a , 1 9 7 7 ; E w e r t , 1 9 7 0 ; K e m p e r , 1 9 7 8 ; Z u c k e r m a n &

L u b in , 1 9 6 5 ), w h e re a s g u i l t , a n x ie ty , w o r ry , f e a r, f e e l in g t e n s e ,

f e e l in g a l a r m e d , a n d f e e li n g t h r e a t e n e d f o r m a n o t h e r c l u s t e r

(A u s u b e l , 1 9 5 5 ; B ib r in g , 1 9 5 3 ; C a t t e l l , 1 9 7 3 ; D e R iv e ra , 1 9 7 7 ;E w e r t , 1 9 7 0 ; K e m p e r , 1 9 7 8 ; R u s s e l l , 1 9 8 0 ; Z u c k e rm a n &

L u b i n , 1 9 65 ) . T h i s b a s i c d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n d e j e c t i o n - r e l a t e d

e m o t i o n s a n d a g i t a ti o n - r e l at e d e m o t i o n s h a s a l so b e e n m a d e

f r e q u e n t l y i n t h e c l i n i c a l l i t e r a tu r e , n o t o n l y t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e -

t w e e n d e p r e s s i o n a n d a n x i e t y b u t a l s o t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n

d i f f e re n t k in d s o f d e p re s s i o n ( s e e, e . g ., B e c k , 1 9 6 7 , 1 9 8 3 ; C a m -

e ro n , 1 9 6 3 ; W h i t e ; 1 9 6 4 ).

T h u s p r e v i o u s t h e or i e s o f b e l i e f i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y a re l i m i t e d

i n t h a t t h e y d o n o t c o n s i d e r t h a t d i s t i n c t k in d s o f d i s c o m f o r t

m a y b e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h b e l i e f i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y . T h e s e t h e o r i e s ,

t h e n , c a n n o t p r e d i c t which k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t o r e m o t i o n a l

p r o b l e m w i l l b e i n d u c e d b y a p a r t i c u l a r t y p e o f b e l ie f i n c o m -

Page 2: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 2/22

3 2 0 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

pa t ib i li ty . I n a d d i t i on , t he po s s i b i li t y doe s n o t a r i s e t ha t c h r on i c

i nd i v i dua l d i f f e re nc e s i n t ype o f be l i e f i nc om pa t i b i l i t y m a y be

r e l a t e d t o i nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n e m o t i ona l vu l ne r a b i l it y . I n -

de e d , a m ong t he o r i e s c onc e r ne d w i t h s e l f - e va l ua t i on , t he o r i e s

o f vu l ne r a b i l i t y t o ge ne r a l l y pos it i ve o r ne ga t i ve e m ot i o ns a r e

r e la t iv e ly c o m m o n , s u c h a s t h e o r i e s o f a c h i e v e m e n t m o t i v a t i o n

( e.g. , A t k i ns on , 1964 ; Mc C l e l l a nd , 1961) , bu t t he o r i e s o f vu l -

ne r a b i l i t y t o different kinds of negative emotions are r a r e . A nd

t h o s e t h a t h a v e b e e n p r o p o s e d t e n d t o d e s c r ib e e m o t i o n a l v u l -

ne r a b i l i t y in t e r m s o f p r ob l e m a r e a s , s uc h a s i n t e r pe r s ona l de -

pe nd e nc y p r o b l e m s ve r s us a c h i e ve m e n t o r s e l f- e ff i ca c y p r ob -

l e m s , r a t he r t ha n t o r e l a t e e m ot i ona l vu l ne r a b i l i t y t o s pe c i f i c

typ es of inco mp at ib le b e l ie f s (e .g . , Beck, 1 983; Bla t t, D 'A ff i i t t i ,

& Q u i n l a n , 1 9 76 ). A p r i m a r y p u r p o s e o f se l f -d i s c re p a n c y th e -

o r y , t he n , i s t o p r e d i c t w h i c h t yp e s o f i nc om pa t i b l e be l ie f s w i l l

i n d u c e w h i c h k i n d s o f n e ga t iv e e m o t i o n s .

A no t he r pu r pos e i s t o c ons i de r w he t he r t he a va i l a b i l i t y a nd

a c c e s s i b il i ty o f d i f f e r e n t type s o f i nc om pa t i b l e be l i ef s i nduc e

d i f f e re n t k i nds o f d i s c om f or t . I n c om pa t i b l e be l i e f s a r e c ogn i t i ve

c ons t r uc t s , a nd a s s uc h t he y c a n va r y i n bo t h t he i r a va i l a b i l i t y

and the i r accessibil ity . Co ns t ruc t availability r e f e r s t o t he p a r -t i c u l a r k i nds o f c ons t r uc t s t h a t a r e a c t ua l l y p r e s e n t ( i. e. , a va i l -

a b l e) i n m e m o r y t o b e u s e d t o p r o c e s s n e w i n f o r m a t i o n ,

w h e r e a s c o n s t r u c t accessibility r e f e r s t o t he r e a d i ne s s w i t h

w h i c h e a c h s t o r e d c o n s t r u c t i s u s e d i n i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g

( s e e H i gg i ns & B a r gh , 1987 ; H i gg i ns , K i ng , & Ma v i n , 1982 ;

Tu l v i ng & Pe a r l s t one , 1966) . I nd i v i dua l d i f fe r e nc e s c a n a r i s e

e i t he r be c a us e p e op l e ha ve d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f c ons t r uc t s a va i l-

a b l e o r be c a us e t he y ha v e t he s a m e t ype s a va i l a b le bu t t he i r r e l a -

t ive acces sibi l i t ies differ.

C o m m o n t o t h e o r ie s o f b e l i e f i n c o m p a t i b i l i ty i s th e a s s u m p -

t i on t ha t t he i nc om pa t i b i l i t y r e f le c t s a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f p s y -

c ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i on t ha t i n f l ue nc e s i t s pos s e s s o r ' s r e s pons e s .

T h u s , t h e s e t h e o r ie s c o m p a r e p e r s o n s w h o d o o r d o n o t p o s se s st he pa r t i c u l a r be l i e f i nc om pa t i b i l i t y ( e .g ., c o gn i t i ve d i s s ona nc e ,

i m b a l a n c e ) a n d t h u s a r e o r a r e n o t l i ke l y t o r e s p o n d i n t e r m s o f

t he p s yc ho l og i c a l s it ua t i on a s s oc i a t e d w i t h i t . The s e t he o r i e s ,

t he n , c om pa r e on l y w he t he r a pa r t i c u l a r ( ne ga ti ve ) p s yc ho l og i -

c a l s i tua t i on i s o r i s no t a va i l a b le a nd t hus a r e l i m i t e d by c on s i d -

e r i n g o n l y th e a b s e n c e o r p r e s e n c e o f o n e b a s i c t y p e o f p s y c h o -

logica l s i tua t ion.

I n c o n t r a s t , K e l l y ' s (1 9 5 5 ) t h e o r y o f p e r so n a l c o n s t r u c t s p r o -

p o s e d t h a t i n d iv i d u a ls v a r y w i d e l y i n t h e p a r t i c u l a r t y p e s o f p s y -

c ho l og i c a l si t ua t i ons a va i l a b le t o t he m ; t ha t i s, t he r e i s a w i de

v a r i e ty o f p e rs o n a l v i e w p o i n t s o r w a y s o f c o n s t r u i n g t h e w o r l d

( s ee a l s o Le w i n , 1935) . B u t K e l l y d i d n o t r e l a t e d i f f e r e n t type s

o f a v a il a bl e c o n s t r u c t s t o d i ff e r en t t y p e s o f e m o t i o n a l v u l n e r a -b il it y. A n d n e i t h e r K e l l y ' s n o r a n y o t h e r t h e o r y o f b e l i e f i n c o m -

pa t i b i l i t y d i s t i ngu i s he d be t w e e n i nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n c on -

s t r uc t a va i l a b i li t y a nd i nd i v i dua l d i f fe r e nc e s i n c ons t r uc t a c c e s -

s ib i li ty . F ol lowing Kel ly , individ ual d i f ferences in pe rsona l

c o n s t r u c t s h a v e b e e n c o m m o n l y c o n c e i v e d a s d if f er e n c es i n t h e

n a t u r e a n d c o n t e n t o f p e o p l e ' s c o n s t r u c ts , i n t h e v i e w p o i n t p e o -

p l e ha ve o f s oc i al ob j e c t s a nd e ve n t s ( e .g ., M a r kus , 1977 ; Sa r b i n ,

Taf t , & Bailey, 1960; Tagiu r i , 1969) . Su ch di f ferences cons t i tu te

d i f fe r e nc e s i n t he a va i l a b il i ty o f s oc i a l c ons t r uc t s . H i gg i ns e t a l .

( 1982) p r op os e d t h a t t he a c c e s s i b i li t y o f s oc i a l c ons t r uc t s c a n

a l s o d if fe r, m om e n t a r i l y o r c h r on i c a l l y .

C ons i de r a b l e e v i de nc e i nd i c a t e s t ha t va r i ous c on t e x t ua l f a c -

t o r s , s uc h a s p r i o r e xpos u r e t o c ons t r uc t - r e l a t e d s t i m u l i ( i . e . ,

p r i m i n g ) , c a n p r o d u c e t e m p o r a r y i n d iv i d u a l d i ff e re n c e s in t h e

a c c e s s i b i li t y o f ge ne r a l l y a va i la b l e s oc i a l c on s t r uc t s ( e. g. , c o m -

m o n t r a i t c o n s tr u c t s , s u c h a s " s t u b b o r n " o r " h o s t il e " ) a n d t h a t

t he s e d i ff e r e nc e s i n t u r n c a n p r od uc e d i f fe r e nc e s i n s ubs e que n t

r e s pons e s t o s oc i a l s t im u l i ( f o r r e v i e w s , s e e H i gg i ns, B a r gh , &

Lo m ba r d i , 1985 ; H i gg i ns & K i ng , 1981 ; W ye r & Sr u ll , 1981) .

The r e i s a l s o e v i de nc e t ha t c h r on i c i nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n

c ons t r uc t a c c e s s i b i l i t y c a n i n f l ue nc e s oc i a l i n f o r m a t i on p r o -

c e s s i ng ( e. g. , B a r gh & The i n , 1985 ; G o t l i b & Mc C a n n , 1984 ;

H i gg i ns e t a l. , 1982) . A n o t he r i m p or t a n t pu r pos e o f s el f- di s-

c r e p a nc y the o r y , t he n , i s t o i n t r o du c e c o ns t r uc t a c c e s s ib i l it y a s

a p r e d i c t o r o f w b e n a v a il a bl e t y p e s o f i n c o m p a t i b l e b e li e fs ( a n d

w h i c h o f t he a va i l a b l e type s ) w i l l i nduc e d i s c om f or t .

S e l f - D is c r e p a n c y T h e o r y

O ve r t he ye a r s m a ny d i f f e r e n t f a c e ts o f t he s e l f o r s e lf - im a ge s

ha ve be e n i de n t if i e d . O n e f i nds de s c r i p ti ons o f t w o " a c t ua l "

s e l ve s - - t he k i nd o f pe r s on a n i nd i v i dua l be l ie ve s he o r s he a c t u -

a l l y i s a nd t he k i nd o f pe r s on a n i nd i v i dua l be l ie ve s t ha t o t he r st h i nk he o r s he a c t ua l l y is . Th e " o t he r s " c a n be s i gn i f ic a n t o t h -

e r s o r t he ge ne r a l i z e d o t he r ( s e e Er i k s on , 1950 / 1963 ; Le c ky ,

1961 ; Me a d , 1934 ; Wyl i e , 1979) . I n a dd i t i on t o t he s e a c t ua l

se lves , a var ie ty o f d i f ferent pote nt ia l se lves have bee n ident i f i ed

( e.g. , Ma r k us & N ur i u s , 1987) .

J a m e s ( 1 8 9 0 / 1 9 4 8 ) , f o r e x a m p l e , d i s ti n g u i sh e d b e t w e e n t h e

" s p i r i t ua l " s e lf , w h i c h i nc l ude d on e ' s ow n m o r a l s e ns ib i l it y a nd

c ons c i e nc e , a nd t he " s o c i a l " s e lf , w h i c h i nc l ud e d t he s e l f t ha t i s

w o r t h y o f b e i n g a p p r o v e d b y t h e h i g h e s t s o c ia l j u d g e . R o g e r s

( 1961) d i s t i ngu i s he d be t w e e n w ha t o t he r s be l i e ve a pe r s on

s hou l d o r ough t t o be ( i. e. , t he no r m a t i ve s t a nda r d ) a nd a pe r -

s o n ' s o w n b e l i e f a b o u t w h a t h e o r s h e w o u l d " i d e a l ly " l i k e to

b e . E l a b o r a ti n g o n F r e u d ' s ( 1 9 2 3 / 1 9 6 l ) b as i c " s u p e r e g o ' / " e g oi de a l " c o nc e p t i ons , Sc ha f e r ( 1967) a nd P i e r s a nd S i nge r ( 197 l )

d i s ti n g u is h e d b e t w e e n t h e s u p e r e g o r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e m o r a l c o n -

s c i e nc e a nd t he i de a l s e l f r e p r e s e n t i ng hope s a nd goa l s (s e e a l so

C a m e r on , 1963) . C oo l e y ( 1902 / 1964 ) a l s o de s c r i be d a s oc i a l

" i d e a l s e lf " b u i l t u p b y i m a g i n i n g h o w a " b e t t e r I " o f a s p ir a t io n

w o u l d a p p e a r i n t h e m i n d s o f p e r s o n s w e lo o k u p t o . I n h i s

p r o g r a m m a b l e t h e o r y o f c o g n i ti o n a n d a f fe c t, C o l b y ( 1 9 6 8 ) d is -

t i n g u i s h e d b e t w e e n " w i s h - b e l i e f s ; ' s u c h a s " I w a n t t o m a r r y

T o m , " a n d " v a l ue - b e li e fs , " s u c h a s " I o u g h t t o h e l p m y f a th e r ? '

A l t ho ugh a va r i e t y o f a s pe c t s o f t he s e l f ha ve be e n d i s t i n -

gu i s he d a c r os s d i f f e r e n t t he o r i e s ( s e e G r e e nw a l d & Pr a t ka n i s ,

1984) , t he r e ha s be e n no s ys t e m a t i c f r a m e w or k f o r r e ve a l ing t he

i n t e r r e l a t i ons a m ong t he d i f f e r e n t se lf -s ta te s. I n a n a t t e m pt t odo s o , s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y pos t u l a t e s t w o c ogn i t i ve d i m e n-

s i ons unde r l y i ng t he va r i ous s e l f - st a te r e p r e s e n t a t i ons : d om a i ns

o f t he s e l f a nd s t a ndp o i n t s on t he s el f.

D o m a i n s o f t h e S e l f

The r e a r e t h r e e ba s i c dom a i ns o f t he s e lf i ( a ) t he actual self,

w h i c h i s y o u r r e p r e s e n t a t io n o f th e a t t r ib u t e s t h a t s o m e o n e

( your s e l f o r a no t he r ) be l i eve s yo u a c t ua l l y pos s e s s ; ( b ) t he ideals el f, w h i c h i s you r r e p r e s e n t a t i on o f t he a t t r i bu t e s t ha t s om e one

(yo urse l f or ano ther ) wo uld l ike you , idea lly , to possess ( i .e . , a

r e p r e s e n t a t i on o f s om e o ne ' s hope s , a s p i r a t ions , o r w is he s fo r

Page 3: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 3/22

SELF-DISCREPANCY THEORY 321

you) ; a nd ( c ) t he ought s el f, w h i c h i s you r r e p r e s e n t a t i on o f t he

a t t r i bu t e s t ha t s om e one ( yo u r s e l f o r a no t he r ) be l i e ve s you

s hou l d o r oug h t t o pos s e s s ( i. e. , a r e p r e s e n t a t i on o f s om e one ' s

s e ns e o f you r du t y , ob l i ga t ions , o r r e s pons ib i l it i es ) .

T h e d i s t in c t i o n p r o p o s e d h e r e b e t w e e n t h e i d e a l s e lf a n d t h e

oug h t s e l f i s r e f l e c te d i n va r i ous d i s t i nc t i ons s ugge s t e d i n t he

l i t e ra ture (e .g. , Colby, 1968; Jam es , 189 0/19 48; Piers & Singer ,

1971; Rogers , 1961 ; Schafer , 1967). In an ex tens ive di scuss io n

o f t he d i f fe r e nc e be t w e e n m o r a l c ons c i e nc e a nd pe r s ona l i dea ls ,

S e h a f e r (1 9 6 7 ) c o g e n t ly a r g u e d t h a t " i d e a l s a n d s u p e r e g o m o -

r a l it y h a v e b e e n c o n f i n e d t o g e th e r w h e n e a c h s h o u l d l o n g a g o

ha ve ha d a p l a c e o f it s ow n " ( p . 131 ) . A c l a s s i c li t e r a r y e xa m pl e

o f t he d i f f e r e nc e be t w e e n t h e i de a l s e l f a nd t he o ugh t s e l f i s t he

c on f l i c t be t w e e n a he r o ' s " pe r s ona l w i s he s " a nd h i s o r he r

" s e ns e o f du t y . " A c u r r e n t r e a l - w or l d e xa m pl e i s t he c on f l i c t

s o m e w o m e n h a v e b e t w e e n t h e ir o w n w i s h e s t o b e s u c c e ss f u l

p r o f e s s i ona l s a nd s om e o t he r pe r s ons ' be l i e fs t ha t t he y oug h t t o

be hous e w i ve s a nd m o t he r s .

f r om t he v i e w po i n t o f s i gn i f ic a n t o t he r s ( u s ua l ly a c h i l d ' s

m o t he r a nd f a the r ) . Me a d , how e ver , d i d no t m a ke c l e a r t o w ha t

e x t e n t t he d i f f e r e n t s ta ndp o i n t s on s e l f r e m a i n d i s t inc t , a nd , i n

f a c t , s ugge s t e d t ha t i n l a t e r de ve l opm e n t a pe r s o n ' s s e l f - c onc e p t

b e c o m e s b a s e d o n t h e v i e w p o i n t o f " g e n e ra l iz e d o t h e r s " r a t h e r

t h a n p a r t i c u l a r o t h e rs .

I n c o n t r a s t t o t he r e l a t i ve ly r a r e u s e o f t he d i s t i nc t ion be t w e e n

" o w n" ve r s us " o t h e r " s t a ndp o i n t s i n c l a s s if y i ng d i f f e r e n t t ype s

o f s el f -s t a te r e p r e s e n t a t i ons , t he d i s t i nc t i on be t w e e n " ow n" ve r -

s us " o t he r " ha s f r e que n t l y be e n us e d a s a c r i ti c a l f e a t u r e i n va r i -

ous s ys t e m s f o r c l a s s if y i ng e m ot i ons ( e .g ., D a h l , 1979 ; D e R i v -

e r a , 1977 ; F r e ud , 1915 / 19 57 ; K e m pe r , 1978 ; R os e m a n , 1984)

a nd d i s t i ngu i s h i ng a m on g m ot i va t i on s (e .g ., B r e c k l e r & G r e e n -

wald , 1986; Buss , 198 0; Sche ier & Carver , 1983; Snyder , 1979) .

B y in c o r p o r a t i n g t h e d is t i n c ti o n b e t w e e n " o w n " a n d " o t h e r " a s

a f e a t u r e f o r c l as s i f y ing s e lf - st a te r e p r e s e n t a t i ons , w e c a n r e l a t e

d i f f e r e n t e m ot i ona l / m o t i va t i ona l c ond i t i ons t o d i f f e r e n t s e l f -

s ta te con di t ion s (as desc r ibed la ter ).

S t a n d p o i n t s o n t h e S e l f

I t is n o t e n o u g h t o d i s ti n g u is h a m o n g d i f fe r e n t d o m a i n s o f

s e l f i f one w i s he s s ys t e m a t i c a l ly t o r e l a t e s e l f a nd a f fe c t . O ne

m u s t a l s o d i s c ri m i n a t e a m o n g s e lf -s ta te r e p r e s e n t a t io n s b y c o n -

s i de r ing w h os e pe r s pe c t ive on t he s e l f i s i nvo l ve d . Th e r e a r e t w o

ba s i c s t a ndpo i n t s on t he s el f, w he r e a s t a ndp o i n t on t he s e l f i s

d e f in e d a s a p o i n t o f v i e w f r o m w h i c h y o u c a n b e j u d g e d t h a t

ref lec t s a se t of a t t i tudes or va lues ( see Turner , 1956): (a ) yo ur

ow n p e r s o n a l s ta n d p o i n t , a n d ( b ) t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f s o m e s i g-

n i f i c a n t other (e .g . , mother , fa ther , s ib l i r~ spouse , c loses t

f r ie nd ) . A pe r s on c a n ha ve s e lf - s ta t e r e p r e s e n t a t i ons f o r e a c h o f

a nu m be r o f s ign i f i c a n t o t he r s .

Exc e p t f o r t he o r i e s f oc us i ng s o l e l y on t he a c t u a l s e lf , p r e v i ous

t he o r i e s o f t he s e l f ha ve n o t s y s t e m a t i c a l l y c ons i de r e d t hed i f f e r e n t dom a i ns o f s e l f i n t e r m s o f t he d i f f e r e n t s t a ndpo i n t s

on t ho s e dom a i ns ( e .g ., y ou r be l i ef s c on c e r n i ng t he a t t r i bu t e s

yo u w o u l d p e r s ona l l y l ike i de a l ly t o pos s e s s ve r s us you r be l ie f s

c onc e r n i ng t he a t t r i bu t e s t ha t s om e s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r pe r s on ,

s uc h a s y ou r m o t he r , w o u l d l i ke you i de a l l y t o pos s es s) . I n f a c t ,

t h i s f a il u r e t o be e xp l i c it a bou t w h i c h s t a ndp o i n t on t he s e l f i s

i nvo l ve d i n a pa r t i c u l a r s e l f - c onc e p t ha s l e d t o c on f us i on s in t he

l i te r a t u r e . F o r e xa m pl e , a l t houg h m os t m e a s u r e s o f " l ow s e lf -

e s t e e m " h a v e i n v o l v e d c o m p a r i n g a p e r s o n ' s a c t u a l s e l f a n d h i s

o r h e r ow n i d e al s elf , s o m e m e a s u r e s h a v e i n v o l v e d c o m p a r i n g

a pe r s o n ' s a c t ua l s e l f a nd h i s o r he r be l i ef s a bou t others" de a l s

f o r h i m o r he r ( o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o a s t he " s oc i a l i de a l s e l f " i n t he

l it e ra t u re ) , a n d o t h e r m e a s u r e s h a v e b e e n a m b i g u o u s c o n c e r n -i ng w hos e i de a l s t a nd po i n t i s i nvo l ve d ( s e e Wyl i e, 1979).

I n a d d i t i o n t o T u r n e r ' s ( 1 9 5 6 ) w o r k , th e c o n c e p t o f s t a n d -

p o i n t i s f o u n d i n s o m e w r i t in g s o n t h e i m p a c t o f r e f e re n c e

g r o u p s o n s e l f -j u d g m e n t , w h e r e a " n o r m a t i v e r e f e re n c e g r o u p "

i s de s c r i be d a s a s ou r c e o f a p e r s on ' s va l ue s o r pe r s pe c t i ve s (s e e

K e ll ey , 1952) . I n d i s c us s i ng " l e ve l o f a s p i r a t i on , " L e w i n ( 1935)

d i s t i ngu i s he d be t w e e n t he e xpe c t a t i ons o f a du l t a u t ho r i t y f i g-

u r e s t h a t c a n r a i s e a c h i l d ' s l e vel o f a s p i r a ti on ( i. e. , " o t he r "

s t a ndpo i n t s ) a nd a c h i l d ' s ow n hope s a nd pe r s ona l goa l s ( i . e . ,

" o w n " s t a n d p o in t ) . T h e n o t i o n o f s t a n d p o i n t i s a l s o im p l i c i t in

M e a d ' s ( 1 9 3 4 ) d i s c u s si o n o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t b e s elf , w h e r e a

pe r s on ' s ow n r e c o gn i t i on o f s e l f a s d i s t inc t f r o m o t he r s de ve l ops

S e l f - S t a te R e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a n d Th e i r M o t i v a t io n a l

S ign i f i cance

C o m b i n i n g e a c h o f t h e d o m a i n s o f t h e s e l f w i t h e a c h o f t h e

s t a ndp o i n t s on t he s e l f y i e l d s s ix ba s i c t ype s o f s el f -s t a te r e p r e -

s e n t a t i ons : a c t ua l / ow n , a c t ua l / o t he r , i de a l / ow n , i de a l / o t he r ,

oug h t / ow n , a nd ough t / o t he r . Th e f ir st t w o s e l f- s ta t e r e p r e s e n t a -

t i ons ( pa r t i c u l a r l y a c t ua l / ow n) c ons t i t u t e w ha t i s t yp i c a l l y

m e a n t b y a p e r s o n ' s self-concept (see Wylie, 1979). Th e fou r re-

m a i n i ng s e l f- s ta t e r e p r e s e n t a t i ons a r e s e l f -d i r e ct i ve s t a nda r ds o r

a c q u i r e d g u i d e s f o r b e i n g - - i n b r ie f , self-guides (se e H i gg i ns ,

S t r a u m a n , & K l e i n , 1986 , f o r a r e v i e w o f d i f f e r e n t k i nds o f s t a n -

da r ds ) . Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y p r opos e s t ha t pe op l e d i f f e r a s

t o w h i c h s e l f - gu i de t he y a r e e s pe c i a l l y m o t i va t e d t o m e e t . N o t

e v e r y o n e i s e x p e c te d t o p o s s e s s a ll o f t h e s e l f - g u i d e s - - s o m e m a ypos s e s s on l y ough t s e lf - gu ide s , w he r e a s o t he r s m a y pos s e s s on l y

ideal se l f -guides .

S e l f -d i s c re p a n c y t h e o r y p o s t u l a t e s t h a t w e a r e m o t i v a t e d t o

r e a c h a c o n d i t io n w h e r e o u r s e l f -c o n c e p t m a t c h e s o u r p e r s o n -

a l l y r e l e va n t s e lf - gu ide s . The n o t i on t ha t s t a nda r ds , pa r t i c u l a r l y

i de a l a nd oug h t s t a nda r ds , a r e m o t i va t i ng ha s a l ong h i s to r y .

J a m e s ( 1 8 9 0 / 1 9 4 8 ) p o i n t e d o u t t h a t s t a n d a r d s b o t h d i r e c t l y

p r om pt a c t i on a nd , t h r ough t he i r u s e i n s e l f - e va l ua t i on , a r ous e

e m o t i o n s t h a t a r e t h e m s e l v e s m o t i v a ti n g . T h e o r i e s o f le v e l o f

a s p i r a t i on , a l t hou gh f oc us i ng on t he r e l a t i on be t w e e n pe r f o r -

m a nc e a nd s t a nda r d s e t t ing (s e e Fe st inger , 1942 ; Le w i n , 1935 ;

R o t t e r , 1942), ha ve t r a d i t iona l l y a s s u m e d t h a t pe op l e ne e d h i gh

" i de a l " goa l s o r a s p i r a t i on l e ve l s i n o r de r t o m o t i va t e pe r f o r -m a nc e . C on t r o l t he o r y o r c ybe r ne t i c s ( s e e Mi l l e r , G a l a n t e r , &

Pr i b r a m , 1960 ; Wi e ne r , 1948) a s s um e s t ha t pe op l e se l f -r e gu l a te

t h r o u g h a d i s c r e p a n c y - r e d u c i n g n e g a t i v e f e e d b a c k p r o c e s s

w h o s e f u n c t i o n i s t o m i n i m i z e d i f f e re n c e s b e tw e e n o n e s e n s ed

va l ue ( w h i c h c o u l d be a s e l f - c onc e p t ) a nd s om e o t he r r e f e r e nc e

v a l u e o r s t a n d a r d o f c o m p a r i s o n ( w h i c h c o u l d b e a s e lf -g u id e ).

D u v a l a n d W i c k l u n d ' s ( 1 9 7 2 ) t h e o r y o f o b je c t iv e s e l f- a w a re n e ss

a r gue s t ha t i nc r e a s i ng s e l f - f oc us e d a t t e n t i on i nc r e a s e s ou r

a w a r e ne s s o f d i s c r e pa nc i e s be t w e e n ou r r e a l s e l f a nd pe r s ona l

s t a n d a r d s o f c o r r e c tn e s s , s u b s e q u e n t l y i n d u c i n g a m o t i v a t i o n t o

r e du c e t he d i s c r e p a nc y ( s e e a l s o Wi c k l und & G o l l w i t ze r , 1982).

A n d C a r v e r a n d S c h e i e r ' s c o n t r o l - t h e o r y a p p r o a c h t o b e h a v -

Page 4: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 4/22

322 E. TO R Y H I G G I N S

iora l se l f - regula t ion (e .g . , Carv er & Scheier , 1981; Scheier &

C a r ve r , 1982), w h i c h i n t e g r a t e s bo t h o f t he s e l a t t e r t w o pe r s pe c -

f ive s, e m p ha s i z e s t he m o t i va t i ona l s i gn i f i c a nc e o f m a t c h i ng t o

s t a nda r ds .

Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y d i f f e r s f r om t he s e o t he r t he o r i e s i n

p r o p o s i n g t h a t d i ff e re n t t y p e s o f c h r o n i c d i s c re p a n c i e s b e t w e e n

t he s e l f - c onc e p t a nd d i f f e r e n t s e l f - gu i de s , a s w e l l a s be t w e e n

di f ferent se l f-guides , a re associa ted wi th d i f feren t mo t iva t io nal

p r e d i s pos i t ions . I t i s no t pos s i b l e i n t h i s a r t i c l e t o c on s i de r a l l

o f t he pos s i b le t ype s o f s e l f - d is c r e pa nc i e s ( e. g. , i de a l / ow n vs .

ough t / o t he r ) . t A n e s pe c i a ll y i m po r t a n t s e t o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc i e s

i s t he s e t t ha t r e f le c t s a d i s c r e pa nc y b e t w e e n a n i nd i v i dua l ' s s e lf -

c on c e p t a nd h i s o r he r s e lf -gu ide s. Th i s s e t o f s e l f- d i s c r e pa nc ie s

ha s a l s o r e c e i ve d t he m os t e m pi r i c a l a t t e n t i on . I n t h i s a r t i c l e ,

t he r e f o r e , w e f oc us o n t he f o l l ow i ng f ou r t ype s o f d i s c r e pa nc i e s :

a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n , a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o t h e r , a c t u a l / o w n :

o u g h t / o w n , a n d a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r .

Ty p e s o f S el f -D i s c r e pa n c i e s a n d Q u a l i t y o f D i s c o m f o r t

A l t hough s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc i e s m i gh t be c ons i de r e d t o c ons t i -

t u t e a f o r m o f b e l i e f i n c o n si s te n c y , t h e s o u r c e o f d i s c re p a n c y -

i n d u c e d d i s c o m f o r t i s n o t a s s u m e d t o b e s i m p l y a f a i l u r e t o

a c h i e ve i n t e r na l c ons i s t e nc y o r a " good G e s t a l t f i t . " I nde e d , i f

t h i s w a s a s s u m e d t o b e t h e o n l y s o u r c e o f t h e d i s c o m f o r t , t h e n

s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y , l i ke p r e v i ous i nc ons i s t e nc y t he o r i e s ,

w o u l d n o t p r e d i c t t h a t d i ff e re n t t y p e s o f d i sc r e p a n c i es i n d u c e

d i f f e r e n t k i nds o f d i s c om f or t . B u t a s A be l s on ( 19 83) ha s

p o i n t e d o u t w i t h r e s p e c t t o H e i d e r 's ( 1 9 5 8 ) b a l a n c e t h e o r y a n d

Fe s t i nge r 's ( 1957) c ogn i t ive d i s s ona n c e t he o r y , i nc on s i s t e nc i e s

a m o n g c o g n i t i o n s r e f l e c t p e r s o n a l c o s t s a n d p r o b l e m s - - n o t

s i m p l y c ogn i t i ve e xpe r i e nc e s . Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y s ha r e s

t h i s pe r s pe c t ive ( se e a l s o H o l t , 1976 ; K e m pe r , 1978 ; P l u t c h i k ,1962 ; Sc h l e nke r, 1985) by a s s um i n g t ha t e a c h t ype o f d i s c r e p -

a nc y r e f le c t s a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua -

t i on t ha t i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h s pe c i f i c e m ot i ona l / m o t i va t i ona l

p r o b l e m s .

W he n pe op l e be l ie ve t ha t t he y ha ve l o s t o r w i l l ne ve r ob t a i n

s om e de s i r e d goa l , t he y f ee l s a d o r d i s a ppo i n t e d . W he n pe op l e

be l ie ve t ha t s om e t h i ng t e r r i b l e i s go i ng t o ha p pe n t he y f e el a p -

p r e he ns i ve o r t h r e a t e ne d . Mor e ge ne r a l l y , t he r e a r e t w o ba s i c

k i nds o f ne ga ti ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i ons t ha t a r e a s s oc i a t e d

w i t h d i f f e re n t k i nds o f e m ot i ona l s t a t e s (s e e, f o r e xa m pl e , J a -

c obs , 1971 ; La z a r us , 1968 ; Mow r e r , 1960 ; R os e m a n , 1984 ;

Ste in & Jewet t , 1982): (a ) the absence o f positive outcomes (ac-

t ua l o r e xpe c t e d ) , w h i c h i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h de j e c t i on - r e l a t e de m ot i ons ( e .g ., d i s s a t is f a c ti on , d i s a ppo i n t m e n t , s a dne s s ); a nd

( b ) t he presence of negative outcomes ( a c t ua l o r e xpe c t e d ) ,

w h i c h i s a s soc i a t e d w i t h a g i t a t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i on s ( e .g ., f ea r,

t h r e a t , e dg i ne s s ) . I t ha s be e n unde r s t ood f o r m a ny ye a r s t ha t

p s y c h o lo g i c a l s i tu a t i o n s a r e a f u n c t i o n o f b o t h t h e n a t u r e o f

e x t e r na l e ve n t s a nd p e op l e ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i ons o f t hos e e ve n t s ( se e ,

f o r e xa m pl e , A s c h , 1952 ; Le w i n , 1951 ; M e r t on , 1957) , a nd t ha t

t he r e a r e i nd i v i dua l d i f fe r e nc e s i n how e x t e r na l e ve n t s a r e i n t e r -

pre te d ( see , for exam ple , Kel ly , 1955; G. S. Kle in , 1970; Mur -

r a y , 1938 ; s e e a l s o C oyne & La z a r us , 1980) . Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y

t he o r y p r opos e s t ha t i nd i v i dua l d i f fe r e nc e s i n t ype s o f s e lf -d is -

c r e pa nc i e s a r e a s s oc i a t e d w i t h d i f f er e nc e s i n t he s pe c i f i c t ype s

o f ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s it ua t i ons t he i r pos s e s s o r s a r e l ike l y t o

e xpe r i e nc e .

J u s t a s y o u r e m o t i o n a l r e s p o n s e t o y o u r p e r f o r m a n c e is n o t

d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e p r o p e r t ie s o f t h e p e r f o r m a n c e p e r s e , b u t

by i t s s i gn i f i c a nc e o r m e a n i ng t o you , s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y

a s s u m e s t h a t t h e m o t i v a t io n a l o r e m o t i o n a l e f fe c ts o f y o u r a c -

t ua l / o w n a t t r ibu t e s , o r s e lf - c onc e p t , a r e de t e r m i ne d by t he s ig -

n i f i c a nc e t o yo u o f pos se s s i ng s uc h a t t r i bu t e s . A n d t he s ign if i-

c a n c e i s a s s u m e d t o d e p e n d o n t h e relation between the se l f -

c on c e p t a n d y ou r s e l f- gu ide s , w i t h d i f fe r e n t t ype s o f r e l a t ions

r e p r e s e n t i ng d i f f e r e n t type s o f ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i tua t i ons ,

a s de s c r i be d ne x t :

1 . A c t ua l / o w n ve r s us i de a l / ow n : I f a pe r s on pos s e s s es t h is

d i s c r e pa nc y , t he c u r r e n t s t a t e o f h i s o r he r a c t ua l a t t r i bu t e s ,

f r o m t h e p e r s o n ' s o w n s t a n d p o i n t , d o e s n o t m a t c h t h e i d e a l

s t a t e t ha t he o r s he pe r s ona l l y hope s o r w i s he s t o a t t a i n . Th i s

d i s c r e p a nc y t he n r e p r e s e n t s t he ge ne r a l p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i on

o f h e a b s e n c e o f p o si ti v e o u t c o m e s (i .e ., n o n o b t a i n m e n t o f o w n

hope s a nd de s i r e s ) , a nd t hus t he pe r s on i s p r e d i c t e d t o be vu l -

ne r a b l e t o dejection-related emotions.

M or e s pec if ic a ll y, t he pe r s on i s p r e d i c t e d t o be vu l ne r a b l e t odisappointment and dissatisfaction b e c a u s e t h e s e e m o t i o n s a r e

a s s oc i a t e d w i t h pe op l e be l i e v i ng t ha t t he i r pe r s ona l hope s o r

w i s he s ha ve be e n un f u l f i l l e d . Mos t p s yc ho l og i c a l a na l ys e s o f

t he s e e m ot i o ns ha ve de s c r i be d t he m a s be ing a s s oc i a t e d w i t h (a )

t he i nd i v i dua l ' s ow n s t a ndp o i n t o r a ge nc y (e .g ., J a m e s , 1890 /

1948 ; K e m pe r , 1978 ; R os e m a n , 1984 ; Wi e r z b i c ka , 1972) a nd

( b ) a d i s c r e p a nc y f r om h i s o r he r ho pe s , de s ir e s , o r i de a l s (e .g .,

A b e l s o n , 1 9 8 3 ; C a r v e r & G a n e U e n , 1 9 8 3; D u r k h e i m , 1 9 5 1 ; D u -

v a l & W i c k l u n d , 1 9 7 2 ; H o m e y , 1 9 5 0 ; J a m e s , 1 8 9 0 / 1 9 4 8 ;

K e m pe r , 1978 ; R oge r s , 1961 ; W i e r z b i c ka , 1972). The m o t i va -

t i ona l na t u r e o f t h is d i s c r e pa nc y a l s o s ugge st s t ha t i t m i g h t be

a s s oc i a t e d with rustration f r om un f u l f i ll e d de s i r e s.

2 . A c t ua l / ow n ve r s us i de a l / o t he r : I f a pe r s on pos s e s s e s t h i sd i s c r e pa nc y , t he c u r r e n t s t a te o f h i s o r he r a c t ua l a t t ri bu t e s ,

f r o m t h e p e r s o n ' s o w n s t a n d p o i n t , d o e s n o t m a t c h t h e i d e a l

s t a t e t ha t t he pe r s on be l i e ve s s om e s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r pe r s on

hope s o r w i s he s t ha t he o r s he w ou l d a t t a i n . T h i s d i s c r e pa nc y ,

t he n , a g a i n r e p r e s e n t s t he ge ne r a l p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i on o f t he

a bs e nc e o f pos i t i ve ou t c om e s ( i. e. , no nob t a i nm e n t o f a s ign if i-

c a n t o t h e r ' s hope s o r w i she s ) , a nd t hus t he p e r s on i s a ga i n p r e -

d i c t e d t o b e v u l n e r a b l e t o dejection-related emotions.M or e s pec if ic a ll y, be c a u s e pe op l e w ho be l ie ve t ha t t he y ha ve

f a i l e d t o ob t a i n s om e s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r ' s hope s o r w i s he s a r e

l i ke l y t o be l i e ve t ha t t he s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r i s d i s a ppo i n t e d a nd

d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h t he m , s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y p r e d i c t s t ha t

t he y w i l l be vu l ne r a b l e t o shame, embarrassment, o r feelingdowncast, b e c a u s e t h e s e e m o t i o n s a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p e o p l e

be l i e v i ng t ha t t h e y ha ve l o s t s ta nd i ng o r e s t e e m i n t he op i n i on

o f o t h er s . M o s t p s y c h o l o g i ca l a n a l ys e s o f " s h a m e " a n d r e la t e d

e m o t i o n s h a v e d e s c r ib e d t h e m a s b e i n g a s so c i a te d w i t h ( a ) t h e

s t a n d p o in t o r a g e n c y o f o n e o r m o r e other peo ple (e .g . , Ausubel ,

1955 ; C oo l e y , 190 2 / 1964 ; D e R i ve r a , 1977 ; Le w i s , 1979 ; P i e rs

& S inger , 1971 ; Wi e r z b i c ka , 1972) a nd ( b ) a d i s c r e pa nc y f r om

a c h i e ve m e n t o r s t a t u s s t a nda r ds ( e . g . , C oo l e y , 1902 / 1964 ; D e -

~The Self-Discrepancies and Self-Concept Negativity section in-

cludes a brie f description of the kind of discomfort that is associatedwith a discrepancy between two self-guides.

Page 5: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 5/22

SELF-DISCREPANCY THEORY 323

R i ve r a , 1977 ; Er i k s on , 1950 / 196 3 ; K e m pe r , 1978 ; P i e r s &

Singer , 1971) . Som e a na l ys e s de s c r ibe s h a m e a s be i ng a s s oc i a t e d

w i t h d i s c r e p a n c y f r o m b o t h m o r a l a n d n o n m o r a l s t a n d a r d s

( e.g. , A us ube l , 1955 ; Le w i s , 1979) . The m o t i va t i on a l na t u r e o f

t h i s d i s c r e pa nc y s ugge s t s t ha t i t m i gh t a l s o be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h

c on c e r n o ve r lo s i ng the a f f e c t i on o r e s t e e m o f o t he r s .

3 . A c t u a l / ow n ve r s us oug h t / o t he r : I f a pe r s on pos s e s s e s t h i s

d i s c r e pa nc y , t he c u r r e n t s t a t e o f h i s o r he r a c t ua l a t t r ibu t e s ,f r o m t h e p e r s o n ' s o w n s t a n d p o i n t , d o e s n o t m a t c h t h e s t a te t h a t

t he pe r s on be l i e ve s s om e s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r pe r s on c ons i de r s t o

be h i s o r he r du t y o r ob l i ga t i on t o a t ta i n . B e c a us e v i o l a t i on o f

p r e s c r i be d du t i e s a nd ob l i ga t i ons i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h s a nc t i ons

( e.g. , pun i s hm e n t ) , t h i s d i s c r e pa nc y r e p r e s e n t s t he ge ne r a l p s y -

c ho l og i c a l s it ua t i on o f t he p r e s e nc e o f ne ga t ive ou t c om e s ( i. e. ,

e x p e c t a t i o n o f p u n i s h m e n t ) , a n d t h u s t h e p e r s o n i s p re d i c t e d t o

b e v u l n e r a b l e t o agitation-related emotions.

M or e s pe c if ic a ll y, t he pe r s o n i s p r e d i c t e d t o be vu l n e r a b l e t o

fea r and feel ing threatened, b e c a u s e t h e se e m o t i o n s o c c u r w h e n

d a n g e r o r h a r m i s a n t i c ip a t e d o r i m p e n d i n g . M o s t p s y c h o lo g i c a l

a n a ly s e s o f t h es e e m o t i o n s h a v e d e s c r i b e d t h e m a s a s s o c ia t e d

w i t h ( a ) e x t e r na l a ge n t s , i n pa r t i c u l a r t he s t a ndpo i n t o r a ge nc yo f o n e o r m o r e other peop le (e .g . , Ab elson , 1983 ; Ausub el , 195 5;

D e R i ve r a , 1977 ; F r e ud , 1923 / 1961 ; K e m pe r , 1978 ; P i e r s &

Singer , 1971 ; Su l li va n , 1953), a n d ( b ) a d i s c r e p a nc y f r o m n o r m s

or moral s tandards (e .g . , Ausubel , 1955; Dala i , 1979; Freud,

1923/1961; Kemper , 1978; Piers & Singer , 1971; Sul l ivan,

1953) . The m o t i va t i ona l na t u r e o f t h i s d i s c r e pa nc y s ugge s t s

t ha t i t m i g h t a l s o be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h f e e l ings of resentment (i.e.,

r e s e n t m e n t o f t he a n t i c i pa t e d pa i n t o b e i n f li c t e d by o the r s ) .

4 . A c t u a l / ow n ve r s us oug h t / ow n : I f a pe r s on pos s e s s e s t h i s

d i s c r e pa nc y , t he c u r r e n t s t a t e o f h is o r he r a tt r i bu t e s , f r om t he

p e r s o n ' s o w n s t a n d p o i n t , d o e s n o t m a t c h t h e s t at e t h a t t h e p e r -

s on be l i e ve s i t i s h i s o r he r du t y o r ob l i ga t i on t o a t t a i n . Th i s

d i s c r e pa nc y , t he n , a ga i n r e p r e s e n t s t he ge ne r a l p s yc ho l og i c a ls i t ua t i on o f t he p r e s e n c e o f ne ga t i ve ou t c om e s ( i. e. , a r e a d i ne s s

f o r s e l f - pun i s hm e n t ) , a n d t hus s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y p r e d i c t s

t ha t t he p e r s on i s vu l ne r a b l e t o agitation-related emotions.M or e s pe c if ic a ll y, t he pe r s on i s p r e d i c t e d t o be vu l ne r a b l e t o

guilt, self-contempt, and uneasiness, be c a u s e t he s e f e e l i ngs oc -

c u r w he n pe op l e be l ie ve t he y ha ve t ra ns g r e s s e d a pe r s ona l l y a c -

c e p t e d ( i . e . , l e g i t i m a t e ) m or a l s t a nda r d . Mos t p s yc ho l og i c a l

a na l ys e s o f gu i l t ha ve de s c r i be d i t a s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h ( a ) a pe r -

s o n ' s ow n s t a ndp o i n t o r a ge nc y ( e. g. , A us ube l , 1955 ; Er i k s on ,

1 9 5 0 / 1 9 6 3 ; F r e u d , 1 9 2 3 / 1 9 6 1 ; J a m e s , 1 8 9 0 / 1 9 4 8 ; K e m p e r ,

1978 ; Le w i s , 1979 ; P i e rs & S i nge r, 1971) a nd ( b ) a d i s c r e p a nc y

f r om h i s o r he r s e ns e o f m or a l i t y o r j u s t ic e ( e. g. , A us ube l , 1955 ;

E r i k s o n , 1 9 5 0 / 1 9 6 3 ; F r e u d , 1 9 2 3 / 1 9 6 1 ; H o m e y , 1 9 3 9 ; J a m e s ,189 0/19 48; Kem per , 1978; Lew is , 1979; Piers & Singer, 1971) .

T h e m o t i v a t i o n a l n a t u r e o f t h is d i s c r e p a n c y s u g g e st s th a t i t m a y

be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h f e e l i ngs o f m or a l w or t h l e s s ne s s o r w e a kne s s .

The d i s t i nc t i on be t w e e n s ha m e a nd gu i l t s ugge s t e d he r e i s

t h a t s h a m e i n v o lv e s f e el in g t h a t o n e h a s b e e n l o w e r ed i n t h e

e s t e e m o f o t h e r s b e c a u s e o n e h a s d i s a p p o i n t e d t h e m b y f a il in g

t o a c c om pl i s h t he i r hope s a nd w i s he s f o r one , w he r e a s gu i l t i n -

v o l v e s f e el in g t h a t o n e h a s b r o k e n o n e ' s o w n r u l e s c o n c e r n i n g

how on e ough t t o c ond uc t on e ' s li fe . Th i s d i s t i nc t i on i s c ons i s-

t e n t w i t h p r e v i ous d i s c us s i ons o f t he d i f f e r e nc e be t w e e n s ha m e

a nd gu i l t ( e. g. , E r i k s on , 1950 / 19 63 ; J a m e s , 1890 / 1948) . I t i s

a l so e v i d e n t f r o m t h e p r e c e d i n g d e s c r ip t i o n s o f p s y c h o lo g i c a l

a n a l y se s o f t h e se t w o e m o t i o n s t h a t m o s t t h e o r i es c o n s i d e r

s h a m e t o i n v o l v e t h e " o t h e r " s t a n d p o i n t a n d g u i l t t o i n v o l v e

t h e " o w n " s t a n d p o i n t , a n d t h a t m o s t th e o r i e s c o n s i d e r s h a m e

t o i n v o l v e t h e " i d e a l " d o m a i n a n d g u i l t t o i n v o l v e t h e " o u g h t "

dom a i n . N e ve r t he l e s s , t he r e a r e s om e t he o r i e s t ha t c ons i de r

gu i l t t o i nvo l ve t he " o t he r " s t a ndpo i n t a s w e l l ( e . g . , H om e y ,

1939 ; P i e r s & S inger , 197 l ) a nd s ha m e t o i nvo l ve t he " o ug h t "

do m ain as wel l (e .g . , Ausubel , 195 5; Lew is , 1979). Thes e theo-

r i es , t he n , w ou l d p r e d i c t t ha t d i s c r e pa nc i e s i n a dd i t i on t o t hos e

p o s t u l a t e d b y s e l f- d i s cr e p a n c y t h e o r y c a n i n d u c e s h a m e a n d

gu i l t. B u t a l l o f t he t he o r i e s w ou l d a g r e e t ha t t he d i s c r e pa nc i e s

p o s t u l a t e d b y s e l f- d i sc r e p a n c y t h e o r y t o i n d u c e s h a m e a n d g u i l t

s h o u l d d o s o .

Th e d i s t i nc t i on be t w e e n f e a r a nd gu i l t sugge s t e d he r e is tha t

f e a r invo l ve s a n t i c i pa t i ng s a nc t i ons f r om o t he r s f o r ha v i ng v i o -

l a t e d t he i r r u l e s, w he r e a s gu i l t i nvo l ve s c ha s t i si ng one s e l f f o r

h a v i n g b r o k e n o n e ' s o w n r u l e s o f c o n d u c t . T h i s d i s t in c t i o n b e -

t w e e n f e a r a nd gu i l t is c ons i s t e n t w i t h t hos e p r e v i ous l y m a de i n

t he p s yc ho l og i c a l l it e r a t u r e o n e m ot i on s ( e. g. , A us ube l , 1955 ;

Fr e ud , 1923 / 1961 ; K e m pe r , 1978) .

A s I m e n t i one d e a rl ie r, s e l f - d i s c re pa nc y t he o r y do e s no t a s -s u m e t h a t p e o p l e p o ss e s s o n l y o n e o r t h e o t h e r o f t he s e t y p e s

o f s e lf - d i sc r e pa nc i e s. P a r t i c u l a r i nd i v i dua l s c a n pos s e s s non e o f

t h e m , a l l o f t h e m , o r a n y c o m b i n a t io n o f th e m . T h u s , o n e c a n

ha ve no e m ot i ona l vu l ne r a b i l i ty , on l y on e ( i. e. , a pu r e c a s e ) , o r

a n u m b e r o f d i ff e r en t k i n d s o f e m o t i o n a l v u l n e r ab i li ti e s. M o r e -

over , e ve n i f a p e r s on pos s e s s e s m or e t ha n one t ype o f s e lf -d is -

c r e p a n c y , a n d t h u s m o r e t h a n o n e k i n d o f e m o t i o n a l v u l n e r ab i l -

i t y , t he d i s c r e pa nc i e s a r e no t ne c e s s a r i l y e qua l l y a c t i ve a nd

e q u a l l y l i k e l y t o i n d u c e d i s c o m f o r t . I n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e

w h i c h t y p e s o f d i sc r e p a n c i e s a p e r s o n p o s s e ss e s a n d w h i c h a r e

l i ke l y t o be a c t i ve a nd i nduc e t he i r a s s oc i a t e d e m ot i ons a t a ny

p o i n t , w e m u s t c o n s i d e r th e n e x t f e a t u re o f s e l f- d i s cr e p a n c y th e -

o r y : d i s t i ngu i s h i ng be t w e e n t he a va i l a b il i ty a n d t he a c c e s s i b i li t yo f s e l f- d i s c re pa nc i e s .

A v a i l a b i l i t y a n d A c c e s s i b i l it y o f S e l f- D i s c r e p a n c i e s

T h e availability o f a n y p a r t i c u l a r t y p e o f s e l f -d i s c re p a n c y i s

a s s u m e d t o d e p e n d o n t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h e a t t r i b u te s o f t h e

t w o c on f l i c t i ng s e l f- s ta t e r e p r e s e n t a t i ons d i ve r ge f o r t he pe r s on

i n que s t i on . Ea c h a t t r i bu t e i n one o f t he s e l f -s t a te r e p r e s e n t a -

t i ons ( e . g . , a c t ua l / ow n) i s c om pa r e d t o e a c h a t t r i bu t e i n t he

o t he r s e l f - st a te r e p r e s e n t a t i on ( e. g. , i de a l /ow n) . Ea c h pa i r o f a t -

t r i bu t e s i s c od e d a s e i t he r a m a t c h ( i .e ., s y no ny m o us a t t r i bu t e s

o f t h e s a m e o r s i m i l a r d e g re e ) o r a m i s m a t c h ( i. e. , a n t o n y m o u s

a t t r i bu t e s , s uc h a s a c t ua l / ow n : " una t t r a c t i ve " v s . i de a l / ow n :" a t t r a c t i v e " a n d s y n o n y m o u s a t tr i b u t e s o f v e r y d i ff e re n t d e -

g r e e s , s uc h a s a c t ua l / ow n : " s l i gh t l y a t t r a c t i ve " v s . i de a l / ow n :

" e x t r e m e l y a t t r a c t i ve " ) .

T h e g r e a t e r t h e d i ff e r en c e b e tw e e n t h e n u m b e r o f m i s m a t c h e s

a nd t he nu m b e r o f m a t c h e s ( i. e. , t he g r e a t e r the d i ve r ge nc e o f

a t t r i bu t e s be t w e e n t he t w o s e l f - s t a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i ons ) , t he

g r e a t e r i s t he m a gn i t u de o f t ha t t yp e o f s e l f - d is c r e pa nc y a va i l-

a b l e t o t h e s u b j e ct . A n d t h e g r e a t e r th e m a g n i t u d e o f a p a r t i c u -

l a r t ype o f d is c r e pa nc y , t he g r e a t e r w i l l be t he in tensi ty o f t h e

k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c i a te d w i t h t h e d i s c r e p a n c y w h e n i t is

a c t i va te d . T he l i ke l i hood t ha t a n a va i l ab l e s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y w il l

be ac t iva ted in tu rn dep end s on i t s access ibi li ty .

Page 6: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 6/22

3 2 4 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

T h e accessibility of a n a va i l a b l e s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y is a s s um e d

t o de pe nd on t he s a m e f a c t o r s t ha t de t e r m i ne t he a c c e s s i b i l i t y

o f a ny s t o r e d c o ns t r uc t ( f o r r e v ie w s , s e e H i gg i ns & K i ng , 1981 ;

H i gg i ns , B a r gh , & Lom ba r d i , 1985 ; W ye r & Sr u l l , 1981). O ne

f a c t o r is how r e c e n t l y t he c ons t r u c t ha s be e n a c t i va t e d . Fo r e x -

a m p l e , i t h a s b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t e x p o s u r e t o t r a i t l a b el s i n

a p r i o r " u n r e l a t e d " t a s k (a priming m a ni pu l a t i on ) i nc r e a s e s t he

l i ke l ihood t h a t s ub j e c t s w i l l s ubs e que n t l y i n t e r p r e t a t a r ge t pe r -

s o n ' s a m b i g u o u s b e h a v i o r s in t e r m s o f th e p a r t i c u l a r c o n s t r u c t s

a c t i va t e d by t he l a be l s ( e . g . , H i gg i ns , R ho l e s , & J one s , 1977 ;

Sr u l l & Wye r, 1979 ; s e e a ls o B a r gh & P i e t r om ona c o , 1982) . A s

A b e l s o n ( 1 9 5 9 ) p o i n t e d o u t , t h e r e a r e n u m e r o u s i n c o n s i s t e n -

c i es i n a n y o n e ' s b e l ie f s y s t e m t h a t m a y l ie d o r m a n t , a n d i t is

p l a us i b l e t o a s s um e t ha t p r e s s u r e ope r a t e s on l y w he n t he i s s ue

i s sa l i e n t (e .g ., w he n t he s e l f - d i sc r e pa nc y ha s be e n c on t e x t u a l l y

p r i m e d ) .

I t h a s a ls o b e e n s h o w n t h a t t h e m o r e f r e q u e n t l y a c o n s t r u c t

i s a c t i va te d , t he m o r e l i ke l y it w i ll be u s e d s ubs e qu e n t l y t o i n t e r -

p r e t s oc i a l e ve n t s ( e . g . , H i gg i ns , B a r gh , & Lom ba r d i , 1985 ;

Sr u l l & Wye r, 1979 , 1980) . The i n f l ue nc e o f f r e que nc y o f a c t iva -

t i on i s a ls o r e f l e c t e d i n t he e f f e ct s o f c h r o n i c i nd i v i dua l d i ff e r -e nc e s i n c ons t r uc t a c c e s s i b i l i t y on s oc i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i on a nd

m e m or y ( e .g ., B a r gh & The i n , 1985 ; H i gg i ns e t al ., 1982) .

Th e a c c e ss ib il it y, o r l i ke l i hood o f a c ti va t i on , o f a s t o r e d c on -

s t r u c t a ls o d e p e n d s o n t h e r e l a t io n b e t w e e n i t s " m e a n i n g " a n d

t he p r ope r t i e s o f t he s t im u l us e ve n t . A s t o r e d c o ns t r u c t w i ll no t

be u s e d t o i n t e r p r e t a n e ve n t un l e s s i t i s a pp l i c a b l e t o t he e v e n t

( s e e H i gg i ns & B a r gh , 1987 ; H i gg i ns e t a l. , 1977). T hu s t he ne g -

a t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i on r e p r e s e n t e d i n a s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y

( i. e. , t he " m e a n i ng " o f t he d i s c r e pa nc y ) w i ll no t be a c t i va t e d by

a n u n a m b i g u o u s l y p o s i t iv e e v e n t. A n d a s e l f- d i s cr e p a n c y n e e d

no t ha ve h i gh p r i o r a c c e s s i b i l it y i n o r de r t o be u s e d t o i n t e r p r e t

a ne ga t i ve e ve n t i f t he e ve n t i n s t a n t i a t e s t he d i s c r e pa nc y ' s

" m e a n i ng " c l e a r l y e nou gh . I n s u m , t he a c c e s s i b i l i ty o f a s e lf -d i s c r e p a n c y i s d e t e r m i n e d b y i t s recency of activation, its fre-quen cy of activation, and its applicability t o t he s t i m u l us e ve n t .

I s h o u l d n o t e t h a t s e l f- d i sc r e p a n c y t h e o r y d o e s n o t a s s u m e

t ha t pe op l e a r e a w a r e o f e it he r t he a va i l a b i l it y o r t he a c c e s s ib i l -

i ty of the i r se l f -d i screpancies . I t i s c lear tha t the a vai labi l i ty and

a c c e s s ib i l it y o f s t o r e d s oc i a l c ons t r u c t s c a n i n f l ue nc e s oc i a l i n -

f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s in g a u t o m a t i c a l l y a n d w i t h o u t a w a r e n es s ( s e e

B a r gh , 1984 ; B a r gh , B on d , Lom ba r d i , & To t a , 1986 ; B a r gh &

Pi e t r om ona c o , 1982 ; H i gg i ns & B a r gh , 1987 ; H i gg i ns & K i ng ,

1981 ; K el ly , 1955 ) . Thu s , s e l f - d i sc r e pa nc y t he o r y a s s u m e s t ha t

t he a va i l a b l e a nd a c c e s s i b l e ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i ons

e m b o d i e d i n o n e ' s s e l f - d i s c r e p a n c i e s c a n b e u s e d t o a s s i g n

m e a n i n g t o e v e n t s w i t h o u t o n e ' s b e i n g a w a r e o f e it h e r th e d i s -c r e p a n c i e s o r t h e ir i m p a c t o n p r o c es s in g . T h e m e a s u r e o f s elf -

d i s c r e pa nc i e s r e qu i r e s on l y t ha t one be a b l e t o r e t r i e ve a t t r i -

bu t e s o f s pe c i fi c se l f -s t a te r e p r e s e n t a t i ons w h e n a s ke d t o d o s o .

I t doe s not r e q u i r e t h a t o n e b e a w a r e o f t h e r e l a ti o n s a m o n g

t he s e a t t r i bu t e s o r o f t he i r s i gn if i c anc e .

General Hypothesis o f Se l f -Discrepancy T heory

A n u m b e r o f im p l i c a t io n s f o l lo w f r o m t h e s e t o f a s s u m p t i o n s

a bove :

1 . I nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n w h i c h t yp e s o f s e l f - d is c r e pa nc i e s

a r e a va i l a b l e w i l l be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h i nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n

t he k i nds o f d i s c om f or t t ha t pe op l e w i l l su f f e r ( i. e. , i nd i v i dua l

d i f f e re nc e s i n e m ot i on a l vu l ne r a b i l it y ) .

2 . Th e g r e a t e r t he m a g n i t ude o f a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f s el f- di s-

c r e pa nc y , t he m or e i n t e ns e l y i ts pos s e s s o r w i ll s u f fe r the k i nd o f

d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c ia t e d w i t h t h a t t y p e o f d is c r e p an c y .

3 . I f a pe r s on pos s e s s e s m or e t ha n one t ype o f s e l f -d i s c r ep -

a nc y ( i. e. , ha s m or e t h a n one t yp e o f s e l f - d i s c re pa nc y a va i la b l e ),

he o r s he i s l i kel y t o s u f fe r m os t i n t e ns e l y t he k i nd o f d i s c om f or t

a s s o c i at e d w i t h w h i c h e v e r t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y h a s t h e g r e a t e st

m a g n i t u d e .

4 . I nd i v i dua l d i ff e r e nc e s i n w h i c h t ype o f s e l f - d i sc r e pa nc y i s

t e m p o r a r i l y m o s t a c c e s si b le w i ll b e a s s o c i a te d w i t h m o m e n t a r y

i nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n t he k i nd s o f d i s c om f or t t ha t pe op l e w i l l

suf fer ( i.e ., in dividu al d i f ferences in emo t ion al epi sodes) .

5 . T he g r e a t e r t he a c c e s s i b i l it y o f a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f se lf -

d i s c r e pa nc y , t he g r e a t e r t he l i ke l i hood t ha t i t s pos s e s s o r w i l l

s u f fe r th e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c i a te d w i t h t h a t t y p e o f d is -

c r e p a n c y .

6 . I f a pe r s on pos s e s se s m or e t ha n one t ype o f s e l f- d i s cr e p -

a nc y , he o r s he is m os t l i ke l y t o s u f f e r m o m e n t a r i l y t he k i nd o f

d i s c o m f o r t a s so c i a te d w i t h w h i c h e v e r t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y h a sthe grea tes t t emporary access ibi l i ty .

T h e s e i m p l i c a ti o n s o f s e lf - d is c r e p an c y t h e o r y a r e c a p t u r e d i n

t he f o l l ow i ng ge ne r a l hypo t he s i s : The g r e a t e r t he m a gn i t ud e a nd

a c c e s s i b i li t y o f a pa r t i c u l a r t y pe o f s e lf - d i s c r e pa nc y pos s e s s e d

by a n i nd i v i dua l , t h e m o r e t he i nd i v i dua l w i l l s u f f er t he k i nd o f

d i s c o m f o r t a s soc i a t e d w i t h t ha t t ype o f s e l f- d i s cr e pa nc y .

E v i d e n c e f o r S e l f - D i sc r e p a n c y T h e o r y

I n t h i s s e c t i on I w i l l r e v i e w e v i de nc e f o r t he p r e c e d i ng hy -

po t he s i s o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y . F i r s t I w i ll d i s c us s obs e r va -

t i o n a l a n d c o r r e l a ti o n a l e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i n g t h e h y p o t h e s i z e d

d i s t i nc t a s s oc i a t i ons be t w e e n pa r t i c u l a r t ype s o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa n -c i e s a nd pa r t i c u l a r k i nds o f d i s c om f or t . N e x t I w il l p r e s e n t e x -

p e r i m e n t a l e v i d e n c e f o r th e c a u s a l a s s u m p t i o n s i n t h e t h e o ry .

Th e n I w il l de s c r i be s om e a dd i t i ona l e v i de nc e o f t he r e l a t ions

be t w e e n s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc i e s a nd m or e ge ne r a l e m o t i ona l p r ob -

l e m s ( i . e . , de j e c t e d de p r e s s i on vs . a g i t a t e d de p r e s s i on o r

a nx i e t y ) .

E v ide nc e o f D i s t i nc t Se l f - D i sc re panc y - Di sc omfor t

Assoc iat ions

A l t ho ugh t he p r e v i o us l i te r a t u r e r e l a t i ng s e l f a nd a f f e ct doe s

no t c on t a i n s t ud i e s t ha t d i r e c t l y t e s te d s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y the o r y ,

t he r e i s s om e e v i de nc e o f d i s ti nc t r e l a t i ons be t w e e n p a r t i c u l a rt ype s o f d i s c r e pa n t s el f- be li ef s a nd pa r t i c u l a r k i nds o f d i s c om -

f o r t t ha t i s r e l e va n t t o , a nd ge ne r a l l y s uppor t s , t he p r opos e d

hypo t he s i s .

J a m e s ( 1 8 9 0 / 1 9 4 8 ) s t a te d t h a t w h e n s u c c e ss d o es n o t m a t c h

o u r p r e t e n s i o n s o r a s p i r a t i o n s ( a n a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s -

c r e pa nc y ) , w e w i l l f e e l d i s a ppo i n t e d . D uva l a nd Wi c k l und

( 1 9 7 2 ) a ls o r e p o r t e d t h a t w h e n w e f o c u s o n o u r o w n " r e a l s elf :

i de a l s e l f " d i s c r e pa nc y , a s a c ons e q ue nc e o f be i ng ob j e c t ive l y

s e l f - a w a r e , w e be c om e i nc r e a s i ng l y d i s s a t i s f i e d a nd d i s a p -

po i n t e d . V a r i ous o t he r r e s e a r c he r s ha ve obs e r ve d t ha t a f e l t d i s -

c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n w h a t o n e a c t u a l l y is a n d w h a t o n e w a n t s o r

hope s t o be , onc e a ga i n r e f l e c ti ng a n a c t u a l / ow n : i de a l / ow n d i s -

Page 7: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 7/22

SELF-D I SCR EPA N C Y TH EO R Y 32 5

c r e pa nc y , l e a ds t o d i s a ppo i n t m e n t a nd d i s s a t i s f a c t i on ( e . g . ,

D u r khe i m , 1951 ; Fe n i c he l, 1945 ; J a c ob s on , 1946 ; R oge r s ,

1961).

C oo l e y ( 1902 / 196 4) s t a t e d t h a t i f pe op l e ha ve a s e ns e o f t he

d i f f e re nc e be t w e e n t he i r c u r r e n t s e l f a nd t he i r s oc i a l i de a l se l f

( a n a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y ), t h e y a r e p l u n g e d i n t o

f e e li ngs o f s ha m e o r unw or t h i ne s s . S i m i l ar l y , J a m e s ( 18 90 /

1948) s a i d t ha t w he n s e l f - e s t i m a t i on doe s no t m a t c h t he s oc i a li de a l se lf , a pe r s on e xpe r i e nc e s s h a m e . P i e r s a nd S i nge r ( 1971)

o b s e r v e d t h a t w h e n p e o p l e fa il t o r e a c h t h e g o a l s a n d h o p e s f o r

t he m t ha t a r e a s s oc i a t e d w i t h t he i r pa r e n t s ( i . e . , t he i r i de a l /

o t he r ) , t he y f e el s ha m e , w h i c h c a n i nc l ud e a n e x pe c t a t i on o f lo s s

o f love. A s d i s c us s e d e a r li er , a n a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l / o t h e r d i s c r e p -

a nc y r e f le c t s ou r be l i e f t ha t w e ha ve f a i l e d t o ob t a i n s om e s ig -

n i f i c a n t o t he r ' s goa l s f o r u s , w h i c h i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h be l i e v i ng

t ha t t he s i gn i f i c an t o t he r i s d i s a ppo i n t e d i n o r d i s sa t is f ie d w i t h

us . I t ha s f r e que n t l y be e n no t e d t ha t s h a m e a s s oc i a t e d w i t h f a il -

u r e t o m e e t a s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r ' s goa l s o r w is he s i nvo l ve s l o s s o f

f a c e a n d p r e s u m e d e x p o s u r e t o t h e d i s s a ti s fa c t io n o f o t h e r s

(e .g . , Ausub el , 1955; M ead, 1934; To mp kins , 1984).

A d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n o n e ' s a c tu a l b e h a v i o r a n d t h e b e h a v -i o r p r e s c r i b e d b y s i g ni f ic a n t o t h e rs ( a n a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r

d i s c r e p a n c y ) h a s o f t e n b e e n s a i d t o c r e a t e f e a r a n d a n x i e t y b e -

c a us e o f a pp r e he n s i on ove r a n t i c i pa t e d s a nc t i ons o r ne ga t i ve r e -

s pons e s by o t he r s ( e . g . , F r e ud , 1923 / 1961 ; Sc he i e r & C a r ve r ,

1977 ; Su ll i van , 1953) . I n c on t r a s t , t r a ns g r e s s i on o f on e ' s ow n

i n t e rn a l i z ed m o r a l a n d r e li g io u s s t a n d a r d s ( a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t /

ow n d i s c r e pa nc y ) ha s be e n a s s oc i a t e d w i t h gu i l t a nd s e l f - c r i t i -

c i sm (e .g . , Ausub el , 1955; Bibr ing~ 1953; Freud, 192 3/19 61;

J a m e s , 1890 / 19 48 ; P i e r s & S inger , 1971 ; Tom pk i ns , 1984) .

W e in er , R u s s e ll , a n d L e r m a n ( 1 9 7 9 ) r e p o r t e d t h a t w h e n p e o p l e

a t t r i bu t e t he i r f a i l u r e s t o a l a c k o f s u ff i c ie n t e f f o r t on t he i r pa r t

( i. e. , no t t r y i ng a s ha r d a s t he y kn ow t he y s hou l d ha ve ) , w h i c h

p e r h a p s r e f l e c t s a n a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y , t h e yfeel guil ty.

The r e i s a l s o s om e e v i de nc e o f d i s t i nc t r e l a t i ons d i s c e r n i b l e

i n p r e v i ous s e l f -c on f l ic t t he o r i e s o f de p r e s s ion . A r e v i e w o f t he s e

t he o r i e s r e ve a l s a ba s i c s i m i l a r it y : Ea c h t he o r y p r opo s e s t ha t t he

e m o t i o n s a s s o c i at e d w i t h d e p r e s s io n a r is e f r o m a d i s c r e p a n c y

b e t w e e n a p e r s o n ' s p e rc e i v e d s e l f a n d s o m e s t a n d a r d . I t h a s n o t

be e n no t e d , how e ve r , t ha t t he r e a r e t w o d i f f e r e n t s e l f - c on f l i c t

t h e o r ie s o f d e p r e s s io n a s a f u n c t i o n o f th e t y p e o f s t a n d a r d t h a t

i s e m p h a s i z e d . O n e s e t o f t h e o ri e s , w h i c h c o u l d b e d e s c r i b e d

a s t h e " a c t u a l : o u g h t " t h e o r ie s , e m p h a s i z e s t h e o u g h t s t a n d a r d .

T h e s e t h e o r i e s p r o p o s e t h a t d e p r e s s i o n i s c a u s e d b y d i s c r e p a n c y

b e t w e e n a p e r s o n ' s a c t u a l s e lf a n d h i s o r h e r s u p e r e g o o r m o r a l

c ons c i e n c e ( e. g. , C a m e r on , 1963 ; Fe n i c he l , 1945 ; F r e ud , 1917 /1959 , 1923 / 196 1 ; R a d o , 1 927 / 1956) . F r e ud , f o r e xa m pl e , s ug -

ge s t e d tha t d e p r e s s i on r e s u l t s f r om a f e l t d i s pa r i t y be t w e e n t he

e g o a s o b j e c t a n d t h e s u p e r e g o o r c o n s c i e n c e . A n o t h e r s e t o f

t he o r i e s , w h i c h c ou l d be de s c r i be d a s t he " a c t ua l : i de a l " t he o -

r ie s , e m pha s i z e s t he i de a l s ta nda r d . The s e t he o r i e s p r opo s e t ha t

d e p r e s si o n i s c a u s e d b y a d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n a p e r s o n ' s a c t u a l

s e l f a nd h i s o r he r goa l s , a s p i r a ti ons , o r i de a l s e l f ( e . g . , B i b r i ng ,

1953 ; J a c ob s on , 1946 ; Sa nd i e r & J o ff e , 1965). B i b r ing , f o r e x -

a m p l e , s ugge s t e d t ha t de p r e s s i on r e s u l t s f r om a n i nne r - s ys t e m i c

c onf l i c t i nvo l v i ng a d i s c r e pa nc y be t w e e n a pe r s on ' s a c t ua l s e l f

a nd h i s o r he r goa l s a nd a s p i r a t ions .

A c c o r d i ng t o s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y , t he s e t w o d i f f e r e n t

t ype s o f se l f -c on f l ic t s o r d i s c r e pa nc i e s s hou l d i nd uc e d i f f e re n t

k i n d s o f d e p r e s s i o n - - a n a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y s h o u l d i n -

duc e a g i t a t e d de p r e s s i on , w he r e a s a n a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y

s hou l d i nduc e de j e c t e d de p r e s s i on . I nde e d , t he de p r e s s i ve

s y m p t o m s e m p h a s i z e d b y t h e " a c t u a l : o u g h t " c o n f li c t t h e o ri s ts

ha ve be e n gu i l t, a pp r e he ns i on , a nx i e t y , a nd f e a r ( i. e. , a g i t a t e d

d e p r e ss i o n ), w h e r e a s t h e d e p r e ss i ve s y m p t o m s e m p h a s i z e d b y

t he " a c t ua l : i de a l " c on f l i c t t he o r i s t s ha ve be e n f e e li ngs o f f a i lu r e ,

d i s a ppo i n t m e n t , de va l ua t i on , a nd s ha m e ( i . e . , de j e c t e d de p r e s -

s i on ). I t i s a l s o i n t e r e s ti ng i n t h i s r e g a r d t ha t pe op l e w ho d e ve l op

i nvo l u t i on a l m e l a nc ho l i a t e nd t o b e h i gh l y m or a l i s t i c (i .e ., h i gh

oug h t s t a nda r d ) , a nd t he i r i ll ne ss u s ua l l y i nvo l ve s a g i ta t e d de -

press ion (Mendels , 1970) .

W i t h r e g a r d t o s t a n d p o i n t , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f d is t in g u i s h in g

b e t w e e n p e r f o r m a n c e : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c i e s a n d p e r f o r -

m a n c e : o n g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c ie s i s s u g ge s te d i n t h e m o r a l s o -

c i a l i z a t i on f i nd ings o f H of f m a n ( e. g. , 1971 , 1975). I n one s t ud y

i n v o l v i n g e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l ch i l d re n a n d a d u l t s , H o f f m a n

( 1975) f ou nd t ha t m or a l t r a ns g r e s s i on w a s a s s oc i a te d w i t h gu i l t

f o r fe m a l e s b u t w i t h f e a r a n d a n t i c i p a t i o n o f p u n i s h m e n t f o r

m a l e s ( e s pe c i a ll y f o r t he a du l t s ) . H of f m a n s ugge s t e d t ha t m a l e sm a y r e p r e s e n t m o r a l s t a n d a r d s m o s t l y i n t e r m s o f e x t e rn a l

s a nc t i ons , w he r e a s f e m a l e s m a y i n t e r na l iz e m o r a l s t a nda r ds . I f

s o , t he n t he r e s u l t s o f h i s s t udy a r e c on s i s t e n t w i t h t he d i s t i nc -

t i o n b e t w e e n t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y ( f o r f e -

m a l e s ) a n d t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y ( fo r m a l e s)

p r o p o s e d i n t h e m o d e l . M o r e o v er , fe a r a n d a n t i c i p a ti o n o f p u n -

i s hm e n t w e r e unc o r r e l a t e d w i t h e xp r e s s i ons o f gu i lt , c ons i s t e n t

w i t h t h e m o d e l ' s p r o p o s a l t h a t t h e se e m o t i o n s h a v e d i st i n ct u n -

de r l y i ng c a us e s . I n a no t he r s t udy , H of f m a n ( 1971) a l s o f ound

t h a t e m p h a s i s o n a n o u g h t / o t h e r s t a n d a r d ( a s m e a s u r e d b y

i d e n ti f ic a t io n w i t h o n e ' s p a r e n t s ' m o r a l s t a n d a rd s ) w a s n o t a s -

s oc i a t e d w i t h gu i l t o r m or a l c on f e s s i on bu t w a s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h

c o n f o r m i t y t o r u l e s ( p re s u m a b l y b e c a u s e o f a n ti c i p a ti o n o fp u n i s h m e n t ) .

I n a d i r e c t t e s t o f s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y the o r y , I a nd m y c o l l e a gue s

( H i gg i ns , K l e i n , & S t r a u m a n , 1985) ha d un de r g r a d ua t e s f il l ou t

a que s t i onna i r e de s i gne d t o m e a s u r e t he i r s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc i e s

( t he Se l ve s que s t i onn a i r e ) a s w e l l a s a va r i e t y o f que s t i onn a i r e s

t h a t m e a s u r e d d i f f e re n t k i n d s o f c h r o n i c d i s c o m f o r t a n d e m o -

t i o n a l s y m p t o m s . T h e S e l v es q u e s t io n n a i r e a s k e d r e s p o n d e n t s

t o l i st u p t o 1 0 t r a it s o r a t t ri b u t e s f o r e a c h o f a n u m b e r o f

di f ferent se lf -s tates. I t was adm inis te red in two sec t ions , the f i r s t

i n v o l v i n g t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s o w n s t a n d p o i n t a n d t h e s e c o n d i n -

vo l v i ng the s t a nd po i n t s o f t he r e s p ond e n t ' s f at he r, m o t he r , a nd

c l os e s t f r i end . I n t he b e g i nn i n g o f t he que s t i on na i r e t he a c t ua l ,

idea l , and ought se l f - s ta tes were def ined (as descr ibed ear l i e r ) .E a c h p a g e o f h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n c e r n e d a p a r t i c u la r s e l f- st at e:

f o r e xa m pl e , " P l e a s e l is t t he a t t r i bu t e s o f t he t ype o f pe r s on you

t h i n k y o u actually are" or " P l e a s e l is t the a t t r i bu t e s o f t he t ype

o f p e r so n y o u r Mother be l ie ve s yo u should o r o u g h t t o b e ? ' B y

ha v i ng s ub j e c t s s pon t a n e ous l y l i s t t he a t t r i bu t e s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h

e a c h o f t he i r s e l f- s ta t e s (a s oppos e d t o a c o ns t r a i ne d , c he c k l i s t

p r oc e dur e ) , w e i nc r e a s e d t he l i ke l i hood t ha t t he a t t r i bu t e s ob -

t a i n e d w o u l d b e i m p o r t a n t a n d a c c e s s ib l e to e a c h s u b j e c t.

Th e s ub j e c t s w e r e a l s o i n s t r uc t e d t o r a t e t he ove r a l l e x t e n t t o

w h i c h a pa r t i c u l a r s t a ndp o i n t ( s el f, m o t he r , e t c . ) on a pa r t i c u l a r

dom a i n o f s e l f ( a c t ua l , i de a l, ough t ) w a s r e le va n t o r m e a n i n g f u l

t o t h e m a s a s o u r c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n . T h i s w a s d o n e b e c a u s e s elf -

Page 8: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 8/22

32 6 E . TO R Y H I G G I N S

d i s c r e p a n c y t h e o r y a s s u m e s t h a t o n l y relevant standpoints are

m ot i va t i ona l l y o r e m o t i ona l l y s i gn if i c an t . I nde e d , a s t u dy by R .

K l e i n a n d H i g g i n s ( 1 9 8 4 ) f o u n d p r e l i m i n a r y s u p p o r t f o r t h i s

a s s um pt i on . U nde r g r a dua t e s f i l l e d ou t a que s t i onna i r e c on t a i n -

i n g s o m e q u e s t i o n s t h a t m e a s u r e d t h e r e l e v a n c e o f th e s t a n d -

po i n t o f d i f f e r e n t s ign i f i c a n t o t he r s de s i gna t e d by t he i r r o l e r e l a -

t ionship to the subjec t (e .g . , mother , fa ther , bes t f r i end) wi th

r e s pe c t t o d i f fe r e n t dom a i ns ( e .g ., f o r t he oug h t dom a i n ,

" W h o s e v i e w p o i nt o n t h e t y p e o f p e r s o n y o u s h o u l d o r o u g h t

t o b e m a t t e r s m o s t t o y o u ? " ; " W h o s e v i e w p o i n t m a t t e r s l e a s t

t o you? " ) . A f e w w e e ks la te r, a s pa r t o f a d i f f e r e n t s t udy , the

s ub j e c t s w e r e a s ke d t o i m a g i ne d i f f e r e n t type s o f pe r f o r m a nc e :

gu i de d i s c r e pa nc i e s i nv o l v i ng t he s t a nd po i n t s o f d i f f e re n t s ig -

n i f ic a n t o th e r s, a n d t h e y r e p o r t e d h o w t h e e v e n t w o u l d m a k e

t h e m f ee l. A s e x p e c t ed , t h e m a g n i t u d e o f d i s c o m f o r t r e p o r t e d

w a s s ign i f ic a n t ly g r e a t e r ( p < . 05 ) w he n t he " o t h e r " s t a ndp o i n t

w a s t h e m o s t r e l e v a n t t o t h e d o m a i n t h a n w h e n i t w a s t h e l ea s t

r e l e va n t .

Th i s e f f e c t o f s t a ndpo i n t r e l e va nc e i s c ons i s t e n t w i t h N e w -

c o m b ' s ( 1 9 6 8 ) c o n c l u s i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e d i s c o m f o r t a s s o ci a te d

wi th incompat ib le be l ie f s :

An individual's m ost salient concern, in dealing with such mu ltiplecognitions, is the suitability of he other person as a source of nfor-mation, or support , o r of influence concerning the object cngnizedby each of them. Insofar as the other person is devalued in thiscontext, h e will be indifferent to the latter's cognitions. (p. 50)

N e w c om b ' s r e s e a r c h s ugge s ts t ha t s t a ndp o i n t r e l e va nc e i s c r i t i-

c a l f o r w he t he r s e l f- s ta t e i nc om p a t i b i l i t y w i ll i nduc e d i s c om f or t

( see a l so Rogers , 19 61; Rose nberg , 1979) .

T h u s i n t h e H i g g in s , K l ei n , a n d S t r a u m a n ( 1 9 8 5 ) s tu d y , s u b -

j e c t s ' r a t i ngs o f t he r e l e va nc e o f the d i f f e re n t s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r s

w e r e u s ed t o s e l ec t f o r e a c h d o m a i n t h a t " o t h e r " w h o w a s m o s t

r e l e va n t t o t h e s ub j e c t . F ou r d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f s e lf - d i s c re pa nc i e sw e r e t h e n c a l c u la t e d : a c t u a l /o w n : i d e a l / o w n ; a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l /

o t h e r , a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r , a n d a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n .

F i r s t, f o r e a c h s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he a t t r i bu t e s i n o ne s e l f- s ta t e

w e r e c om pa r e d t o t he a t t r i bu t e s i n t he o t he r s e l f- s ta t e t o de te r -

m i n e w h i c h a t t r i b u te s m a t c h e d ( i .e. , both self-states l isted the

s a m e a t t r i b u te ; s y n o n y m s w e re c o n s i d e r e d t o b e t h e s a m e a t t r i-

b u t e ) a n d w h i c h a t t r i b u t e s m i s m a t c h e d ( i .e . , an a t t r ibute in one

s e l f- s ta t e w a s a n a n t o ny m o f a n a t t r i bu t e i n t he o t he r s el f- st at e) .

Se c ond , t he s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y s c o r e f o r t he t w o s e l f- s ta t e s w a s c a l -

c u l a t e d b y s u b t ra c t i n g t h e to t a l n u m b e r o f m a t c h e s f r o m t h e

t o t a l n u m b e r o f m i s m a t c h e s .

I n o r d e r t o m e a s u r e c h r o n i c d is c o m f o r t a n d e m o t i o n a l s y m p -

t om s , t he f o l l ow i ng m e a s u r e s w e r e u s e d ( f o r m or e de t a i l s a bou tt he s e m e a s u r e s , s e e H i gg i ns , K l e i n , & S t r a um a n , 1985) : t he

B e c k D e p r e s s io n I n v e n t o r y ( B e c k , W a r d , M e n d e l s o n , M o c k , &

Er ba ugh , 1961) , t he B l a t t D e pr e s s i ve Expe r i e nc e s Q ue s t i on -

na i r e ( B l a tt e t a l ., 1976) , t he H o pk i ns S ym pt o m C he c k l i s t ( D e -

r oga t i s , L i pm a n , R i c ke l s , U h l e nhu t h , & C ov i , 1974) , a nd t he

E m o t i o n s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( H i g g in s , K l e in & S t r a u m a n , 1 98 5 ).

B e c a u s e th e p u b l i s h e d r e s u lt s o f o u r s t u d y d i d n o t c o n s i d e r

a l l f ou r pos s i b l e type s o f a c t ua l / ow n : gu i d e d i s c r e pa nc i e s , t he

d a t a f r o m t h is s t u d y w e r e r e a n a l y z e d to c o m p a r e a l l fo u r t y p e s

o f d i s c r e pa nc ie s . T o t e s t the hypo t he s i s o f s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he -

o r y , pa r t i a l c o r r e l a t i ons be t w e e n e a c h o f t he d i s c r e pa nc i e s a n d

e a c h o f th e i t e m s w e r e c a lc u l a te d , p a r t i a l in g o u t t h e c o n t r i b u -

t i o n t o e a c h c o r r e l a t i o n d e r iv i n g f r o m t h e i r c o m m o n r e l a t io n t o

all the other discrepancies (all s i gn i fi c a n t pa r t i a l c o r r e l a t i ons

a r e r e p o r t e d ) :

1 . A c t ua l / ow n ve r s us i de a l / ow n : We p r e d i c t e d t h i s d i s c r e p -

a n c y w o u l d b e a s s o c ia t e d w i t h f e e li n g s o f d i s a p p o i n t m e n t a n d

d i s s a t i s f a c t i on i n pa r t i c u l a r a nd w i t h de j e c t i on i n ge ne r a l . A s

p r e d i c te d , t h e a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l /o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y

a s s oc i a t e d ( p < . 05 ) w i t h s ub j e c t s ' fe e l i ng " d i s a p po i n t e d , " " d i s -

s a t i s f i e d" no t f e e l i ng " e f f e c t i ve , " f e e l i ng " b l a m e w or t hy , " a nd

" f e e l i ng no i n t e r e s t i n t h i ngs ? '

T h e a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s a ls o u n i q u e l y a s -

s oc i a t e d ( p < . 05 ) w i t h t he I n t r o j e c t i on s ubs c a l e o f t he B l a t t

D e pr e s s i ve Expe r i e nc e s Q ue s t i onna i r e , w h i c h c ons i s t s m os t l y

o f i t e m s m e a s u r i n g g e n e r a l d i s c re p a n c y w i th s t a n d ar d s , e s p e -

c i a l ly i de a l s t a nda r ds ( e. g. , " I o f t e n f i nd t ha t I don ' t l ive up t o

m y ow n s t a nda r ds o r i de a l s " ) a nd ge ne r a l de j e c t i on ( e . g . ,

" The r e a r e t i m e s w he n I f e e l e m p t y i n s i de " ) . I n ge ne r a l , t he n ,

t he r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t udy s ugge s t t ha t t he a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l / ow n

d i s c r e pa nc y i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h dejection from perceived lack of

effectiveness or self-fulfillment.

2 . A c t ua l / ow n ve r s us i de a l / o t he r : We p r e d i c t e d t h i s d i sc r e p -a n c y w o u l d b e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h f e e l i n g s h a m e a n d e m b a r r a s s -

m e n t i n pa r t i c u l a r a n d w i t h de j e c t i on i n ge ne r a l . A s p r e d i c t e d ,

t h e a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y a s s o c i -

a t e d ( p < . 05 ) w i t h s ub j e c t s ' fe e l ing l a c k o f " p r i d e " l a c k o f f ee l-

i n g " s u r e o f s e l f a n d g o a l s " " f e e li n g l on e ly , " " f e e li n g b l u e " a n d

" f e e l i ng no i n t e r e s t i n t h i ngs ? '

T h e a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y w a s a l s o u n i q u e l y

a s s oc i a t e d ( p < . 05 ) w i t h t he B l a t t I n t r o j e c t i on s ubs c a l e a s w e ll

a s w i t h t he B l a t t A na c l i t i c subs c a l e, w h i c h m o s t l y m e a s u r e s be -

l ie fs c onc e r n i ng de p e nde nc y o n o t he r s a n d s e ns i t iv i t y t o o t he r s '

e xpe c t a t i ons ( e. g. , " I f I f a il t o li ve up t o e xp e c t a t ions , I fe e l un -

w o r t h y" " I a m ve r y s e ns it ive t o o t he r s f o r s i gns o f r e je c t i on" ) .

I n ge ne r a l , t he n , t he r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t udy s ugge s t t ha t t he a c t ua l /ow n : i de a l / o t he r d i s c r e pa nc y i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h dejection fro m

perceived or anticipa ted loss of social affection or esteem.

3 . A c t u a l / o w n v e r su s o u g h t / o t h e r : T h i s d i s c re p a n c y w a s p re -

d i c t e d t o be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h f e a r a nd f e e l i ng t h r e a t e ne d i n pa r -

t i t u l a r a n d w i t h a g i t a t i o n i n g e n e r a l . T h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t /

o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y a s s o c i at e d ( p < . 0 5) w i t h s u b -

j e c t s ' s u f f e r i ng " s pe l ls o f t e r r o r o r pa n i c , " f e e l i ng " s udde n l y

s c a r e d f o r n o r e a s o n , " f e e li n g " s o c o n c e r n e d w i t h h o w o r w h a t

I fe e l t ha t i t ' s ha r d t o t h i nk o f m u c h e l s e , " a nd f e e li ng " s ha m e . "

T h e a s s o c i a t io n b e t w e e n f e el in g " s h a m e " o r " l a c k o f p r i d e " a n d

pos s e s s i ng a d i s c r e p a nc y f r o m e i t he r a s i gn i f ic a n t o t he r ' s ough t

s t a nda r d o r a s ign i f i c a n t o t he r ' s i de a l s t a nda r d s u ppo r t s t he po -

s i ti on , d i s c us s e d e a rl ie r, t ha t s ha m e i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h " o t he r "s t a n d p o i n t s o n e i t h e r m o r a l o r n o n m o r a l d o m a i n s ( e .g ., A u s u -

bel , 1 955; Lewis , 1979) . In genera l , the resul t s of th i s s tudy sug-

g e st t h a t t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y i s a s so c i a te d

wi th ag i ta t ion rom f ear and threa t.

4 . A c t u a l / o w n v e r s u s o u g h t / o w n : T h i s d i s c r e p a n c y w a s p r e -

d i c t e d t o be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h f e e l i ngs o f gu i l t a nd s e l f - c on t e m p t

i n pa r t i c u l a r a nd w i t h a g i t a t i on i n ge ne r a l . A s p r e d i c t e d , t he

a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s a s s o c i a te d w i t h " f e e l -

i n g s o f w o r t h l e ss n e s s " a n d w a s t h e o n l y t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y t h a t

w a s un i q ue l y a s s oc i a t e d w i t h f e e l ings o f " gu i l t ? ' B u t t he l a t t e r

c o r r e l a t i on w a s negative, pa r t ia l r ( 49 ) = - . 2 7 , p < . 05 . I n a

l a t e r s t udy ( S t r a u m a n & H i gg i ns , 1987) , w e a ls o f ound t ha t t he

Page 9: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 9/22

SELF-D I SCR EPA N C Y TH EO R Y 32 7

a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y b u t n e g a -

t ive l y a s s oc i a te d w i t h " a nx i e t y ove r t r a ns g r e s s i ons o f r u le s , "

pa r t i a l r ( 59 ) = - . 2 6 , p < . 05 . A l t ho ugh t he d i r e c t i on o f t he s e

r e s u l ts w a s no t e xpe c t e d , t he ove r a l l pa t t e r n i s c ons i s t e n t w i t h

a n a n a l y si s o f " g u i l t " p r o v i d e d b y H o m e y ( 1 9 3 9 ) a n d o t h e r s

( e. g. , C a m e r on , 1963) . H o m e y s ugge s t e d t ha t t he m or e pe op l e ' s

f e e li ngs o f gu i l t o r s e l f - r e c r i m i na t i on f o r m o r a l t r a ns g r e s s i on

a r e g e n u i n e , th e m o r e t h e y m a y r e f r ai n f r o m e x p r e s si n g t h e m .I nde e d , i t ha s be e n s ugge s t e d t ha t " gu i l t y " ne u r o t i c s t e nd t o

de ny t he i r f e e li ngs o f gu i l t a nd i n s t e a d e x p r e s s t he m a s f e e li ngs

o f w or t h l e s s ne s s t ha t l e s s d i r e c t ly i m p l y s i n f u l ne s s .

T h e r e w a s a ls o e v i d en c e t h a t t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s-

c r e p a nc y w a s un i que l y a s s oc i a t e d ( p < . 05 ) w i t h t he f o l l ow i ng

e m o t i o n a l s y m p t o m s : " f e el i n g i r r it a t e d a l l t h e t i m e " " f e e li n g

l ow i n e ne r gy o r s l ow e d dow n , " " f e e l i ng no i n t e r e s t i n t h i ng s "

a nd " f e e l i ng e ve r y t h i ng is a n e f f o r t. " Th i s c l u s t e r o f e m ot i on a l

s y m p t o m s i s c o n s i st e n t w i t h t h e c l a s s ic d e s c r i p ti o n o f " g u i l t y "

o r " a nx i e t y" ne u r o t i c s a s su f f e ri ng f r om i r r it a b i l i ty a n d f a t i gue

( ge e C a m e r on , 1963) . I n ge ne r a l , t he n , t he r e s u l t s o f t h is s t udy

t e n ta t iv e l y s u g ge s t t h a t t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y

i s a s s oc i a te d w i t h agitation fro m self-criticism. F u r t h e r r e s e a r c hon t h i s d i s c r e pa nc y i s c le a r l y ne e de d , how e ve r, t o t e s t t h i s hy -

pothes i s .

W e a l s o f o u n d e v i d e n c e o f d i s t in c t s e l f -d i s c r e p a n c y - d i s c o m -

f o r t a s s o c i a t i o n s i n a s t u d y b y S t r a u m a n a n d H i g g i n s ( 1 9 8 7 )

t h a t e x t e n d e d a n d r e f i n e d t h e H i g g i n s , K l e i n , a n d S t r a u m a n

( 1 9 8 5 ) s t u d y i n a n u m b e r o f r es p e c ts . F i r st , t h e m e t h o d f o r ca l -

c u l a t in g t h e m a g n i t u d e o f s e l f- d is c r ep a n c ie s w a s i m p r o v e d . I n

t he Se l ve s que s t i onna i r e , a f t e r re s pond e n t s l i s te d t he a t t r i bu t e s

f o r e a c h s e l f -s t a te , t he y w e r e a s ke d t o r a t e t he e x t e n t t o w h i c h

t he s t a n dpo i n t p e r s on ( s e l f o r o t he r ) e i t he r be l i e ve d t he y a c t ua l l y

pos s e s s e d o r ough t t o pos s e s s o r w a n t e d t he m i de a l ly t o pos s e s s

e a c h a t t r i bu t e t he y l is te d . T he 4 - p o i n t r a t i ng s c a l e r a nge d f r o m

slightly (1) to extremely ( 4) . The s e r a t i ngs pe r m i t t e d a ne w d i s -t i n ct io n t o b e m a d e - - b e t w e e n " t r u e " m a t c h es , w h e re s y n o n y -

m o us a t t r i bu t e s a c r os s t w o s e l f -s t a te s a ls o ha d r a t i ngs t ha t va r -

i e d b y n o m o r e th a n l s c al e p o i n t , a n d s y n o n y m o u s " m i s -

m a t c h e s , " w h e r e s y n o n y m o u s a t t r i b u te s a c r o s s t w o s e l f- st a te s

ha d r a t i ngs t ha t va r i e d by 2 o r m or e s c a l e po i n t s ( e . g . , a c t ua l /

ow n : " s l i gh t l y a t t r a c t i ve " ve r s us i de a l / ow n : " e x t r e m e l y a t t r a c -

t i ve " ). A n t on ym ou s a t t r i bu t e s a c r os s t w o s e lf - s ta t e s c on t i nue d

t o b e c o d e d a s m i s m a t c h e s . T h i s n e w m e a s u r e o f t h e m a g n i t u d e

o f s e l f- d i s cr e pa nc y , t he n , r e s e r ve s t he " m a t c h" c l a s s if i c a ti on t o

c a se s o f t r u e o v e r la p a n d t a k e s i n t o a c c o u n t t h e s e v e ri ty o f a

m i s m a t c h .

T h e s e c o n d i m p r o v e m e n t i n t h e s t u d y w a s t h e c o l le c t io n o f

t h e v a r io u s m e a s u r e s o f d i s c o m f o r t a n d e m o t i o n a l s y m p t o m sa p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 m onths after subjec t s f i ll ed ou t the Selves ques-

t i onna i r e . The de l a y bo t h r e duc e d t he l i ke l i hood t ha t s ub j e c t s

w o u l d r e s p o n d t o t h e d i s c o m f o r t m e a s u r e s b y t r y i n g t o r el a te

t h e m t o t h e i r a n sw e r s o n t h e S e l v es q u e s t io n n a i r e a n d p e r m i t t e d

a t e s t o f t he s t a b i l it y o f t he s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y - d i s c om f or t a s s oc i a -

t i o n s o v e r a p e r i o d o f ti m e . T h e f i n a l im p r o v e m e n t w a s t h e d e -

ve l opm e n t o f s ubs c a l e s r e fl e c t ing d i s ti nc t i ve k i nds o f d i s c o m f o r t

t h a t c o u l d b e u s e d a s m u l t i- i te m m e a s u r e s t o r e p l a c e th e i t e m -

b y - i t e m a n a l y s e s p e r f o r m e d i n o u r 1 9 8 5 s t u d y . W e a c c o m -

p l i s he d t h i s r e f ine m e n t by p e r f o r m i ng a s e r i es o f f a c t o r a na l ys e s

o n s u b j e c ts ' r e s p o n s e s t o t h e u n a m b i g u o u s l y d e j e c ti o n - re l a te d

a n d a g i ta t io n - r e la t e d i t e m s i n t h e B e c k D e p r e s s i o n I n v e n t o r y

( B D I ) , t he B l a t t D e pr e s s i ve Expe r i e nc e s Q ue s t i onna i r e

( B D E Q ) , t h e H o p k i n s S y m p t o m C h e c k l i st (H S C L ) , a n d th e

E m o t i o n s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( E Q ).

The s e a na l ys e s i de n t if i e d t w o d i s t i nc t s e t s o f i t e m s ( i. e. , h i gh

w i t h i n - s e t i n t e r c o r r e l a t i ons a nd l ow be t w e e n- s e t i n t e r c o r r e -

l a t i ons ) , w h i c h r e f l e c t e d a " d i s a ppo i n t m e n t / d i s s a t i s f a c t i on"

e m o t i o n a l s y n d r o m e a n d a " f e a r /r e s tl e s s n es s " s y n d r o m e , a s f o l -

lows:

1. Disappointment~dissatisfaction: ( a ) " d i s a p p o i n t e d i n

y o u r s e l f " ( E Q ) ; ( b ) " I a m v e r y s at is f ie d w i t h m y s e l f a n d m y

a c c om pl i s hm e n t s " ( B D EQ , r e ve r s e d s c o r i ng ) ; ( c ) " I f e e l I a m

a l w a ys m a k i ng f u l l u s e o f m y po t e n t i a l a b i l i ti e s " ( B D EQ , r e -

ve r s e d s c o r i ng ) ; ( d ) " unc e r t a i n ove r a b i l i t y t o a c h i e ve goa l s "

( EQ ) ; a nd ( e ) " b l a m i ng y ou r s e l f f o r f a il u r e t o a c h i e ve

goa l s " ( EQ ) .

2. Fear~restlessness: a ) " f e e l ing you a r e o r w i ll be p un i s h e d"

( B D I ) ; (b ) " f e e li n g a f ra i d t o g o o u t o f y o u r h o u s e a l o n e "

( H SC L) ; ( c ) " f e e l i ng a f r a i d t o t r a ve l on bus e s , s ubw a ys o r

t r a i n s " ( H SC L) ; ( d ) " s l e e p t ha t i s r e s tl e s s o r d i s t u r be d" ( H SC L) ;

a nd ( e ) " f e e li ng s o r e s tl e ss yo u c o u l d n ' t s i t s ti l l" ( H S C L) .

A c c o r d i ng t o s e l f- d i s c r e pa nc y the o r y , t he a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l /o w n d i s c r e p a n c y s h o u l d b e r e l a te d t o t h e d i s a p p o i n t m e n t / d i s -

s a t i s f a c t i on c l u s t e r , w he r e a s t he a c t ua l / ow n : ough t / o t he r d i s -

c r e p a nc y s hou l d be r e l a t e d t o t h e f e a r / r e st l e ss ne s s c l us te r. A n d

i n d e e d t h e y w e r e : t h e a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s

s i gn i f ic a n t l y r e l a t e d t o t he d i s a ppo i n t m e n t / d i s s a t i s f a c t i on s ub -

s c a l e ( a s m e a s u r e d 2 m on t hs l a te r ) , r ( 70 ) = . 38 , p < . 001 , a nd

t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y w a s s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e -

la ted to the fear / res t lessness subsca le , r (70) = .42, p < .001. But

t he c r i t i c a l que s t i on i s w he t he r t he s e a s s oc i a t i ons a r e un i que .

To t e s t t h is , e a c h o f t he s e l f - d i s c re pa nc i e s w a s r e l a t e d t o e a c h o f

t h e k i n d s o f d i s c o m f o r t , w i th t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e a s s o c i a ti o n

be t w e e n e a c h pa i r o f va r i a b l e s f r om t he i r a s s oc i a t i ons t o t he

a l t e r na t i ve va r i a b l e s be i ng s t a t i s t i c a l l y r e m ove d . The pa r t i a lc o r r e l a t i ona l a na l ys i s r e ve a l e d , a s p r e d i c t e d , t ha t t he a c t ua l /

o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y r e l a te d t o t h e d i s a p -

po i n t m e n t / d i s s a t i s f a c t i on c l u s t e r ( a s m e a s u r e d 2 m on t hs l a t e r ) ,

pa r t i a l r ( 66 ) = . 30 , p = . 01 , bu t w a s un r e l a t e d t o t he f e a r /r e s t -

l e s sne s s c l u st e r, pa r t ia l r ( 66 ) = - . 0 8 , p > . 35 . The a c t u a l / ow n :

o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y r e l at e d t o t h e f e a r / re s t -

l essness c lus ter , par t i a l r (66) = .35, p < .0 l , but was unre la ted t o

t he d i s a ppo i n t m e n t / d i s s a t i s f a c t i on c lu s te r, pa r t i a l r ( 66 ) = . 04 ,

p > .50.

I t s hou l d be no t e d t ha t , a s p r e d i c t e d by s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he -

o r y , i t w a s t he a c t ua l / ow n d i s c r e pa nc y f r om t he s e l f - gu i de a s

d e f i n ed b y b o t h d o m a i n a n d s t a n d p o i n t t h a t w a s c r it ic a l f o r p r e -

d i c t in g e a c h d i s ti n c ti v e k i n d o f e m o t i o n a l s y n d r o m e . C o n s i s -t e n t w i t h t h e t h e o r y ' s p r e d i c t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h s p e c i f i c

t y p e o f s e lf - d is c r e p a n c y w o u l d b e a s s o c ia t e d w i th w h i c h p a r t ic -

u l a r k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t , t h e d i s a p p o i n t m e n t / d is s a t i sf a c t io n

c l us t e r w a s s i gn i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h t he a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l /

o w n d i s cr e p a n c y b u t not w i t h t h e a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o th e r d i s-

c r e p a nc y ( p > . 10 ), a nd t he f e a r /r e s t le s s ne s s c l u s t e r w a s s ign if i-

c a n t l y c o rr e l a te d w i t h t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y

b u t not with the a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c re p a n c y ( p > .5 ).

T h i s s t u d y a l s o t e s te d t h e t h e o r y ' s p r e d i c ti o n t h a t t h e a c t u a l /

o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y a n d t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r

d i s c r e p a n c y a r e a s s o c ia t e d w i t h t w o d i f fe r e n t k i n d s o f a n g e r - -

f r u s t r a t i on a nd r e s e n t m e n t , r e s pe c t i ve l y . The pa r t i a l c o r r e l a -

Page 10: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 10/22

3 2 8 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

t i ona l a na l ys i s r e ve a l e d , a s e xpe c t e d , t ha t t he a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l /

o w n d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y r e l a te d t o " f r u s t r a t i o n " ( a s m e a -

s u r e d 2 m on t h s l a te r ), pa r t i a l r ( 66 ) = . 36 , p < . 01 , bu t no t w i t h

" r e s e n t m e n t " ( p > . 1 5 ) , w h e r e a s t h e a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r

d i s c r e p a n c y w a s u n i q u e l y a s s o c ia t e d w it h " r e s e n t m e n t " p a r t ia l

r = . 39 , p < . 01 , bu t no t w i t h " f r u s t r a t i on" ( p > . 2) .

Evidence That M agnitude and A ccessibility of DifferentTypes o f Self-Discrepancy Determ ine Kind o fDiscomfort

S e l f -d i s c re p a n c y t h e o r y p r o p o s e s t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e m a g n i -

t ude a nd a c c e s s i b il i ty o f a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f s e l f- d i s c re pa nc y ,

t he m or e i t s pos s e s s o r w i l l e xpe r i e nc e t he k i nd o f d i s c o m f o r t

a s s oc i a t e d w i t h it . Th a t i s , t he t he o r y p r o pos e s t ha t d i s c om f or t

i s in f l u e n c e d b y t w o f a c to r s : (a ) T h e m a g n i t u d e o f o n e ' s a v a il -

a b l e t ype s o f s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc i e s - - t he g r e a t e r the d i s c r e pa nc y ,

t he m or e i n t e ns e l y i t s pos s e s so r w i ll e xpe r i e nc e t he k i nd o f d i s-

c om f or t a s s oc i a t e d w i t h i t . Thus , e ve r y t h i ng e l s e be i ng e qua l ,

o n e w i l l e x p er i e n ce m o s t i n t en s e l y t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o -

c i a t e d w i t h t he g r e a t e s t s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y . ( b ) The a c c e s s i b i l i t yo f one ' s a va i la b l e t ype s o f s e l f - d i sc r e pa nc i e s - - - the g r e a t e r t he

a c c e s s i b il i ty o f a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f d i s c r e pa nc y , t he m or e l i ke ly

i ts pos s e s s o r w il l e xpe r i e nc e t he k i nd o f d i s c om f or t a s s oc i a t e d

w i t h i t . Thus , e ve r y t h i ng e l se be i ng e qua l , on e i s m os t l i ke l y

t o e x p e r ie n c e t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c ia t e d w i t h t h e m o s t

a c c e s s ib l e s e l f- d i s c re pa nc y . The s e i m p l i c a t i on s o f t he c e n t r a l

h y p o t h e s is o f t h e t h e o r y w e r e d i r e c tl y t e s te d i n a c o u p l e o f r e-

c e n t e xpe r i m e n t a l s t ud i e s ( H i gg i ns , B ond , K l e i n , & S t r a um a n ,

1986).

T h e f ir st s t u d y t e s t e d w h e t h e r t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t t h a t r e -

s u i te d f r o m f o c u s in g o n a n e g a ti v e e v e n t w o u l d v a r y d e p e n d i n g

o n t h e t y p e o f s e lf - d is c r e p an c y t h a t w a s p r e d o m i n a n t f o r a n i n -

d i v i dua l ( i. e. , t he t yp e o f s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y w i t h t he g r e a t e s t m a g-n i t ude ) . U nde r g r a dua t e s w e r e a s ke d t o im a g i ne e i t he r a pos i t ive

e v e n t i n w h i c h p e r f o r m a n c e m a t c h e s a c o m m o n s t a n d a r d ( e. g.,

r e c e i v i ng a g r a de o f A i n a c ou r s e ) o r a ne ga t i ve e ve n t i n w h i c h

pe r f o r m a nc e f a i l s t o m a t c h a c om m on s t a nda r d ( e . g . , r e c e i v i ng

a g r a d e o f D i n a c o u r s e t h a t i s n e c e s s a r y f o r o b t a i n i n g a n i m -

p o r t a n t j o b ) . F o r t h e " n e g a t i v e e v e n t " c o n d i t io n , w e e x p e c t e d

t ha t s ub j e c t s w i t h a p r e dom i na n t a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y

w ou l d s how a n i nc r e a s e i n de j e c t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i ons , w he r e a s

s u b j e c t s w i t h a p r e d o m i n a n t a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y w o u l d

s how a n i nc r e a s e i n a g i t a t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i ons . Fo r t he " pos i -

t i ve e ve n t " c ond i t i on , w e e xpe c t e d t ha t t he s ub j e c t s ' p r e dom i -

na n t s e l f - d is c r e pa nc i e s w o u l d p r o du c e l e s s e f f e ct on t he i r e m o-

t i ons be c a us e t he ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i ons a s s oc i a t e dw i t h t he d i s c r e pa nc i e s w ou l d no t be a pp l i c a b l e t o pos i t i ve

e ve n t s ( se e H i gg i ns & K i ng , 1981 ; se e a l s o Mi s c he l , 1984 , f o r a

s i m i l a r a r gum e n t ) .

Sub j e c t s f il le d o u t t he Se l ve s que s t i on na i r e a f e w w e e ks be f o r e

t he e xpe r i m e n t a l s e s s ion . The y w e r e d iv i de d i n t o h i gh a n d l ow

a c t u al :i d e a l d i s c re p a n c y g r o u p s a t t h e m e d i a n o f t h e ir a c t u a l /

o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y s c o re s , a n d i n t o h i g h a n d l o w a c -

t u a l : o u g h t d i s c re p a n c y g r o u p s a t t h e m e d i a n o f th e i r a c t u a l /

o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y s c o re s . W e t h e n u s e d t h e s e d iv i -

s i o n s t o c r e a t e t w o d i s t in c t g r o u p s o f s u b je c t s v a r y i n g o n w h i c h

t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y w a s p r e d o m i n a n t - - a h i g h a c tu a l : id e a l d is -

c r e p a n c y / l o w a c t u a l : o u g h t d is c r e p a n c y g r o u p a n d a h i g h a c -

t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y / l o w a c t u a l : i d e a l d i s c r e p a n c y g r o u p .

W h e n t h e s u b j e c ts a r r iv e d a t t he e xp e r i m e n t a l s e s s ion , t he y f i r st

c om pl e t e d a s e m a n t i c d i f f e r e n t i a l que s t i onna i r e t ha t a s s e s s e d

t h e i r g e n e r a l m o o d p r i o r t o t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l m a n i p u l a t i o n .

The y a l s o pe r f o r m e d a s i m p l e w r i t i ng - s pe e d t a s k . Wr i t i ng -

s pe e d s c o r e s ha ve be e n f ound t o de c r e a s e f o l l ow i ng a " s a d"

m oo d i nduc t i on ( N a t a l e & H a n t a s , 1982) . Sub j e c t s t he n r e -

c e i ve d e i t he r t he pos i t i ve o r ne ga ti ve gu i de d - i m a ge r y t a s k , m o d-

e l e d a f te r a p r oc e du r e u s e d by Wr i gh t a nd Mi s c he l ( 1982) . Fo l -

l ow i ng t he gu i de d - i m a ge r y t a s k , s ub j e c t s w e r e g i ve n t he w r i t i ng -

s pe e d t e s t f o r t he s e c on d t i m e . Th e y t he n f il le d ou t t he Mul t i p l e

A f f e c t A d j e c t i ve C he c k l i s t ( MA A C L;Z u c k e r m a n & L u b i n , 1 9 6 5)

t o m e a s u r e t he i r c u r r e n t f e e li ngs .

T h e M A A CLw a s u s e d t o c r e a t e a s u m m a r y s c o r e fo r d e j e c-

t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i ons ( e . g . , b l ue , d i s c ou r a ge d , l ow , ha ppy [ r e -

ve r s e d f o r s c o r i ng ] , s a t is f ie d [ r e ve rs e d f o r s c o r i ng ] ) a nd a s um -

m a r y s c o r e f o r a g i ta t i on - r e l a t e d e m o t i ons ( e .g ., a f r a i d , a g i t a t e d ,

de s pe r a t e , c a l m [ r e ve r se d f o r s c o r i ng ] , qu i e t [ r e ve r s e d f o r s c o r -

i n g] ). A T y p e o f S e l f - D i s c r e p a n c y ( p r e d o m i n a n t a c t u al : id e a l

d i s c r e p a n c y ; p r e d o m i n a n t a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y ) • E v e n t

Foc us ( pos i ti ve e ve n t ; ne ga t i ve e ve n t ) • K i n d o f D i s c om f or t

( de j e c t i on - re l a t e d ; a g i t a t i on - r e la t e d ) a na l ys i s o f va r i a nc e ( A N -

O V A ) w a s p e r f o r m e d o n t h e p o s t m a n i p u l a t i o n m o o d s c o r e s ,

w i t h s u b j e c ts ' p r e m a n i p u l a t i o n m o o d ( a s m e a s u r e d b y t h e s e-

m a n t i c d i f fe r e n t ia l ) a s a c ova r i a t e . W e f oun d a s i gn i fi c a n t t h r e e -

w a y i n t e r a c t i on . A s p r e d i c t e d , t he r e w a s no d i f f e r e nc e be t w e e n

p r e d o m i n a n t a c t u a l : i d e a l d i s c r e p a n c y s u b j e c t s a n d p r e d o m i -

na n t a c t ua l : ough t d i s c r e pa nc y s ub j e c t s i n t he i r de j e c t i on - r e -

l a t e d a n d a g i t a t i o n - r e l a t e d m o o d s c o r e s w h e n t h e y w e r e e x -

p o s e d t o a p o s i ti v e ev e n t ; b u t w h e n t h e y w e r e e x p o s e d t o a n e g a -

t i ve e ve n t , p r e dom i na n t a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y s ub j e c t s f e l t

s i g ni f ic a n tl y m o r e d e j e c t ed t h a n d i d p r e d o m i n a n t a c t u a l : o u g h t

d i s c r e p a nc y s ub j e c t s , w he r e a s t he l a t t e r te nde d t o f e e l m o r e a g i -

t a t e d t h a n t h e i r c o u n t e r p a rt s .We a l s o t e s t e d t he h ypo t he s i s by pe r f o r m i ng~a Type o f Se lf -

D i s c r e p a n c y • E v e n t F o c u s A N O V A o n t h e p e r c e n ta g e o f i n -

c r e a s e i n s ub j e c t s ' w r i t i ng s pe e d , a ga i n u s i ng s ub j e c t s ' p r e m a -

n i p u l a t i o n m o o d a s a c o v a r i a te . W e f o u n d a t w o - w a y i n te r a c -

t i o n . A s p r e d i c t e d , t h e p r e d o m i n a n t a c t u a l : i d e a l d i s c r e p a n c y

s ub j e c t s w e r e s l ow e r f o l l ow i ng t he ne ga t i ve e ve n t f oc us a s c om -

p a r e d t o t h e p o s i t iv e e v e n t f o cu s , w h e r ea s t h e p r e d o m i n a n t a c -

t ua l : ou gh t d i s c r e pa nc y s ub j e c t s w e r e , i f a ny t h i ng , f as te r.

Th e r e s u l t s o f t h is f i rs t s t udy i nd i c a t e d t ha t bo t h t he i n t e ns i t y

a n d t h e q u a l i t y o f e m o t i o n a l c h a n g e i n d u c e d b y f o c u s in g o n a n

e ve n t t ha t w a s l i ke ly t o be e xpe r i e nc e d a s ne ga t ive va r i e d a s a

f u n c t i o n o f t h e m a g n i t u d e a n d t y p e o f s e l f- d i sc r e p a n c y t h a t w a s

p r e do m i n a n t f o r a sub j e c t ( a s m e a s u r e d w e e ks ea rl ie r) . Th us w eve r i f i e d t he hypo t he s i z e d r e l a t i on be t w e e n t he r e l a t i ve m a gn i -

t ude o f d i f fe r e n t t ype s o f d i s c re pa nc i e s a nd d i f f er e nc e s i n e m o -

t i o n a l c h a n g e .

T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e s e c o n d s t u d y w a s t o d e m o n s t r a t e o u r s e c-

ond hypo t he s i z e d r e l a t i on , be t w e e n t he r e l a t ive a c c e s s ib i l it y o f

d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f se l f - d is c r e pa nc i e s a nd d i f f e re nc e s i n e m o-

t i ona l c ha nge . Fo u r t o 6 w e e ks be f o r e the e xpe r i m e n t a l s e s s ion ,

u n d e r g r a d u a t e s c o m p l e t e d t h e S e l v e s q u e s t i o n n a i r e . T w o

g r o u p s o f s u b je c t s w e r e r e c r u it e d f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t ( f o r fu r t h e r

p r oc e dur a l de t a i l s , s e e H i gg i ns , B ond , K l e i n , & S t r a um a n ,

1986) - - - s ub j e c t s w ho w e r e r e l a t i ve l y h i gh on bo t h a c t ua l : i de a l

d i s c r e p a n c y ( i . e . , a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y a n d a c -

Page 11: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 11/22

SELF-DISCREPANCY THEORY 329

t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y c o m b i n e d ) a n d a c t u a l : o u g h t

d i s c r e p a n c y ( i . e . , a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y a n d a c -

t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y c o m b i n e d ) a n d s u b j e ct s w h o

w e r e r e l a t i ve l y l ow on bo t h d i s c r e pa nc i e s . The os t e ns i b l e pu r -

pos e o f t he s t udy w a s t o ob t a i n t he s e l f - re f l e c ti ons o f a you t h

s a m pl e f o r a l i f e - s pa n de ve l opm e n t a l s t udy . The s ub j e c t s w e r e

t o l d t h a t t h e i r m o o d d u r i n g t h e s t u d y w o u l d b e c h e c k e d b e c a u s e

p r e v i o u s r e se a r c h i n d i c a te d t h a t m o o d c a n s o m e t i m e s i n fl u e n c e

pe op l e ' s s e lf - re f le c t ions . Th i s c ove r s t o r y p r ov i de d t he r a t i ona l e

f o r o b t a in i n g m o o d m e a s u r e s b o t h b e f o r e a n d a f t e r t h e e x p e r i-

m e n t a l m a n i p u l a t i o n .

H a l f o f h e s u b j e ct s i n e a c h d i s c r e p a n c y g r o u p w e r e r a n d o m l y

a s s ig n e d t o a n i d e al p r i m i n g c o n d i t i o n , a n d t h e o t h e r h a l f w e r e

a s s i g n e d t o a n o u g h t p r i m i n g c o n d i t i o n . I n t h e i d e a l p r i m i n g

c ond i t i on , t he s ub j e c t s w e r e a s ke d ( a ) t o de s c r i be t he k i nd o f

p e r s o n t h a t t h e y a n d t h e i r p a r e n t s w o u l d i d e a ll y li k e t h e m t o b e

a n d t h e a t t ri b u t e s t h a t t h e y a n d t h e i r p a r e n t s h o p e d t h e y w o u l d

h a v e , a n d ( b ) to d i s c u s s w h e t h e r th e r e h a d b e e n a n y c h a n g e o v e r

t h e y e a r s in t h e s e h o p e s a n d a i m s . I n t h e o u g h t p r i m i n g c o n d i -

t i on , s ub j e c t s w e r e a s ke d ( a ) t o de s c r i be t he k i n d o f pe r s on t ha t

t h e y a n d t h e i r p a re n t s b e l i ev e d t h e y o u g h t t o b e a n d t h e a t t ri -bu t e s t ha t t he y a nd t he i r pa r e n t s be l i e ve d i t w a s t he i r du t y o r

ob l i ga t i on t o ha ve , a nd ( b ) t o d i s c us s w he t he r t he r e ha d be e n

a ny c h a nge ove r t he ye a r s in t he s e be li ef s. B o t h be f o r e a nd a f t e r

t h i s p r i m i ng m a n i pu l a t i on , s ub j e c t s fi ll ed ou t a m oo d que s t i on -

na i r e t ha t i de n t i fi e d bo t h de j e c t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i on s ( e. g. , s a d ,

d i s a ppo i n t e d , a nd e n t hu s i a s t i c [ r e ve r s e d f o r s c o r i ng ] ) a nd a g i -

t a t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i ons ( e . g . , t e ns e , ne r vous , a nd c a l m [ r e -

ve r s e d f o r s c o r i ng ] ) . Th e s ub j e c t s w e r e a s ke d t o r a t e t he e x t e n t

t o w h i c h t h e y n o w w e r e f e e li n g e a c h e m o t i o n o n a 6 - p o i n t s c a l e

t h a t r a n g e d f r o m n o t a t a l l (0) to a g r e a t d e a l ( 5 ) . The s c o r e s

f o r t h e d e j e c ti o n - re l a te d e m o t i o n s w e r e c o m b i n e d t o c r e a t e a

de j e c t i on m e a s u r e , a nd t he s c o r e s f o r t he a g i t a t i on - r e l a te d e m o -

t i o n s w e re c o m b i n e d t o c r e a t e a n a g i t a t io n m e a s u r e .F o r t h e s u b j e ct s w h o w e r e h i g h i n b o t h t y p e s o f s e l f- d is c re p -

a n c ie s , w e p r e d i c t e d t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c ia t e d w i t h t h e

t ype o f s e lf - d i s c r e pa nc y w hos e a c c e s s i b il i ty w a s t e m p or a r i l y i n -

c r e a s e d b y t h e p r i m i n g m a n i p u l a t i o n - - a n i n c r ea s e i n d e j ec -

t i o n - re l a t e d e m o t i o n s i n t h e i d ea l p r i m i n g c o n d i t i o n a n d a n i n -

c r e a se i n a g i t a ti o n - re l a te d e m o t i o n s i n t h e o u g h t p r i m i n g c o n -

d i ti o n . I n c o n t r a s t, f o r th e s u b j e c t s w h o w e r e l o w i n b o t h t y p e s

o f s e lf - di s cr e p an c i es , w e p r e d i c t e d t h a t t h e p r i m i n g m a n i p u l a -

t i o n w o u l d , i f a n y th i n g , d e c r e a s e t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c i -

a t e d w i t h t he p r i m e d d i s c r e pa n c y (i .e ., m a ke t h e m f e e l be t t e r

b y r e m i n d i n g t h e m o f g o a l s o r o b l i g at i o n s t h e y h a v e m e t ) - - a

s l igh t de c r e a s e i n de j e c t ion - r e l a t e d e m ot i on s i n t he i de a l p r i m -

i ng c ond i t i on a nd a s li gh t de c r e a s e i n a g i t a t ion - r e l a t e d e m ot i on si n t he ough t p r i m i ng c ond i t i on . To t e s t t he s e p r e d i c t i ons , a

Le ve l o f Se l f - D i s c r e pa nc y ( h i gh a c t ua l : i de a l a nd h i gh a c t ua l :

o u g h t ; l ow a c t u a l: i d e al a n d l o w a c tu a l : o u g h t ) x T y p e o f P r i m i n g

( id e a l p r im i n g ; o u g h t p r i m i n g ) X K i n d o f D i s c o m f o r t ( d e je c -

t i on - r e l a t e d ; a g i t a t ion - r e l a t e d ) A N O V A w a s pe r f o r m e d o n s ub -

j e c t s ' m o o d c h a n g e s c o r es (i .e ., t h e p o s t p r i m i n g s c o r e m i n u s t h e

p r e p r i m i n g s c o re ) .

A s Ta b l e 1 s how s , w e f oun d a s i gn i f ic a n t t h r e e - w a y i n t e r a c -

t i on . A s p r e d i c t e d , i de a l p r i m i ng i nc r e a s e d h i gh - d i s c r e pa n c y

s ub j e c t s ' de j e c t i on a nd s l i gh t l y de c r e a s e d l ow - d i s c r e pa nc y s ub -

j e c t s ' de j e c t i on , w he r e a s ough t p r i m i ng i nc r e a s e d h i gh - d i s c r e p -

a nc y s ub j e c t s ' a g i ta t i on a nd s l i gh t l y de c r e a s e d l ow - d i s c r e pa nc y

Ta b l e 1

M e a n C h a n g e i n D e j e c t io n E m o t i o n s a n d A g i ta t i o n E m o t i o n s

a s a F u n c t i o n o f L e v e l o f S e l f - D i sc r e p a n c ie s

a n d T y p e o f P r i m i n g

Ideal priming Ought priming

Level of se lf - Deject ion Agitation Deject ion Agitationdiscrepancies emotions emotions emo tions emo tions

High actual:idealand actual:oughtdiscrepancies 3.2 -0 .8 0.9 5.1

Low actual:idealand actual:oughtdiscrepancies - 1.2 0.9 0.3 -2 .6

Note. Each of eight dejection emotions a nd eight agitation emotions wa smeasured o n a 6-point scale from not at all to a great deal. The m or epositive the num ber, the greater the increase in discomfort.

s ub j e c t s ' a g i t a t i on . Thus , t h i s s t udy de m ons t r a t e s t ha t i nc r e a s -

i ng t he a c c e s s i b i li t y o f d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f s e l f - d i s c re pa nc i e s i n -c r e a s e s d i ff e r e n t k i nds o f d i s c om f or t , bu t on l y f o r s ub j e c ts

w ho s e m a gn i t ude o f d i s c r e pa nc y i s h i gh (i .e ., i nd i v i dua l s f o r

w h om t he s e l f - d i s c re pa nc i e s a r e a va i la b l e ). A nd t h i s oc c u r s e ve n

f o r t h o s e w h o p o s s es s b o th t ype s o f s e lf - d is c r e pa nc ie s . T he f a c t

t ha t p e op l e w i t h bo t h t ype s o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc i e s c a n e xpe r i e nc e

e i t he r a n i nc r e a s e i n de j e c t i on o r a n i nc r e a s e i n a g i t a t i on de -

p e n d i n g o n w h i c h t y p e o f d i s c re p a n c y i s m a d e t e m p o r a r i l y

m o r e a c c e ss ib l e b y t h e m o m e n t a r y c o n t e x t e x p la i n s w h y s o m e

pe op l e s u f f e r f r om de j e c t i on a nd a g i t a t i on a t d i f f e re n t m om e n t s

in th e i r l ives.

Th e r e s u l t s o f t he s e s t ud i e s i nd i c a t e t ha t a c t i va t ing s e l f- di s-

c r e p a n c i e s b y h a v i n g p e o p le t h i n k a b o u t n e g a ti v e e v e n ts o r t h e i r

ow n pe r s ona l gu i de s ( i . e . , t he i r hope s a nd goa l s o r du t i e s a ndob l i ga t i ons ) w il l i ndu c e t he k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t t ha t i s a s s oc i a t e d

w i t h t he a c t i va t e d s e l f - d is c r e pa nc y . B u t i f a s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y is

a c o g n i t iv e s t r u c t u r e c o m p o s e d o f t b e r e l a ti o n b e t w e e n t w o s e lf -

s t a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i ons ( e. g. , t he r e l a t ions be t w e e n a pe r s o n ' s a c -

t u a l / o w n a t t r ib u t e s a n d h i s o r h e r o u g h t / o t h e r a t t ri b u te s ) , t h e n

i t s hou l d be pos s i b l e t o a u t o m a t i c a l l y a c t i va t e t h i s s t r uc t u r e ,

a n d t h u s i n d u c e i ts a s s o c i a te d d i s c o m f o r t , b y s i m p l y a c t iv a t in g

a s i ng le c om po ne n t o f t he s t r uc t u r e . Mor e ove r , g ive n t ha t t he

a t t r i bu t e s i n p e op l e ' s s e l f -gu i de s a r e i nhe r e n t l y pos i ti ve , a c t iva t -

i n g e v e n a p o s i t i v e a t t r ib u t e s h o u l d i n d u c e d i s c o m f o r t i f th e a t -

t r i bu t e i s a c om po ne n t o f a pe r s on ' s s e lf - gu ide a nd t he pe r s on ' s

a c t u a l / o w n v a l u e o n t h e a t t r i b u t e i s d i sc r e p a n t f r o m h i s o r h e r

s e l f- gu i de va l ue on t ha t a t t r i bu t e . A n d i f it w e r e pos s ib l e t o a c t i -va t e t he s e l f -d i s c r e pa n t s t r uc t u r e a nd i nduc e i t s a ss oc i a t e d d i s -

c o m f or t w i t h a t a s k t ha t d i d n o t e ve n i nvo l ve s e l f -f oc us e d a t t e n -

t ion ( i .e . , a non-se l f - referent ia l t ask) , the not ion tha t se l f -d i s -

c r e pa nc i e s a r e e m ot i ona l l y s i gn i f i c a n t c ogn i t i ve s t r uc t u r e s

w ou l d be e s pe c i a ll y c om pe l l i ng . The s e pos s i b il i ti e s w e r e t e s t e d

i n a r e c e n t s t u d y b y S t r a u m a n a n d H i g g i n s ( i n p re s s) .

N e w Y o r k U n i v er s i ty u n d e r g r a d u a t e s w e r e a s k e d t o p a r t ic i -

pa t e i n a s t ud y on " phys i o l og i c a l e f fe c t s o f pe r c e i v i ng o t he r s "

i n w h i c h t h e y w e r e g i ve n p h r a se s o f t h e f o r m , " A n x p e r s o n i s

" ( w h e r e x w o u l d b e a t r a i t a d je c ti v e s u c h a s " fr i e n d l y "

o r " i n t e ll i g e n t" ) a n d w e r e a s k e d t o c o m p l e t e e a c h s e n t e n c e a s

qu i c k l y a s pos s i b le . Fo r e a c h s e n t e nc e , e a c h s ub j e c t ' s t o t a l ve r -

Page 12: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 12/22

3 3 0 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

b a l i za t i o n ti m e a n d s k i n c o n d u c t a n c e a m p l i t u d e w e r e re c o r d e d .

I n a d d i t io n , s u b je c t s re p o r t e d t h e i r m o o d a t t h e b e g i n n i n g a n d

e nd o f t he s e ss i on . Th e s ub j e c t s w e r e e i t he r p r e dom i na n t l y a c -

t u a l: id e a l d i s c r e p a n t o r p r e d o m i n a n t l y a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n t

a s m e a s u r e d a t l e a st 4 w e e ks ea rl ie r. Ea c h o f t he s e g r oups o f

s u b j ec t s w a s r a n d o m l y a s s i g n e d t o o n e o f t h r e e p r i m i n g c o n d i -

t i o n s : ( a ) " n o n m a t c h i n g " p r i m i n g , w h e r e t h e t r a i t a d j e c t i v e s

w e r e a t t r i bu t e s i n a s ub j e c t ' s s e l f - gu i de bu t t he a t t r i bu t e s d i d

no t a ppe a r i n t he s ub j e c t ' s a c t ua l / ow n s e l f - c onc e p t ; ( b ) " m i s -

m a t c h i ng" p r i m i ng , w he r e t he t r a i t a d j e c t i ve s w e r e a t t r i bu t e s

i n a s ub j e c t ' s s e l f- gu i de a nd t he va l ue o f t he s e a t t r i bu t e s i n t he

s ub j e c t ' s a c t ua l / ow n s e l f - c onc e p t w a s d i s c r e pa n t f r o m t he va l ue

i n t he s e l f - gu i de ; a nd ( c ) " yoke d ( m i s m a t c h i ng ) " p r i m i ng ,

w he r e t he t r a i t a d j e c t i ve s w e r e a t t r i bu t e s t ha t d i d n o t a p p e a r i n

e i t he r a s ub j e c t ' s se l f -gu i de o r a c t ua l / ow n s e l f - c onc e p t bu t w e r e

th e s a m e a t t r i bu t e s t ha t a ppe a r e d a s t he t r a i t a d j e c t ive s f o r s om e

o t h e r s u b je c t in t h e " m i s m a t c h i n g " p r i m i n g c o n d i t i o n . I n a d d i -

t i on t o t he s e t r a i t a d j e c t i ve s t ha t de f i ne d t he t h r e e s ub j e c t - r e -

l a t e d p r i m i ng c ond i t i ons , a l l s ub j e c t s r e c e i ve d t he s a m e s e t o f

" s ub j e c t - un r e l a t e d" t r a i t a d j e c t i ve s , w h i c h w e r e a t t r i bu t e s t ha t

d i d n o t a p p e a r i n a n y o f t h e s u b j e ct s ' s e lf -g u i de s o r a c t u a l / o w nsel f -concepts .

T h e b a s i c p r e d i c t i o n w a s t h a t p r i m i n g m i s m a t c h i n g a t t r i -

bu t e s w ou l d i nduc e a de j e c t i on - r e l a t e d s yndr om e ( i . e . , m ood ,

phys i o l ogy , a nd be ha v i o r ) i n i de a l - d i s c r e pa n t s ub j e c t s bu t

w o u l d i n d u c e a n a g i t a ti o n - re l a te d s y n d r o m e i n o u g h t - d i s c re p -

a n t s ub j e c t s . The r e s u l t s w e r e c ons i s t e n t w i t h t h i s p r e d i c t i on .

The g r e a t e s t i nc r e a s e i n de j e c t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i ons ( f r om t he

be g i nn i ng t o t he e nd o f t he s e s s ion ) oc c u r r e d f o r ide a l - d i s c re p -

a n t s u b j e c t s i n t h e " m i s m a t c h i n g " p r i m i n g c o n d i t i o n , a n d t h e

g r e a t e s t i nc r e a s e i n a g i t a t i on - r e l a t e d e m ot i ons oc c u r r e d f o r

o u g h t - d i s c r e p a n t s u b j e c t s i n t h e " m i s m a t c h i n g " p r i m i n g c o n -

d i t i ons ( p < . 05 ). T he s a m e ba s i c pa t t e r n o f r e s u l t s w a s a l s o

f o u n d o n t h e p h y s i o l o g ic a l a n d b e h a v i o r a l m e a s u r e s . A s s h o w ni n T a b l e 2 , i n t h e " m i s m a t c h i n g " p r i m i n g c o n d i t i o n , i d ea l- d rs -

c r e p a n t s u b j e c ts ' m e a n s k i n c o n d u c t a n c e a m p l i tu d e s a n d t o t a l

ve r ba l i z a t i on t i m e decreased ( f o r s ub j e c t - r e l a t e d a t t r i bu t e s a s

c o m p a r e d w i t h s u b j e c t - u n r e l a t e d a t t r i b u t e s ) , w h e r e a s o u g h t -

d i s c r e p a n t s u b je c t s' m e a n s k i n c o n d u c t a n c e a m p l i t u d e s a n d t o -

t a l ve r ba l i z a t ion t i m e increased ( bo t h p s < . 05 ). A s p r e d i c t e d ,

f o r t he s ub j e c t - re l a t e d a t t r ibu t e s i n t he m i s m a t c h i n g p r i m i ng

c ond i t i on , t he d i f f e r e nc e s be t w e e n a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa n t s ub -

j e c ts a n d a c t u a l :o u g h t d i s c r e p a n t s u b j e ct s in m e a n s k i n c o n d u c -

t a n c e a m p l i tu d e a n d m e a n t o t a l v e rb a l iz a t io n t i m e w e r e q u i te

s t r i k i ng ( bo t h p s < . 01 ).

S e l f- D i s cr e p a n c ie s a n d E m o t i o n a l P r o b l e m s

T h e r e s u lt s o f t h e se v a r i o u s c o r r e la t i o n a l a n d e x p e r i m e n t a l

s t ud i e s p r ov i de c ons i de r a b l e s upp or t f o r t he c e n t r a l hypo t he s i s

o f s e l f- d i sc r e p a n c y th e o r y . F u r t h e r s u p p o r t i s p r o v i d e d b y s o m e

a dd i t i ona l e v i de nc e t ha t a l s o r a i s e s a n i m por t a n t que s t i on :

G i ve n t ha t pe op l e c a n s u f f e r g r e a t l y f r om d i s c r e pa nc i e s be t w e e n

t he i r a c t ua l s e l f -s t a te a nd t he i r s e lf - gu ide s , w hy do t he y n o t s i m -

p l y low e r o r c ha nge t he i r s e l f - gu ide s t o r e duc e t he d i s c r e pa nc y?

I t i s s oc i a l i z a t ion f a c t o r s i n t he e t i o l ogy o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc ie s ,

I b el ie v e, t h a t p r o v i d e t h e a n s w e r b o t h t o w h y t h e y d o n o t a n d

t o w h y s e l f- d i s c r e pa nc ie s c a n be s o pa i n f u l . Pe r h a ps pe o p l e pos -

s e s si ng a c t ua l : ou gh t d i s c r e pa nc i e s ha d a n e a r l y h i s t o r y o f pa -

Ta b l e 2

Mea n S tandardi zed Sk in Conduc tance A mpl i tude an d Mean

Total Verbalizat ion Tim e as a Funct ion of Typ e of Sel f-

Discrepancy a nd T ype of Pr imin g o r Subject-Related

an d Subject-Unrelated A ttributes

Subject- Subject-

Type o f self-discrepancy unrelated relatedand type of priming at tr ibutes at tr ibutes

Mean standardized skin conductance ampli tude i

Actual:ideal discrepancyMismatching - 0 . 1 0 - 0 . 3 0

Nonmatching -0.2 1 0.19Yoked (mismatching) -0. 02 0.24

Actual:ought discrepancyMismatching -0. 14 0.26Nonmatching -0 .2 5 0 .09Yoked (mismatching) -0. 09 0 .1 4

Me an total verbalization time b

Actual:ideal discrepancy

Mism atching 1.59 1.31Nonm atching 1.89 1.97Yoked (mismatch ing) 2.15 2.26

Actual:ought discrepancyMism atching 1.99 2.47Nonm atching 1.60 1.65Yoked (misma tching) 1.40 1.42

"A ll values are standardized using the mean an d standard d eviation skinconductance amplitude from each subject's priming trials (subject-re-lated and unrelated attributes).b The length in seconds of each subject's total verbal response to eachattribute phrase.

r e n t a l i n t e r a c t i ons t ha t i nvo l ve d t he p r e s e nc e o f ne ga ti ve ou t -c o m e s - - f o r e x a m p l e , p a r e n t s w h o c r it ic i z ed , p u n i s h e d , o r r e -

j e c t e d t h e m f o r n o t b e i n g t h e t y p e o f c h i ld t h e i r p a r e n t s b e l ie v e d

t h e y o u g h t t o b e ; p a r e n t s w h o w e r e i n tr u s i v e o r c o n t r o l li n g i n

o r d e r t o m a k e t h e m b e c o m e t h e ty p e o f c h i ld t h e p a r e n t s b e -

l i e v e d t h e y o u g h t t o b e ; p a r e n t s w h o c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e m

t h e ir w o r r i e s a b o u t t h e m o r t h e ir o w n f e a r a n d d r e a d o f t h e

w or l d i n ge ne r a l . I n c on t r a s t , pe op l e pos s e s s i ng a c t ua l :i de a l d i s-

c r e p a n c i e s m a y h a v e h a d a n e a r ly h i s t o r y o f p a r e n t a l i n te r a c -

t i o n s t h a t i n v o l v e d t h e a b s e n c e o f p o s it iv e o u t c o m e s - - f o r e x -

a m p l e , p a r e n ts w h o w i th d r e w f r o m t h e m , a b a n d o n e d t h e m , o r

p a i d l i tt le a t t e n t i o n t o t h e m w h e n e v e r t h e y w e r e n o t t h e t y p e o f

c h i l d t h e p a r e n t s w a n t e d o r h o p e d f o r ; p a r e n t s w h o d i d n o t o r

c ou l d no t s a t i s f y t he c h i l d ' s ne e ds f o r l ove , nu r t u r a nc e , o r a p -p r o v a l ; p a r e n t s w h o c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e m t h e i r d i s a p p o i n t -

m e n t i n t he m o r t he i r ow n f e e li ngs o f hope l es s ne s s , s adne s s , a nd

d i s c ou r a ge m e n t a bou t l if e. Pe o p l e pos s e s s ing bo t h t ype s o f s e lf -

d i s c re p a n c i e s m a y h a v e e x p e r i e n c e d b o t h k i n d s o f n e g at iv e i n -

t e r a c t i ons w i t h t he i r pa r e n t s .

I t is l ike l y t ha t c h i l d r e n a r e m o t i va t e d t o a vo i d t he ne ga t i ve

ps yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i on a s s oc i a t e d w i t h t he i r pa r e n t s ' ne ga t i ve

i n t e r a c t i ons w i t h t he m . To do s o , c h i l d r e n m us t l e a r n t o a n t i c i-

pa t e t he s e e ve n t s a nd d i s c ove r how t he i r ow n r e s pons e s a nd a t -

t r i bu t e s i nc r e a s e o r de c r e a s e t he l i ke l i hood t ha t t he s e e ve n t s w i l l

oc c u r . Th i s l e a r n i ng p r oc e s s u l t i m a t e l y l e a ds t o t he a c qu i s i t ion

o f m e n t a l r e p r e s e n t a t i ons o f t he i r pa r e n t s ' i de a l gu ide s f o r t he m

Page 13: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 13/22

SELF-DISCREPANCY THEORY 331

( t o a v o i d t h e a b s e n c e o f p o s i ti v e o u t c o m e s ) a n d / o r t h e i r p a r e n t s '

o u g h t g u i d e s f o r t h e m ( t o a v o i d t h e p r e s e n c e o f n e g at iv e o u t -

c om e s ) . I t a ls o c a us e s c h i l d r e n t o a c qu i r e be l i e f s a bo u t t he ne g a -

t ive c ons e que nc e s o f fa i li ng t o m e e t t he i r p a r e n t s ' gu i de s . I t is

w e ll k n o w n , f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t d e p r e s s e d p e o p l e o f t e n g r o w u p

be l i e v i ng t ha t t he i r pa r e n t s ' c a r e , a f f e c t i on , a nd a pp r ova l a r e

d e p e n d e n t o n t h e i r l iv i n g u p t o a n d p u r s u i n g t h e i r p a r e n t s ' s t a n -

da r ds f o r t he m ( s ee A r ie t i & B e m por a d , 1978 ; B e c k , 1967 ; G u i -

da n o & L i o t t i , 1983).

I f c h i l d r e n be l ie ve t ha t i t i s e s se n t i a l t o m e e t t he i r pa r e n t s '

gu i de s t o a vo i d e x pe r i e nc i ng a ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t ion ,

t he n a f a i l u r e t o do s o ( a s r e f l e c t e d i n a d i s c r e pa nc y be t w e e n

t he i r c u r r e n t s t a t e a nd t he e nd - s t a t e r e p r e s e n t e d by t he i r pa r -

e n t s ' gu i de s f o r t he m ) i s li ke ly t o i nd uc e i n t e ns e e m ot i ona l d i s -

c om f or t . I n o r de r t o a vo i d t h i s i n t e ns e pa i n , t he c h i l d m us t a t -

t e m p t t o m e e t t h e p a r e n t s ' g u id e s , w h i c h r e q u i r e s i n t u r n t h a t

t h e c h i l d m o n i t o r h i s o r h e r p r o g r es s t o w a r d m e e t i n g t h e g u id e .

S u c h m o n i t o r i n g in v o l v e s c o m p a r i n g a c u r r e n t p e r f o r m a n c e o r

a t t r ib u t e t o t h e s t a n d a r d r e p r e s e n t e d b y t h e g u id e . T h i s m e a n s

t ha t t he c u r r e n t l eve l o f t he a t t r i bu t e i s i n t e r p r e t e d i n r e f e r e nc e

t o t h e g u i d e r a t h e r t h a n i n r e f e re n c e t o s o m e f a c t u a l s ta n d a r d ,s uc h a s t he c h i l d ' s p r e v i ous l e ve l o f t he a t t r i bu t e ( s e e H i gg i ns ,

S t r a u m a n , & K l e i n , 1986). O ve r t i m e , t he n , t he c h i l d ' s a c t ua l /

ow n s e l f m a y be c ons t r uc t e d , a t l e a s t i n pa r t , i n r e f e r e nc e t o h i s

o r he r gu i de s . Thu s t o t he e x t e n t t ha t c h i l d r e n be l ie ve i t i s e s s e n -

t i a l t o m e e t t he gu i de s f o r t he m , t he y a r e m or e l i ke l y t o a c qu i r e

a c t ua l : gu i de d i s c r e pa nc i e s , t he y a r e m or e l i ke l y t o s u f f e r i n -

t e n s e l y f r o m a n y d i s c r e p a n c y t h e y d o p o s s e s s , a n d t h e y a r e

m o r e l ik e ly t o r e s is t a n y a t t e m p t t o m o d i f y t h e i r g u i de s .

We ha ve a r gue d ( H i gg i ns , K l e i n , & S t r a um a n , 1985) t ha t i n

o r de r f o r s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y t o be m a x i m a l l y u s e f u l a s a n

a p p r o a c h f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d e v e n t u a l ly tr e a ti n g , e m o t i o n a l

p r ob l e m s , i t m us t be e x t e nde d t o i nc l ude va r i a b l e s t ha t r e f l e c t

pe r s ona l be l i e fs a bou t t he i n t e r pe r s ona l c ons e qu e nc e s o f pos -s e s si ng t he d i s c r e pa nc y . The r e f o r e , a m e a s u r e o f be li e f s i n s uc h

c o n t in g e n c i e s w a s i n c l u d e d i n S t r a u m a n a n d H i g g i n s ' s ( 1 9 8 7 )

s t udy de s c r i be d e a rl ie r. Pa r t o f a ge ne r a l Soc i a l i z a ti on Q ue s t i on -

na i r e a s ke d t he s ub j e c t s t he f o l l ow i ng k i nds o f que s t i ons : ( a )

" H a v e y o u e v e r fe l t u n l o v e d b e c a u s e y o u d i d n ' t l iv e u p t o y o u r

p a r e n t s ideals f o r y o u ? T o w h a t e x t e n t ? " ( b ) " H a v e y o u e v e r fe l t

y o u w o u l d b e e m o t i o n a l l y a b a n d o n e d i f y o u d i d n ' t l iv e u p t o

y o u r p a r e n t s ' i d e a ls f o r y o u ? T o w h a t e x t e n t ? " ( c ) " D i d y o u

e v e r b e li e ve t h a t y o u r p a r e n t s w o u l d r e j e c t y o u i f y o u d i d n ' t l iv e

u p t o t h e i r oughts f o r y o u ? T o w h a t e x t e n t ? " S u b j e c t s' s c o r e s fo r

t he t h r e e i de a l que s t i ons w e r e a ve r a ge d t o f o r m a n ove r a l l ide a l -

o u t c o m e c o n t i n g e n c y s c o re , a n d t h e i r s c o r e s f o r t h e t h r e e o u g h t

q u e s t i o n s w e r e a v er a g e d t o f o r m a n o v e r a l l o u g h t - o u t c o m e c o n -t i nge nc y s c o r e .

As descr ibed ear l i e r , subjec t s ' se l f -d i screpancies were ob-

t a i n e d w e e k s b e f o r e th e y a n s w e r e d t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s m e a s u r -

i ng the i r e m o t i ona l p r o b l e m s . U s i ng t e r t i a r y s p li ts , w e d i v i de d

t h e s u b j ec t s i n t o t h r e e l e v e ls - -- h ig h , m e d i u m , a n d l o w - - w i t h

r e ga r d t o bo t h a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e p a nc y ( i. e. , a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l /

o w n d i s c r e p a n c y a n d a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y c o m -

b i n e d ) a n d a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y ( i . e . , a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t /

o w n d i s c r e p a n c y a n d a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y

c om bi ne d ) . U s i ng m e d i a n s p li ts , w e a ls o d i v i de d t he s ub j e c ts

i n t o t w o l eve ls o f i de a l - ou t c o m e c on t i nge nc y a nd t w o l e ve l s o f

o u g h t - o u t c o m e c o n t i n g en c y . W e th e n p e r f o r m e d a L e v e l o f A c -

Ta b l e 3

Squared Multiple Correlations Between Domain of Self-Discrepancy Plus Outcome Contingencyand Type of Emotional Problem

Dom ain o f sel f-discrepancy an d

outcome BDI HSCL HSCL HSCLcontingency de pr es s io n de pre ss i on anxie ty paranoid

Ideal .39*** .27*** .18* .11Ou ght .11 .17* .22** .24**

Note.BD I = Beck Depression Inventory; HSCL = H opkins SymptomChecklist. N = 70.* p < . 0 5 . * * p < . 0 1 . * * * p < . 0 0 1 .

t u a l :I d e a l D i s c r e p a n c y • L e v e l o f Id e a l - O u t c o m e C o n t i n g e n c y

A N OV A a n d a L e v e l o f A c t u a l : O u g h t D i s c r e p a n c y • L e v e l o f

O u g h t - O u t c o m e C o n t i n g e n c y A N O V A f o r e a c h o f a s e t o f g en -

e r a l m e a s u r e s o f e m o t i o n a l p r o b l e m s .O u r m o s t i m p o r t a n t p r e d i c ti o n w a s t h a t t h e i n t e n s it y o f th e

s u b j e c t s ' e m o t i o n a l p r o b l e m s w o u l d b e r e l a t e d t o b o t h t h e i r

l e ve l o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc y a nd t he i r l eve l o f ou t c om e c on t i ng e nc y

a n d t h a t t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e i r e m o t i o n a l p r o b l e m s w o u l d d e p e n d

on th e typ e of se l f -guide invo lved ( i .e . , idea l vs . ough t ) . Table

3 s how s t he r e s u lt s . A s p r e d i c t e d , a n a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y

c o m b i n e d w i t h a n i d e a l - o u tc o m e c o n t i n g e n c y w a s s tr o n g ly a s-

s oc i a t e d w i t h de p r e s s i ve (i .e ., de j e c t i on - r e l a t e d ) s y m p t om s bu t

ha d a r e l a t i ve l y w e a k a s s oc i a t i on w i t h a nx i e t y / pa r a no i d ( i . e . ,

a g i t a t i on - r e l a t e d ) s ym pt om s , w he r e a s t he r e ve r s e w a s t r ue f o r

a n a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y c o m b i n e d w i t h a n o u g h t - o u t c o m e

c on t i nge nc y . ( Fo r o t he r r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t udy , se e H i gg i ns , K l e i n ,

& S t ra u m a n , 1 9 8 7 .)Th e r e s u l t s i n Ta b l e 3 s ugge s t t ha t t he r e i s s om e r e l a t i on ( a l -

t h o u g h w e a k ) b e t w e e n a n a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y

a n d a g i t a t io n - r e la t e d s y m p t o m s a n d s o m e r e l a ti o n b e t w e e n a n

a c t u a l / o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y a n d d e j e c t i o n - r e l a t e d

s ym pt om s . Th i s a ppa r e n t w e a k re l a t i on , how e ver , c ou l d be due

t o t he i n t e r c o r r e l a t i on be t w e e n t he t w o t ype s o f se l f - d is c r e pa n -

c ies . In order to cont rol s ta t i s t i ca l ly for th i s potent ia l fac tor ,

a n a l ys e s o f c o v a r i a n c e w e r e p e r f o r m e d i n w h i c h l ev el o f a c tu a l :

ough t d i s c r e pa nc y w a s t he c ova r i a t e f o r t he a na l ys e s i nvo l v i ng

t he i de a l dom a i n , a n d l e ve l o f a c t ua l :i de a l d i s c r e pa n c y w a s t he

c o v a r i a te f o r t h e a n a l y s es i n v o l v i n g th e o u g h t d o m a i n . T h e s e

a na l ys e s r e p l i c a t e d t he s i gn i f i c a n t r e l a t i on be t w e e n i de a l do -

m a i n a n d d e p r es s iv e s y m p t o m s a n d t h e s i g n if i ca n t r el a t io n b e -t w e en o u g h t d o m a i n a n d a n x i e t y /p a r a n o i d s y m p t o m s , b u t b o t h

t h e r e l a ti o n b e t w e e n i d e a l d o m a i n a n d a n x i e t y a n d t h e r e l a t io n

be t w e e n ough t dom a i n a nd de p r e s s i on w e r e no l onge r s i gn i f i -

c a n t ( p > . 20 ).

T h e a b i li t y o f s e l f- d i sc r e p a n c y t h e o r y t o d i s c r i m i n a te b e -

t w e e n pe op l e vu l ne r a b l e t o m i l d de p r e s s i on a nd t hos e s us c e p t i -

b l e t o a n x i e t y w a s re t e s te d i n a s u b s e q u e n t s t u d y b y S t r a u m a n

a nd H i gg i ns ( 1987) . We us e d a l a t e n t va r i a b l e a na l ys i s t o e va l u -

a t e s i m u l t a ne o us l y t he va l i d i t y o f t he p r e d i c t e d c ons t r u c t s ( s e e

Bentler, 1980). In t ro du cto ry psych olog y s tuden ts f i rs t f il led out

t h e S e l v es q u e s t io n n a i r e a s p a r t o f a b a t t e ry o f m e a s u r e s t h e y

r e c e i ve d a t t he be g i nn i ng o f t he s e m es te r. A p pr ox i m a t e l y 1

Page 14: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 14/22

33 2 E. TORY HIGGINS

Figure 1. Latent-variable model relating type of self-discrepancy (actual/own:ideal/own discrepancy; ac-tual/own:ought/other discrepancy) to kind o f emotional problem (depression, social anxiety). (SAD = So-

cial Avoidance and Distress Scale; FNE = Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale; HSCL = Hopkins SymptomChecklist, I = Interpersonal Sensitivity subscale, D = Depression subscale; BDI = Beck Depression Inven-tory.)

mo nth la ter they f il led out an other bat tery of measures that

comprised both the la tent variable for depression--the Beck

Depres s ion Inven tory (BDI) and the Hopk ins Symp tom C heck-

l is t Depress ion subscale (H SC L-D )-- and the la tent variable for

social anxiety---the Fear of Negat ive Evaluat ion Scale (FNE;

Watso n & Friend, 1969), the Social Avo idance and Distress

Scale (SAD; Watson & Friend, 1969), and the Hopk ins Sym p-

tom Checklist Interpersonal Sensitivity subscale (HSCL-I).

The hypothes ized causal s t ruc ture -- th e val idi ty of both the

depress ion c onstruct an d the social anxiety cons truct , a re la t ionbetween actual /own: ideal /own discrepancy and depress ion that

is independent of a re la tion between actual /own :ough t /other

discrepancy and socia l anxiety, and vice versa--was the only

model to provide an acceptable f it to the sam ple data , x 2 (11,

N = 163) = 16.70, p > . 15. (For further discussion of the com -

parison o f the hypothes ized causal s t ructure wi th a l ternat ive

models, see Strauman & Higgins, 1987.) As Figure 1 shows,

actual /own: ideal /own discrepancy was uniquely associa ted

with depress ion but not wi th anxiety, whereas actual /own:

ought /other discrepancy was uniquely associa ted with socia l

anxiety but not w i th depression. Th e resul ts of this s tudy, then,

s t rongly support the predict ions o f se l f-discrepancy theory.

C o m p a r i s o n t o O t h e r T h e o r i e s R e la t i n g

Se l f -Be l i e f s and Affec t

W ha t is the relation b etween self-beliefs and affect? This h as

been a centra l ques t ion from the beginning o f psychologists ' in-

terest in the self. An d the general answer m ost ofte n given is that

incompat ible se lf-bel iefs produ ce emotion al problems. A mon g

a wide arr ay o f poss ibi l it ies , three bas ic types of incom pat ible

self-beliefs can b e identified: (a) inconsistencies between one 's

self-perceived attributes (or self-concept) and external, behav-ioral feedback re la ted to one 's se l f-percept ions; (b) contradic-

t ions amo ng one 's sel f-perceived a tt r ibutes th at imp ede a coher-

ent and unified self-concept; and (c) discrepancies between

one 's self-perceived attributes and som e standa rd o r self-guide.

Self-discrepancy theory is an example of the la t ter type o f

theory.

Inconsis tencies between on e 's se l f and external feedback can

occu r from on e 's own responses or the responses of others. Ar-

onso n's (1969) vers ion of cogni t ive dissonance theory (Fes-

tinger, 1957), with its emph asis o n self-expectancies, is an ex-

ample oftb e forme r case . The theory proposes that when people

behave in a m ann er that i s inconsis tent wi th thei r se l f-concept ,

Page 15: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 15/22

SELF-DISCREPANCY THEORY 333

t he y e xpe r i e nc e d i s c om f or t (s e e a l s o B r a m e l , 1968 ; R oge r s ,

1959) , a s w he n s om e one w ho be l i e ve s t ha t he o r s he i s de c e n t

a n d t r u t h f u l p e r s u a d e s a n o t h e r p e r s o n t o p e r f o r m a t a s k t h a t

h e o r s h e k n o w s i s b o r i n g . W i c k l u n d a n d G o l l w i t z e r' s ( 1 9 8 2 )

s y m b o l i c s e l f -c o m p l e t io n t h e o r y p r o p o s e s t h a t p e o p l e w h o a r e

c o m m i t t e d t o a s e l f -d e f in i ti o n b u t h a v e b e e n u n a b l e t o a c h i e v e

i t c om pl e t e l y e xpe r i e nc e a p s yc ho l og i c a l t e ns i on t h a t m o t i va t e s

s e l f - c om pl e t i on s t r a te g i e s. Sw a nn ' s ( 1983) s e l f- ve r if i c a ti on t he -

o r y i s a l s o c onc e r ne d w i t h i nc ons i s t e nc i e s be t w e e n s e l f - c on -

c e p t s a nd e x t e r na l f e e dba c k , bu t i t f oc us e s on pe op l e ' s a t t e m p t s

t o o b t a i n r e s p o n s e s f r o m o t h e r s t h a t c o n f i r m t h e i r s e l f- c o n c e p t

( s ee a l s o Le c ky , 196 l ; Wi c l d und & G o l l w i t z e r , 1982). T he t he -

o r y s t a t e s t ha t pe op l e a r e d i s t r e s s e d w he n t he y r e c e i ve s oc i a l

f e e dba c k t h a t i s i nc ons i s t e n t w i t h t he i r s e l f - c onc e p t , e ve n w he n

t he f e e db a c k d i s c on f i r m s a ne ga t i ve s e lf - c onc e p t i on . Pe op l e w i l l

s e e k ou t s e l f - c ons is t e n t s oc ia l f e e dba c k a nd a vo i d s e l f - inc ons i s -

t e n t f e e d b a c k i n a m a n n e r r e m i n i s c e n t o f th e " s e l e ct iv e e x p o -

s u r e " h y p o t h e s i s o f c o g n it iv e d i s s o n a n c e t h e o r y ( se e O l s o n &

Z a n n a , 1 9 7 9 ; W i c l d u n d & B r e h m , 1 9 76 ).

I t h a s a ls o b e e n p r o p o s e d t h a t p e o p l e n e e d c o n s i s t e n c y a m o n g

t he i r s e l f - pe r c e i ve d a t t r i bu t e s i n o r de r t o f o r m a c ohe r e n t a ndun i f i e d s e l f - c onc e p t ( se e , f o r e xa m pl e , A l l po r t , 1955 ; B r i m ,

1976 ; Eps t e i n , 1973 ; H a r t e r , 1986 ; Le c ky , 196 l ; Mor s e & G e r -

ge n , 1970 ; R oge r s , 1961 ; Snygg & C om bs , 1949) . H a r t e r ha s

f ound t ha t a do l e s c e n t s a r e a b l e t o d i s t i ngu i s h be t w e e n t hos e

s e l f- pe r c e ive d oppos i t e t r a i t s t ha t a r e i n c o n f l i c t o r inc ons i s t e n t

w i t h e a c h o t h e r ( e .g ., " s m a r t " a n d " f u n - l o v i n g " i n s c h o o l ) a n d

t h o s e t h a t a r e n o t i n c o n f l i c t b e c a u s e t h e y o c c u r i n d i f f e r e n t

c o n t e x t s (e .g ., " o u t g o i n g " w i t h f r ie n d s a n d " s h y " w i t h r o m a n t i c

i n t e r e s t s ) . A s t he o r i e s p r opos i ng t he ne e d f o r s e l f - c ons i s t e nc y

s ugge s t, t he a do l e s c e n t s w e r e d i s t re s s e d by t he i r s e l f - pe r c ei ve d

conf l i c t in g t ra i ts .

Th e f i r s t t w o t y pe s o f the o r i e s o f inc o m p a t i b l e s el f- be li ef s e m -

pha s i z e t he i n t e r r e l a t i on a m ong s e l f - pe r c e i ve d a t t r i bu t e s , be -h a v i o r s , a n d e x p e r i e n c e s - - t h a t i s , t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n a m o n g

d i f f e r e n t p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i on a bou t t he a c t ua l s e lf . The t h i r d

t y p e e m p h a s i z e s t h e r e l a ti o n b e t w e e n t h e a c t u a l s e l f a n d s o m e

s t a nda r d o r s e l f - gu i de . The s e t he o r i e s p r opos e t ha t d i s c r e pa n -

c i e s be t w e e n ou r s e l f - pe r c e i ve d a t t r i bu t e s ( o r be ha v i o r ) a nd

s om e c on t e x t ua l l y s a l i e n t s t a nda r d o r pe r s ona l a s p i r a t i ons o r

va l ue s p r oduc e d i s c om f or t ( e . g . , A d l e r , 1964 ; C a n t o r & K i h l -

s t r o m , 1 9 8 6 ; C o o l e y , 1 9 0 2 / 1 9 6 4 ; D u v a l & W i c k l u n d , 1 9 7 2 ;

F r e u d , 1 9 2 3 / 1 9 6 1 ; H o m e y , 1 9 5 0 ; J a m e s , 1 8 9 0 / 1 9 4 8 ; M a r k u s

& Nu r ius , 1987; Scheier & Carver , 1982 ; Sul l ivan, 1953). In

h i s c la s s i c t he o r y o f the s e lf , J a m e s d i s t i ngu i s he d be t w e e n t he

m o t i v a t i o n a l r o l e o f th e s e l f i n p r o m p t i n g a n d r e g u l at i n g a c t i o n

( i .e . , se l f - seeking, se l f -preservat ion) and in inf luencing the pro-cess of se l f -evaluat ion ( i.e ., se l f -es t im at ion, se l f -ap prec ia t ion ) .

T h e o r i e s o f t h e t h i r d t y p e v a r y i n w h e t h e r t h e y e m p h a s i z e t h e

s e l f - r e gu l a t o r y /a c t i on - e l i c it i ng a s pe c t o f t he s e l f ( e. g. , C a n t o r &

K i h l s t r om , 1986 ; M a r ku s & N ur i u s , 1987 ; Se he i e r & C a r ver ,

1982) or the se l f -evaluat ive aspect o f the se l f (e .g . , A dler, 1964;

C oo l e y , 1902 / 1964 ; H om e y , 1950) .

B e c a us e pa s t t he o r i e s o f i nc om pa t i b l e s e lf -be li ef s ha ve o f t e n

no t e xp l i c i tl y d i s t i ngu i s he d be t w e e n a c t ua l - s e l f a t t r i bu t e s a nd

sel f -guides (e .g . , goal s and values) , so me o f the m are , in fac t ,

b l e nds o f t he s e c on d a nd t h i r d t ype s o f the o r i e s ( e. g. , H a l t e r ,

1986 ; Le c ky , 1961 ; R oge r s , 1961 ; Snyg g & C om bs , 1949) . I n

s uc h c a s e s i t is no t c l e a r w h e t he r pe op l e ' s m o t i va t i o n i s t o ha ve

a c ohe r e n t , un i f i e d s e l f pe r s e - - s e l f - c ons i s t e n c y f o r t he s a ke o f

s tabi li ty , predic tabi l i ty , o r order l iness ( like a "go od Ge s ta l t

f i t " ) - - o r w h e t h e r t h e i r m o t i v a t io n i s s e l f -e n h a n c e m e n t a s d e -

f i ne d i n r e l a t i on t o t he i r goa l s a nd va l ue s .

S e l f -d i s c re p a n c y t h e o r y i s a n e x a m p l e o f th e t h i r d t y p e o f

t he o r y t ha t e m p ha s i z e s t he s e l f - eva l ua ti ve a s pe c t o f t he s e lf , bu t

i t h a s a n u m b e r o f u n i q u e f e a tu r e s:

I . I t e xp l i c it l y d i s ti ngu i s he s a m o ng d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f s e lf -

gu i de s i n t he d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f ne ga t i ve p s yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i ons

t ha t a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by t he i r d i s c r e pa nc y f r om t he a c t ua l s e l f -

c on c e p t (e .g ., a n a c t ua l s e l f - c onc e p t : i de a l s e lf - gu ide d i s c r e pa nc y

r e p r e s e n t i ng t he a bs e nc e o f pos i t ive ou t c om e s ; a n a c t ua l s e lf -

c o n c e p t : o u g h t s e lf - gu i d e d i s c r e p a n c y r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e p r e s e n c e

o f ne ga t ive ou t c om e s ) .

2 . I t e xp l i c i t l y d i s t i ngu i s he s a m ong d i f f e r e n t s e l f - gn i de s i n

t e r m s o f th e s t a n d p o i n t o n t h e s e l f t h a t i s i n v o lv e d . A s I m e n -

t i one d e a rl ie r, a l t ho ugh M e a d ( 1934) de s c r i be d t he de ve l opm e n t

o f d i ff e r e n t s t a ndpo i n t s , i t i s no t c l e a r i n h i s t he o r y w h e t he r t he

d i f f e r e n t s t a ndp o i n t s on t he s e l f r e m a i n d i s t inc t . Th e d i s t i nc t i on

be t w e e n p r i va t e a nd pub l i c s e l f - c ons c i ous ne s s a s c h r on i c p r e -

di spo s i t ions to be se l f -a t t ent ive (see Ca rve r & Scheier, 1978;

Fe n i gs t e i n , Sc he i e r , & B us s , 1975) s e e m s t o m i r r o r t he " ow n"

v e r s u s " o t h e r " s t a n d p o i n t p r o p o s e d h e r e . B u t b o t h " o w n " a n d

" o t h e r " s t a ndpo i n t s a r e pe r s ona l , c ove r t a s pe c t s o f one ' s i n t e r -

na l l y r e p r e s e n t e d s e lf - gu ide s , a nd t hu s both o f t h e s e s t a n d p o i n t s

w ou l d be a s s oc i a t e d w i t h private s e l f- c ons c i ous ne s s. Mor e ove r ,

i n s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y on l y t he i n t e r na l ly r e p r e s e n t e d s t a nd -

p o i n t s o f significant o t h e r s a r e c o n s i d e r e d - - n o t s o m e g e n e r a l

c o n c e r n a b o u t h o w o n e a p p e a r s a n d i s o b s e r v e d b y o t h e r s ( i. e. ,

pub l i c s e l f -c ons c i ous ne s s ).

3 . I t expl ic i t ly d i s t inguishe s be tw een th e avai labi l i ty of a sel f-

d i s c re p a n c y , a s m e a s u r e d b y t h e m a g n i t u d e o f a d i s c r e p a n c y

between in ternal ly represented se l f - s ta tes , and the access ibi l i tyo f a s e lf - d i sc r e pa nc y , w h i c h c a n va r y a s a f unc t i on o f c on t e x t ua l

p r i m i n g .

S e l f -d i s c re p a n c y t h e o r y c o u l d b e u s e d t o p r o v i d e a g e n e r a l

f r a m e w o r k f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e e m o t i o n a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f

inc om pa t ib le se l f-be lie fs . In par t i cular , i t co uld be used to d i s -

t i ngu i s h a m on g i nc om pa t i b l e s el f- be li ef s w i t h r e ga r d t o t he

d i f f e r e n t k i nds o f ne ga t ive e m ot i on s t he y a r e l ike l y to i nduc e .

Th e f i rs t t w o t ype s o f the o r i e s o f i nc om p a t i b l e s el f- be li ef s, i n

p a r ti c u la r , h a v e t e n d e d t o d e s c r i b e t h e e m o t i o n a l c o n s e q u e n c e s

o f i nc om p a t i b i l i t y on l y i n ve r y ge ne r a l t e r m s , s uc h a s c on f l ic t ,

a nx i e t y , o r d i s t re s s . I f w e c ons i de r t he f ir s t t ype o f the o r y , f o r

e x a m p l e , i t m a y b e t h a t t h e e m o t i o n a l i m p a c t o f e x t e rn a l b e h a v -

i o r al f e e d b a c k , w h e t h e r f r o m o n e ' s o w n r e s p o n s e o r f r o m a n -o t h e r p e r so n , d e p e n d s o n w h e t h e r t h e a c t u a l / o w n a t t r i b u t e t o

w h i c h t he f e e dba c k i s r e le va n t ha s i m p l i c a t i ons f o r t he pe r s on ' s

s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc ie s . I f t he be ha v i o r a l f e e d ba c k e i t he r d i s c on f i r m s

a n a c t u a l / o w n a t t r i b u t e t h a t c u r r e n t l y m a t c h e s a n i d e a l / o w n

a t t ri b u t e , c o n f i r m s a n a c t u a l / o w n a t t r ib u t e t h a t c u r r e n t l y m i s -

m a t c h e s a n i d e a l / o w n a t t r i b u t e , o r c r e a t e s a n e w a c t u a l / o w n

a t t r i b u t e t h a t m i s m a t c h e s a n i d e a l / o w n a t t r i b u t e , t h e p e r s o n

s hou l d fe e l d i s a pp o i n t e d a nd d i s s a ti s fi e d . O n t he o t he r ha nd , i f

t h e b e h a v i o r a l f e e d b a c k e i t h e r d i s c o n f ir m s a n a c t u a l / o w n a t tr i -

b u t e t h a t c u r r e n t l y m a t c h e s a n o u g h t / o t h e r a t t ri b u t e , c o n f r m s

a n a c t u a l / o w n a t t r i b u t e t h a t c u r r e n t l y m i s m a t c h e s a n o u g h t /

o t h e r a t tr i b u t e, o r c r e a te s a n e w a c t u a l / o w n a t t r i b u t e t h a t m i s -

Page 16: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 16/22

3 3 4 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

m a t c h e s a n oug h t / o t he r a t tr i bu t e , t he pe r s on s ho u l d f ee l a f r a i d

a n d t h r e a te n e d .

O n e c a s e o f d i s c o m f o r t i n d u c e d b y d i s c o n f i r m i n g f e e d b a c k

w ou l d s e e m t o be d i f fi c u l t t o e xp l a i n i n t e r m s o f s e l f -d i s c r e p -

a n c y t h e o r y : T h e c a s e w h e r e s o m e o n e w h o p o s s e s se s n e g a ti v e

o r s o c ia l ly u n d e s ir a b l e a c t u a l / o w n a t t ri b u t e s i s m a d e u n c o m -

f o r t a b l e by f e e dba c k d i s c on f i r m i ng t hos e a t t r i bu t e s ( s e e Sw a r m ,

1983) . I n s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y the o r y , how e ve r, w he t he r a n a t t r i bu t e

i s s oc i a l ly de s ir a b l e i s no t r e l e va n t . W ha t m a t t e r s i s w he t he r a n

a t t r i bu t e m a t c h e s o r m i s m a t c he s one ' s se l f- gn ide s . I t i s pos s i b le ,

t he r e f o r e , t ha t a pe r s on c ou l d pos s e s s a n a t t r i bu t e t ha t i s ne ga -

t ive o r s oc i a ll y unde s i r a b l e bu t ne ve r t he l e s s m a t c he s o ne o f h i s

o r he r i m p or t a n t s e lf -gu ide s. Fo r e xa m p l e , e ve n t hou gh a n a t t r i-

b u t e i s d y s f u n c t i o n a l o u t s i d e t h e h o m e a n d d o e s n o t m e e t a

c h i l d ' s o w n w i s h es i t c o u l d m a t c h w h a t s o m e s i g n i fi c a n t o t h e r

i n t h e h o m e w a n t s t h e c h i l d t o b e o r b e li e ve s th e c h i l d o u g h t t o

be , s uc h a s i n t he c a s e o f a c h i l d w hos e pa r e n t s be l i eve i t is h i s

o r he r du t y t o be de pe nde n t , s ubm i s s i ve, a nd d i f f i den t . A c c o r d -

i ng t o s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y , d i s c on f i r m i ng s uc h " ne ga t i ve "

a t t ri b u t e s w o u l d i n d u c e d i s c o m f o r t b e c a u s e i t w o u l d c r e a t e a

d i s c r e p a n c y w i t h a s e lf -g n id e ; t h e k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t w o u l d d e -

p e n d o n w h i c h t y p e o f s e lf - d is c r e p a n cy t h e d i s c o n f i r m e d a t t r i-

bu t e a c t i va t e d ( e. g. , f e a r a nd t h r e a t f o r a n a c t u a l / ow n : ou gh t /

o t he r d i s c r e pa nc y ) .

Th e s e c on d t ype o f the o r y o f i nc om p a t i b l e s e lf -be li ef s c on -

c e r n s c a s es o f d i s c o m f o r t f r o m c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a m o n g s e lf -a t tr i-

bu t e s t ha t i m pe de a c o he r e n t a nd un i f i e d s e lf . Som e o f t he s e

c a s e s m a y r e f l e c t d i s c r e pa nc i e s be t w e e n t he a t t r i bu t e s pe op l e

be l i e ve t he y pos s e s s a nd t he a t t r i bu t e s t ha t s i gn i f i c a n t o t he r s

be l i e ve t he y pos s e s s ( i . e . , a n a c t ua l / ow n : a c t ua l / o t he r d i s c r e p -

a nc y ) o r d i s c r e pa nc i e s be t w e e n t he a t t r i bu t e s t h a t t w o d i f f e r e n t

s i gn i fi c a n t o t he r s be li e ve t he y pos s e s s (i .e ., a n a c t ua l / O t he r 1 :

a c t u a l / O t h e r 2 d i s c re p a n c y ) . S u c h d i s c r e p a n c i e s a r e o f t e n d e -s c r i b e d a s a n " i d e n t i t y c r i s i s " a n d a r e e s p e c i a l l y c o m m o n i n

a do l e s c e nc e (s e e Er i k s on , 1950 / 1963 , 1968 ; H a r t e r , 1986) .

A s I m e n t i one d e a r li er , o t h e r c a s e s o f t h i s ge ne r a l t ype m a y

r e f le c t d i s c r e pa nc i e s i nvo l v i ng s e l f - gu ide s a nd t hus a r e a c t ua l l y

i n s t a nc e s o f t he t h i r d t ype o f t he o r y . Le c k y ( 196 l ) , f o r e xa m pl e ,

d e s c r ib e d t h e a c u t e n e e d f o r u n i t y i n a d o l e s c e n c e c a u s e d b y a

c ha l l e nge t o va l ue s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h t he a do l e s c e n t s ' pa r e n t s

f r om va l ue s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h t he a do l e s c e n t ' s r om a n t i c pa r t ne r .

Th i s c on f l i c t p r oba b l y r e f l e c t s a d i s c r e pa nc y be t w e e n t he k i nd

o f p e r s o n t h e p a r e n t s b e l ie v e t h e a d o l e s ce n t o u g h t t o b e a n d t h e

k i n d o f p e r s o n t h e r o m a n t i c p a r t n e r w o u l d l i k e th e a d o l e s c e n t t o

be ( i. e. , a n ou gh t / O t he r 1 i de a l / O t he r 2 d i s c r e pa nc y ) . S i m i l a r ly ,

H a r t e r ( 1 9 8 6 ) p r o v i d e s t h e f o ll o w in g e x a m p l e o f a s t u d e n t ' s b e -f ie fs a b o u t h o w h e o r s h e s h o u l d a c t in s c h o o l - - " I k n o w I shouM

b e d o i n g w e ll i n s c h o o l. I g e t p r e s s u re f r o m m y f a t h e r " - - w h i c h

i s in c on f l i c t w i t h t he s t ud e n t ' s s e l f - per c e i ved a c t i ons . A c c o r d i ng

t o s e l f - d is c r e pa nc y t he o r y , t h i s a c t ua l / ow n : ou gh t / o t he r d i s c r e p -

a n c y s h o u l d p r o d u c e n o t o n l y g e n er a l c o n fl ic t , a s H a r t e r s u g -

ge st s, bu t f e a r a nd t h r e a t i n pa r t i c u la r . A nd d i s c r e pa nc i e s w i t h

pe r s ona l goa l s a nd de s i r e s , w h i c h H a t t e r a l s o de s c ri be s , s hou l d

p r oduc e d i s a ppo i n t m e n t a nd d i s s a t i s f a c t i on . Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y

t h e o r y c o u l d p o t e n t ia l ly c o m p l e m e n t o t h e r t h e o r ie s o f se l f- b e -

f i e f i nc om pa t i b i l i t y by d i f f e r e n t ia t i ng a m ong t he k i nds o f d i s -

c o m f o r t t h a t i n c o m p a t i b i l it y c a n p r o d u c e a s a f u n c t i o n o f t h e

t ype s o f d i s c r e pa nc i e s r e f l e c t e d i n t he i nc om pa t i b i l it y .

S e l f - D i s c r e p a n c i e s a n d S e l f - C o n c e p t N e g a t i v i t y

( o r L o w S e l f -E s t e e m )

T h e n o t i o n t h a t a d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n o n e ' s s e l f - c o n c e p t

( i. e. , t he pe r c e i ve d a c t ua l s e l f ) a nd one ' s p r e f e r r e d , po t e n t i a l s e l f

i s a s s oc i a t e d w i t h d i s c om f or t ha s be e n c e n t r a l t o t he l i t e r a t u r e

on s e l f - e s t e e m ( s e e R os e nbe r g , 1979 ; We l l s & Ma r w e l l , 1976 ;

Wyl i e , 1961 , 1979) . A l t hough t he s e de s c r i p t i ons a r e o f t e n no t

e xp l i c i t a bou t w h i c h s e l f - gn ide i s i nvo l ve d , i t i s u s ua l l y t he i de a l

s e l f - gu i de d i s c r e pa nc y , w i t h l ow s e l f - e s t e e m be i ng a s s oc i a t e d

w i t h a h i gh a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y . A t t he s a m e t i m e , s om e

o t he r r e s e a r c he r s ha ve de f i ne d l ow s e l f - e s te e m a s a g l oba l ne ga -

t i ve s e l f - c onc e p t ( s e e D e m o , 1985) . I nde e d , s om e ha ve que s -

t i o n e d w h e t h e r m e a s u r i n g " d i s c r e p a n c y " c o n t r i b u t e s a n y t h i n g

b e y o n d m e a s u r i n g j u s t t h e " n e g a t i v i t y " o f s e lf - co n c e p ts (s ee

Ho ge & McC ar thy , 1 983; Wel l s & Maxwel l, 1976; Wyl ie, 1961,

1979) . Th e s a m e que s t i on c ou l d be r a i s e d w i t h r e s pe c t t o se lf -

d i s c r e p a n c y th e o r y : D o e s t h e n o t i o n o f " d i s c r e p a n c y " c o n t r i b -

u t e a n y t h i n g b e y o n d t h e n e g a t iv i t y o f t h e a c t u a l s e l f a l o n e?

Th e r e s u l t s o f ou r t e s t s o f s e l f -d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y , de s c r i be d

e a rl ie r, i nd i c a t e t ha t t he n o t i on o f d i s c r e pa nc y i s ne c e s s a r y i f w e

w i s h t o d i s ti n g u i sh a m o n g d i f fe r e n t k i n d s o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o ci -

a t e d w i t h a g l oba l " ne ga t i ve " s e l f - c onc e p t . I n one o f t he e xpe r i -

m e n t s , f o r e xa m pl e , s ub j e c t s w ho pos s e s s e d bo t h a n a c t ua l : ide a l

d i s c r e p a n c y a n d a n a c t u a l : o u g h t d i s c r e p a n c y e x p e r i e n c e d

d i ff e re n t k i n d s o f d i s c o m f o r t d e p e n d i n g o n w h i c h s e lf -g n id e w a s

p r i m e d . Mor e ove r , i f g loba l s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t i v i t y w a s a ll t ha t

m a t t e r e d a n d t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y w a s i r re l e va n t , t h e n o u r a n a l -

y s e s p a rt i a li n g t h e e f f ec ts o f o n e t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y f r o m t h e

e f f ec t s o f a no t he r , w he r e e a c h d i s c r e pa n c y i s c a l c u l a te d i n r e l a -

t i o n t o t h e s a m e m e a s u r e o f t h e a c t u a l s e lf - co n c e p t, w o u l d r e -

ve a l no t h i ng . Th e r e s u l t s o f ou r s t ud i e s , how eve r, c l e a r l y s up -

p o r t t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t d i s c o m f o r t i s i n d u c e d b y t h e n e g a ti v e

ps yc ho l og i c a l s i t ua t i on t ha t t he a c t ua l - s e l f : s e l f - gu i de d i s c r e p -a n c y as a whole r e p r e s e n t s .

T h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h e n o t i o n o f d i sc r e p a n c y i s al s o ev i d e n t

w h e n w e c o n s i d e r cases o f discrepancy that do not even involve

the self-concept. A s I m e n t i on e d e a r li er , a l t houg h t h i s a r ti c l e f o -

c us e s on t he c a s e o f a c t ua l / ow n : s e l f - gu i de d i s c r e pa nc i e s , se lf -

d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y i s no t r e s t r i c t e d t o t he s e d i s c r e pa nc i e s . Fo r

e x a m p l e , s o m e p e o p l e ' s p e r s o n a l h o p e s a n d w i sh e s f o r t h e m -

s e l ves a r e d i s c r e pa n t f r om s om e s i gn i f ic a n t o t he r ' s be li e fs a bou t

t h e k i n d o f p e r s o n i t i s t h e i r d u t y o r o b l ig a t io n t o b e - - a n i d e a l/

o w n : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y ( s e e H o m e y , 1 9 46 ). S u c h S e lf -

G u i de 1 Se l f - G u i de 2 d i s c r e pa nc i e s r e p r e s e n t a n o t he r t ype o f

n e g a ti v e p s y c h o l o g ic a l si tu a t io n : a d o u b l e a p p r o a c h - a v o i d a n c e

c onf l ic t . O ne w o u l d e xpe c t s u c h c on f l i c t s t o be a s s oc i a t e d w i t hf e e l ing c on f us e d o r unc e r t a i n . Th e d i s t inc t i ve ne s s o f t h i s pa r t i c -

u l a r t y p e o f d i s c r e p a n c y - d i s c o m f o r t r e l at i o n w a s t e st e d i n a r e -

c e n t s t udy ( V a n H o ok & H i gg i ns , 1986) .

Tw e n t y - e i gh t i n t r o duc t o r y p s yc ho l ogy s t ude n t s w e r e s e l ec t e d

on t he ba s i s o f t he i r r e s pons e s t o t he Se l ve s que s t i onna i r e . H a l f

o f t he s ub j e c t s ha d a t l e a s t one s e l f- gu i de :s e l f- gu i de m i s m a t c h

a nd t h e o t he r ha l f ha d no s e l f- gn i de :s e l f- gn i de m i s m a t c he s . S ix

t o e i gh t w e e k s la te r, a l l sub j e c t s f il le d ou t a n e m ot i ons que s t i on -

n a i r e t h a t a s k e d r e s p o n d e n t s t o i n d i c a t e h o w o f t e n t h e y f e l t

d i f f e r e n t k i nds o f e m o t i ons . T he qu e s t i onna i r e i de n t if i e d de je c -

t ion- re la ted emo t ion s (e .g . , d i sap poin ted, d i ssa ti sf ied , em bar -

rassed) , agi ta t ion- re la ted emot ions (e .g . , t ense , a f ra id , threa t -

Page 17: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 17/22

SELF-D I SCR EPA N C Y TH EO R Y 335

e ne d ) , a nge r - r e l a te d e m ot i on s ( e .g ., a ng r y , r e s e n t f u l) , a n d c on -

f us i on - r e l a t e d e m o t i ons ( i. e. , uns u r e o f s e lf / goa ls , m ud d l e d ,

c on f us e d a bou t i de n ti t y ).

A Le ve l o f Se l f - G u i de l : Se l f - G u i de 2 D i s c r e p a nc y ( h i gh ;

l ow ) • K i n d o f D i s c om f or t ( de je c t i on ; a g i t a t i on ; a nge r ; c on f u -

s i on ) A N O V A w a s p e r f o r m e d o n t h e m e a s u r e o f f r e q u e n c y o f

d i s c om f or t . W e f ound a h i gh l y s i gn i f ic a n t m a i n e f f e c t o f l eve l o f

Se l f - G u i de l : Se l f - G u i de 2 d i s c r e pa nc y , F ( 1 , 26 ) = 17 .03 , p <

.001 ; t ha t i s , t he h i gh - d i s c r e pa n t g r oup r e po r t e d s u f f e r i ng d i s -

c o m f o r t m o r e f r e q u e n tl y t h a n d i d t h e l o w - d i s c re p a n t g r o u p . I n

a dd i t i on , t he r e w a s a l s o a s i gn i f i c a n t Le ve l o f Se l f -G u i de 1 Sel f-

G u i d e 2 D i s c r e p a n c y • K i n d o f D i s c o m f o r t i n t e ra c t i o n , F ( 3 ,

78 ) = 4 .65 , p < . 01 . A s p r e d i c t e d , t he d i f fe r e nc e be t w e e n t he

h i g h - d i s c r e p a n t a n d l o w - d i s c r e p a n t g r o u p s i n r e p o r t e d f r e -

q u e n c y o f d i s c o m f o r t w a s g r e a t e r f o r th e c o n f u s i o n - r e la t e d

e m ot i on s ( h igh , M = 4 .6 ; l ow , M = 2 .9 ) t ha n f o r t he o t he r k i nds

o f d i s c om f o r t (h i gh , M = 4 .0 ; l ow , M = 3 .3 ). T he s e r e s u l t s s ug -

ge s t t ha t t h e Se l f - G u i de 1 Se l f - G u i de 2 d i s c re pa nc y , w h e r e t he

ne ga t i v i t y o f the s u b j e c t ' s s e l f - c onc e p t is no t e ve n pa r t o f t he

m e a s u r e m e n t o f t h e d i s c re p a n c y , is a s s o c ia t e d w i t h a n o t h e r d i s -

t i nc t k i nd o f d i s c o m f o r t ( i. e. , c on f us i o n / unc e r t a i n t y ) .

A l t ho ugh t he r e s u l t s o f t he s e s t ud ie s i nd i c a t e t ha t t he no t i o n

o f d i s c r e p a n c y i s n e c e s s a r y i f o n e w i s h es t o d i s ti n g u is h a m o n g

d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f e m ot i ona l vu l ne r a b i l i ti e s , i t i s pos s ib l e t ha t i f

one w i s he d on l y t o p r e d i c t l ow s e l f -e s t e e m , a m e a s u r e o f a c t ua l :

i d ea l d i s c re p a n c y w o u l d c o n t r i b u t e n o t h i n g b e y o n d a m e a s u r e

o f g l oba l s e lf - c onc e p t ne ga t iv i t y . I n f a c t , a r e c e n t s t udy b y H oge

a n d M c C a r t h y ( 1 9 8 3 ) r e p o r ts t h a t t h e i r m e a s u r e o f s u b j e ct s '

r e a l s e l f w a s s u p e r i o r t o t h e ir m e a s u r e o f r e a l - i d e a l d i s c r e p a n c y

i n p r e d i c t i ng t he s ub j e c t s ' s c o r e s on t he R os e nbe r g ( 1965) a nd

C oo pe r s m i t h ( 1967 ) s e l f - e s te e m s c a le s.

The r e a r e s e r i ous l i m i t a t i ons w i t h t h i s s t udy , how e ve r . Pe r -

ha ps m os t c r i t i c a l , s ub j e c t s w e r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h a n e xpe r i -

m e n t e r - s e l e c t e d s e t o f pos it i ve a t t ri bu t e s f o r w h i c h t he y w e r e t oi nd i c a t e t he i r r e a l a nd i de a l se l ve s ( e. g. , " I a m goo d- l ook i ng" ;

" I a m t a l e n te d i n a r t s a n d m u s i c " ). W i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f o n e

d i m e n s i o n ( " W h a t o n e t h i n g d o y o u l i k e t o d o b e s t o f a ll ? H o w

g o o d a r e y o u a t t h a t ? " ), t h e r e w a s n o g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e se a t t r i-

bu t e s w e r e i m por t a n t o r r e l e va n t t o i nd i v i dua l s ub j e c t s . G i ve n

t ha t t he r e a r e c ons i de r a b l e i nd i v i dua l d i f f e r e nc e s i n w h i c h a t t r i -

b u t e s a r e i m p o r t a n t a n d a c c e s si b le t o s u b je c ts , a n d t h a t m a n y

of t he a t t r i bu t e s l i s t e d by s ub j e c t s in o u r p r e v i ous s t ud i e s w e r e

nonm a t c he s ( i . e . , ne i t he r m a t c he s no r m i s m a t c he s t o s e l f -

gu i de s ) , t h i s non i d i og r a ph i c a pp r oa c h m a y s e r i ous l y unde r e s t i -

m a t e t he p r e d i c t i ve pow e r o f a c t ua l : ide a l d i s c r e pa n c y s c o r e s .

I n d e e d , a n o n i d i o g r a p h i c m e a s u r e o f g l o b a l s e l f- c o n c e p t p o si -

t iv i ty or negat iv i ty a t l eas t t aps subjec t s ' genera l se l f -evalua-t i ons , w he r e a s a non i d i og r a ph i c m e a s u r e o f a c t ua l :i de a l d is -

c r e p a n c y m a y t o t a l ly m i s s t h o s e a t tr i b u t e s t h a t a c t u a l l y m a t c h

o r m i s m a t c h t he s ub j e c t s ' pa r t i c u l a r s e l f - gn i de s . Thus , s uc h a

m e a s u r e i s e s pe c i a l l y i na pp r op r i a t e f o r t e s t i ng t he p r e d i c t i ve

pow e r o f t he a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y .

I n a r e c e n t s t u d y w e u s e d t h e S e l v es q u e s t io n n a i r e m e a s u r e

o f a c t u a l s e l f -c o n c e p t a n d a c t u a l : id e a l d i s c r e p a n c y t o r e e x a m -

ine th i s i ssue (Moret t i & Higgins , 1987) . In addi t ion to f i l l ing

ou t t he Se lve s que s t i onn a i r e , 41 p s yc h o l ogy und e r g r a d ua t e s

f il le d ou t t he H og e - M c C a r t hy m e a s u r e s , t he R os e nbe r g Se lf - Es -

t e e m Sc a l e , a nd t he C oop e r s m i t h Se l f - Es t e e m Sc a le . The Se l ve s

m e a s u r e o f g l oba l s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t i v it y w a s c a l c u l a t e d by c od -

i ng e a c h o f t he a t t r i bu t e s l i st e d by a s ub j e c t i n r e s p ons e t o t he

a c t ua l / ow n que s t i on a s be i ng e i t he r pos i t ive o r ne ga t ive a c c o r d -

i n g t o A n d e r s o n ' s ( 1 9 6 8 ) n o r m s o f a t t r ib u t e l ik a b il it y , a n d t h e n

e i t he r s i m p l y t o t a l i ng t he ne ga t i ve a t t r i bu t e s l i s t e d by a s ub j e c t

( t he a bs o l u t e g l oba l ne ga t i v i t y s c o r e ) o r d i v i d i ng t he t o t a l nu m -

be r o f ne ga t ive a t t r i bu t e s l i s te d by t he t o t a l nu m be r o f a t t r ibu t e s

l i st e d ( t he pe r c e n t a ge g l oba l ne ga t i v i t y s c o re ) . The a c t ua l : i de a l

d i s c r e p a n c y s c o r e f o r e a c h s u b j e c t w a s c al c u l a te d b y c o m b i n i n g

h i s o r h e r a c tu a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y s c o r e a n d h i s o r

he r a c t ua l / ow n : i de a l / o t he r d i s c r e pa nc y s c o r e ( a s i n H i gg i ns ,

K l e i n , & S t r a u m a n , 1985) .

Th e f i r st re s u l t o f i n te r e s t w a s t ha t t he Se l ve s m e a s u r e s o f

g l oba l s e l f -c onc e p t p r e d i c t e d bo t h m e a s u r e s o f (h i gh ) s e lf -e s -

t e e m b e t t e r t h a n t h e l es s i d i o g r a p h i c m e a s u r e u s e d b y H o g e a n d

M c C a r t h y ( 1 98 3 ):

1 . R os e n be r g Se l f - Es t e e m Sc a l e - - a b s o l u t e ne ga t iv i t y ,

r ( 39 ) = - . 3 5 , p < . 05 ; pe r c e n t a ge ne ga t iv i ty , r ( 39 ) = - . 33 , p <

.05 ; H o ge - M c C a r t hy pos it i v it y , r ( 39 ) = . 26 , p = . 10 .

2 . C o ope r s m i t h Se l f - Es t e em S c a l e - - a bs o l u t e ne ga t iv i t y ,

r ( 39 ) = - . 3 7 , p < . 02 ; pe r c e n t a ge ne ga t iv i ty , r ( 39 ) = - . 4 3 , p <

.01 ; H o ge - M c C a r t hy pos it i v it y , r ( 39 ) = . 25 , p = . 10 .B u t t he c r i t ic a l que s t i on i s w he t he r t he a c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e p -

a n c y c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e p r e d i c t io n o f s e lf - es t ee m b e y o n d g l o b al

s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t iv i t y . To t e st t h i s , t he r e l a t i on be t w e e n a c t ua l :

i de a l d i s c r e p a nc y a n d e a c h o f t he s e l f -e s t e e m m e a s u r e s w a s c a l -

c u l a t e d , w i th t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o e a c h r e l a t io n f r o m t h e i r c o m -

m on a s s oc i a t i on t o g l oba l s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t i v i t y be i ng pa r -

t i a l e d ou t :

1 . A c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa n c y a nd R os e nb e r g Se l f - Es t e e m

Sc a l e - - pa r t i a l i ng ou t a bs o l u t e ne ga t iv i t y , pa r t i a l r ( 38 ) = - . 4 5 ,

p < . 01 ; pa r t i a l i ng ou t pe r c e n t a ge ne ga t i v i t y , pa r t i a l r ( 38 ) =

- . 4 7 , p < . 0 I .

2 . A c t ua l : i de a l d i s c r e pa nc y a nd C oope r s m i t h Se l f - Es t e e m

Sc a l e - - pa r t i a l i ng ou t a bs o l u t e ne ga t i v it y , pa r t i a l r ( 38 ) = - . 5 0 ,p < . 01 ; pa r t i a l i ng ou t pe r c e n t a ge ne ga t i v it y , pa r t i a l r ( 38 ) =

- . 4 6 , p < . 0 I .

The s e r e s u l t s c l e a r ly i nd i c a t e t ha t ou r m e a s u r e o f a c t ua l : i de a l

d i s c r e p a n c y c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e p r e d i c t i o n o f s el f -e s te e m b e y o n d

g l oba l s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t iv i ty . M or e ove r , w he n t he a c t ua l : ide a l

d i s c r e p a nc y w a s pa r t i a l e d ou t o f t he r e l a t ion be t w e e n s el f- es -

t e e m a nd g l oba l s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t i v i t y , t he c o r r e l a t i ons be -

t w e e n t he g l oba l s e l f - c onc e p t ne ga t i v i t y m e a s u r e s a nd t he s el f-

e s t e e m m e a s u r e s w e r e no t s i gn i f i c a n t ( a ll p s > . 10 ).

G e n e r a l D i s c u s si o n a n d C o n c l u s i o n s

Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y s ha r e s a l ong t r a d i t i on i n p s yc ho l ogyof m ode l s p r opo s i ng t ha t i nc om pa t i b l e be li ef s, a nd pa r t i c u l a r l y

s e lf -be li ef s, i ndu c e d i s c om f or t . Se l f - d i s c r e pa nc y t he o r y , how -

ever, has so me di s t inc t ive fea ture s . Fi r s t , i t sys tem at ica l ly re la tes

d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f d i s c re pa nc i e s be t w e e n s e l f- s ta t e r e p r e s e n t a -

t i ons t o vu l ne r a b i l i t y t o d i f f e r e n t k i nds o f d i s c om f or t . Se c ond ,

n o t o n l y d o e s i t c o n s i d e r w h e t h e r p a r t i c u l a r t y p e s o f d i s c re p -

a n c y a r e a v a i l ab l e t o p e o p l e a s a f u n c t i o n o f th e m a g n i t u d e o f

t he d i s c r e pa nc i e s , bu t i t a l s o c o ns i de r s t he r e l a ti ve a c c e s s i b il i ty

o f ind i v i dua l s ' a va i l a b le d i s c r e pa nc i e s . The v a r i ous a s s um p-

t i o n s a n d i m p l i c a t io n s o f s e l f- d i sc r e p a n c y th e o r y a r e c a p t u r e d

by t he f o l l ow i ng ge ne r a l hypo t he s i s : Th e g r e a t e r t he m a g n i t ude

a nd a c c e s s i b il i ty o f a pa r t i c u l a r t ype o f s e l f - d i s c r e pa nc y pos -

Page 18: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 18/22

3 3 6 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

s e s se d b y a n i n d i v i d u a l, t h e m o r e t h e i n d i v i d u a l w i l l s u f f er t h e

k i n d o f d i s c o m f o r t a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h a t t y p e o f s e lf - d is c r e p a n c y .

T h i s h y p o t h e s i s w a s t e s t e d i n a s e r i es o f c o r r e l a t i o n a l a n d e x -

p e r i m e n t a l s t u d i e s. C o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e h y p o t h e s i s , w h e n e i t h e r

t h e m a g n i t u d e o r t h e a c c e s si b i li t y o f t h e s u b j e c t s ' d i s c r e p a n c y

b e t w e e n t h e i r s e l f - c o n c e p t s a n d t h e i r i d e a l s e l f - g u id e s w a s

g r e a te r , t h e s u b j e c t s su f f e r e d m o r e f r o m d e j e c t i o n - r e l a t e d e m o -

t i o n s ( e. g ., d i s a p p o i n t m e n t , d i s s a ti s f a c ti o n , s a d n e s s ) . W h e n e i -

t h e r t h e m a g n i t u d e o r t h e a c c e ss i b i li t y o f d i s c r e p a n c y b e t w e e n

t h e i r s e l f - c o n c e p t s a n d t h e i r o u g h t s e l f- g u i d es w a s g r e a t e r , t h e

s u b j e c t s s u f f e r e d m o r e f r o m a g i t a t i o n - r e l a t e d e m o t i o n s ( e . g . ,

f e a r , r e s tl e s s n e s s , t e n s i o n ) .

T h e p r e s e n t a r t i c l e h a s p r e s e n t e d t h e b a s i c a s s u m p t i o n s o f

s e l f - d is c r e p a n c y t h e o r y i n t h e c o n t e x t o f r e la t e d t h e o r i e s a n d

d e s c r i b e d i n i ti a l e m p i r i c a l s u p p o r t f o r th e t h e o r y ' s m a j o r h y -

p o t h e s i s . F u t u r e r e s e a r c h w i l l n e e d t o c o n s i d e r a n u m b e r o f

o t h e r i m p o r t a n t i s s u es : (a ) h o w t h e t h e o r y c o u l d b e u s e d t o p r e -

d i c t positive e m o t i o n s ( e . g . , w e h a v e f o u n d t h a t t h e a b s e n c e o f

a n a c t u a l / o w n : i d e a l / o w n d i s c r e p a n c y i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h f e el i n g

" h a p p y " a n d " s a ti s fi e d ," w h e r e a s t h e a b s e n c e o f a n a c t u a l / o w n :

o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h f e e l in g " c a l m " a n d" s e c u r e " ) ; ( b ) t h e c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r w h i c h s e l f - g u i d e s i n i t i a t e

a n d d i r e c t a c t i o n a s w e l l a s b e i n g u s e d a s s t a n d a r d s f o r s e l f -

e v a l u a t i o n ; ( c ) t h e r o l e o f p e o p l e ' s b e l ie f s c o n c e r n i n g t h e l i k e l i-

h o o d t h a t t h e y w i l l e v e r m e e t t h e i r g u i d e s i n m o d e r a t i n g t h e

m o t i v a t i o n a l a n d e m o t i o n a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f p o s s es s i ng s e l f- d is -

c r e p a n c i e s ( e .g ., t h e r o l e o f p e r c e i v e d s e l f -e f f ic a c y ; s e e B a n d u r a ,

1 9 8 6) ; a n d ( d ) wh e t h e r d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s o f li f e s h o u l d b e d i s t i n -

g u i s h e d w h e n m e a s u r i n g d i s c r e p a n c i e s in o r d e r t o p r e d ic t m o r e

a c c u r a t e l y e mo t i o n a l v u l n e r a b i l i t i e s i n e a c h r e g i o n ( e . g . ,

a c h i e v e m e n t v s . i n te r p e r s o n a l) .

E v e n i n i t s c u r r e n t f o r m , h o w e v e r , s e l f - d i s c r e p a n c y t h e o r y

h a s i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r o t h e r a r e a s o f p sy c h o l o g y . F o r e x a m p l e ,

s e l f - d is c r e p a n c y t h e o r y h a s s o m e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r tr e a t i n g e m o -t i o n a l p r o b l e m s . A l t h o u g h i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o r e v i e w t h e s e i m -

p l i c a t i o n s i n d e ta i l , i t i s i n t e r e s ti n g t o n o t e t h a t e a c h o f t h e m a -

j o r a l t e r n a ti v e w a y s o f r e d u c i n g s e l f - d is c r e p a n c i e s i s c u r r e n t l y

a s s o c ia t e d w i t h s o m e i m p o r t a n t a p p r o a c h t o t r e a tm e n t . A c -

c o r d i n g t o s e l f - d i s c r e p a n c y t h e o r y , e m o t i o n a l p r o b l e m s a r e a s -

s o c i a t e d w i t h a c c e s s i b le d i s c r e p a n c i e s b e t w e e n p e o p l e ' s a c t u a l /

o w n s e l f - c o n c e p t a n d o n e o r m o r e o f t h e i r s e lf - g u id e s . L o g i c al l y,

t h e n , t h e r e a r e t h r e e g e n e r a l a l t e rn a t i v e s f o r r e d u c i n g e m o t i o n a l

p r o b l e m s i n d u c e d b y s e l f -d i s c r ep a n c i e s .

F i r st , o n e c o u l d c h a n g e a c l i e n t ' s a c t u a l / o w n s e l f - c o n c e p t t o

b e l e s s d i s c r e p a n t f r o m t h e c l i e n t ' s s e lf - g ui d e s. B e h a v i o r a l t h e r a -

p e u t i c a p p r o a c h e s a c c o m p l i s h t h i s b y m o d i f y i n g c l i e n ts ' p e rs i s -

t e n t p e r f o r m a n c e , a n d b o t h c o g n i t iv e a n d p s y c h o d y n a m i c t h er -a p e u t i c a p p r o a c h e s a c c o m p l i s h i t b y m o d i f y i n g c l i e n t s ' i n t e r -

p r e t a t i o n s o f t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e . S e c o n d , o n e c o u l d c h a n g e t h e

c l i e n t 's s e l f -g u i d e s t o b e l e ss d i s c r e p a n t f r o m t h e c l i e n t ' s a c t u a l /

o w n s e lf - co n c e p t. B o t h c o g n i ti v e a n d p s y c h o d y n a m i c t h e r a p e u -

t i c a p p r o a c h e s a c c o m p l i s h t h i s b y l o w e r i n g e i t h e r t h e l e v e l o r

t h e p e r c e i v e d r e l e v a n c e o f a s e l f - g u i d e ( e . g ., b y l e a d i n g c l i e n t s

t o q u e s t i o n i t s f a i r n e s s , l e g i t i ma c y , r e a s o n a b l e n e s s , o r u t i l i t y ) .

T h i r d , o n e c o u l d c h a n g e t h e a c c e s s i b i l it y o f th e d i s c r e p a n c i e s .

B e h a v i o r al a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l i n t e r v e n ti o n a p p r o a c h e s a c c o m -

p l i s h th i s b y r e d u c i n g c l i e n t s ' e x p o s u r e t o s i t u a t i o n s a n d s o c i a l

i n t e r a c t i o n s t h a t a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i r p r o b l e m s ( i . e . , t h a t

a r e l i k el y t o p r i m e t h e d i s c r e p a n c y ) . C o g n i t i v e a p p r o a c h e s a c -

c o m p l i s h t h i s b y h a v i n g c l i e n t s a c t i v e l y r e h e a r s e p o s i t i v e

t h o u g h t s a n d a t t i t u d e s , w h i c h t h e n f u n c t i o n a s a c t i v e s e t s t h a t

i n h i b i t p a s s i v e a c c e s s i b i l i t y e ff e c t s ( s e e H i g g i n s & K i n g , 1 9 81 ) .

T h u s s e l f - d i s c r e p a n c y t h e o r y p o t e n t i a l l y p r o v i d e s a s in g l e, u n i -

f i ed f r a m e w o r k f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e f u n c t i o n a l c o n s e q u e n c e s

o f d if f er e n t k i n d s o f t h e r a p e u t ic a p p r o a c h e s - - w h a t t h e y d o a n d

d o n o t a c c o m p l i s h .

T h i s a r t i c l e h a s f o c u s e d o n t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f se l f - c o n c e p t

d i s c r e p a n c y t h e o r y f o r s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n s a n d p e r s o n a l e m o t i o n a l

r e s p o n s e s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e t h e o r y a l s o h a s m o r e g e n e r a l i m -

p l i c a t i o n s f o r m o t i v a t i o n , e v a l u a t i o n s o f o t h e r s, a n d i n t e r p e r -

s o n a l r e l a t i o n s . P e o p l e ' s e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s t o t h e i r p e r f o r -

m a n c e , f o r e x a m p l e , c a n i n f lu e n c e t h e i r s u b s e q u e n t m o t i v a t i o n s

t o a c h i e v e ( f o r a r e v i e w , s e e W e i n e r , 1 9 8 6 ) . M o r e o v e r , i n d i v i d u a l

d i f f e r e n c e s i n a c h i e v e m e n t m o t i v a t i o n m a y r e f l e c t i n d i v i d u a l

d i f f e r e n c e s i n w h i c h s e l f - g u i d e s a r e a c c e s s i b l e a n d u s e d a t

d i f f e r e n t s t ag e s o f t h e p r o c e s s o f s e l f - e v a l u a ti o n ( H i g g i n s , S t r a u -

m a n , & K l e i n , 1 9 8 6 ). T h e d i f f e r e n c es , f o r i n s t a n c e , b e t w e e n

l o w - a n d h i g h - r e s u l t a n t a c h i e v e r s d e s c r i b e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e

( e . g ., A t k i n s o n , 1 9 6 4 ; K u h l , 1 9 7 8 ; Ku k l a , 1 9 7 8 ; W e i n e r, 1 9 7 2 )

c o u l d b e d u e t o l o w a c h i e v e r s ' h a v i n g a t e n d e n c y t o i n t e r p r e t

t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e a s a s u c c e s s o r a f a i l u r e o n t h e b a s i s o f

w h e t h e r i t i s a b o v e o r b e l o w t h e i r h i g h o u g h t ] o t h e r s t a n d a r d , i n

c o n t r a s t t o h i g h a c h i e v e r s ' h a v i n g a t e n d e n c y t o i n t e r p r e t t h e i r

p e r f o r m a n c e a s a s u c c e ss o r a f a i lu r e o n t h e b a s i s o f a m o r e

m o d e r a t e f a c t u a l c o m p a r i s o n s t a n d a r d ( e .g . , t h e i r o w n p a s t p e r -

f o r m a n c e o r t h e a v e r a ge p e r f o r m a n c e ) a n d a p p r a i s in g i t i n r e l a-

t i o n t o t h e i r i d e a l / o w n s t a n d a r d .

T h u s , l o w a c h ie v e r s w o u l d t e n d t o j u d g e t h e ir p e r f o r m a n c e

a s a f a i l u r e a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y f e e l a p p r e h e n s i v e a n d a n x i o u s ,

w h e r e a s h i g h a c h i e v e rs w o u l d t e n d t o j u d g e t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e

a s a s u c c e s s , t h e r e b y i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e , b u t t h e y

wo u l d a l s o f e e l d i s s a t i s f i e d b e c a u s e t h e y h a d n o t y e t f u l f i l l e d

t h e i r p e r s o n a l a s p i r a t i o n s . T h i s , i n t u r n , w o u l d c a u s e l o wachievers t o a v o i d s u b s e q u e n t a c h i e v e m e n t t a s k s a n d h i g h

a c h i e v e r s t o i n c r e a s e t h e i r e f f o rt s .

S e l f - d i s c re p a n c y t h e o r y m a y a l s o h a v e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r i n d i -

v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n e v a l u a t i n g o t h e r s . T h e r e i s c o n s i d e r a b l e

e v i d e n c e t h a t p e o p l e ' s s e l f - c o n c e p t s a n d c h r o n i c p e r s o n a l c o n -

s t r u ct s c a n i n f l ue n c e t h e ir j u d g m e n t s a n d m e m o r y o f o t h e rs

( e .g . , H a s t o r f , R i c h a r d s o n , & D o r n b u s c h , 1 9 58 ; H i g g in s , K i n g ,

& M a v i n , 1 9 8 2 ; K e l l y , 19 5 5 ; K u i p e r & D e r r y , 1 9 8 1; M a r k u s &

S m i t h , 1 9 8 1 ; S h r a u g e r & P a t t e r s o n , 1 9 7 4 ) . I f i n d i v i d u a l s ' se l f -

g u i d e s a r e a l s o u s e d i n e v a l u a t i n g o t h e r s , t h e n s e l f - d is c r e p a n c y

t h e o r y c o u l d p r e d i c t n o t o n l y w h e t h e r t h e j u d g m e n t i s l ik e l y

t o b e p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e ( i. e ., d e p e n d i n g o n h o w h i g h a r e t h e

p e r c e i v e r ' s s e l f - g u i d e s ) , b u t a l s o wh a t t h e p e r c e i v e r ' s s p e c i f i ce m o t i o n a l r e s p o n s e t o t h e t a r g e t ' s b e h a v i o r i s l ik e l y t o b e . F o r

e x a m p l e , a t a r g e t 's b e h a v i o r t h a t w a s d i s c r e p a n t f r o m a p e r c e i v -

e r ' s i d e a l s t a n d a r d s c o u l d c a u s e t h e p e r c e i v e r t o f e e l d i s s a t i s f ie d

a n d d i s a p p o i n t e d w i t h t h e t a r g e t o r t o f e el s a d f o r t h e t ar g e t ,

w h e r e a s a t a r g e t ' s b e h a v i o r t h a t w a s d i s c r e p a n t f r o m a p e r c e i v -

e r ' s o u g h t s t a n d a r d s c o u l d c a u s e t h e p e r c e i v e r t o f e e l r e s e n t f u l

o r c r i ti c a l t o w a r d t h e t a r g e t o r t o w o r r y a b o u t t h e t a r g e t.

S i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n p a r t n e r s i n t h e g u i d e s t h e y u s e t o e v a l u a t e

t h e m s e l v e s a n d o t h e r s c o u l d p r o m o t e p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e -

c a u s e i t w o u l d i n c r e a s e t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f th e p a r t n e r s ' r e s p o n d -

i n g s i m i l a r l y t o s o c i a l e v e n t s , w h i c h i n t u r n i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h

b a l a n c e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( e. g ., H e i d e r, 1 9 58 ; N e w c o m b , 1 9 61 ).

Page 19: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 19/22

SELF-DISCREPANCY THEORY 33 7

O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n p a r t n e r s i n t h e i r s e lf -

d i s c r e p a n c i e s c o u l d i n c r e a s e t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t b o t h p a r t n e r s

w o u l d b e e m o t i o n a l l y v u l n e r a b l e t o t h e s a m e e v e n t s, w h i c h

w o u l d r e d u c e t h e a b i l i t y o f e a c h p a r t n e r t o s e r v e a s a " s a f e t y

z o n e " f o r t h e o t h e r. P e r h a p s s i m i l a r i t y o f s o c i a l e v a l u a t i v e

g u i d e s b u t d i s s i m i l a r i t y i n r e g i o n s o f v u l n e r a b i l i t y ( e .g . ,

a c h i e v e m e n t v s . i n t e r p e r s o n a l ) w o u l d p r o v i d e t h e m o s t b a l -

a n c e d r e l a t i o n s h i p .

F i n a l l y , p e o p l e ' s e m o t i o n s i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s m a y b e i n f l u e n c e d

b y t h e r o l e t h e i r p a r t n e r p l a y s i n t h e i r s e l f - d i s c r e p a n c y s y s t e m .

I n s o m e c a s es , t h e p a r t n e r ( e .g . , p a r e n t , s p o u s e , b o s s) m a y b e

r e p r e s e n t e d d i r e c t l y a s t h e s i g n i f ic a n t o t h e r i n a n a c t u a l : i d e a l /

o t h e r o r a c t u a l : o u g h t / o t h e r d i s c r e p a n c y . I n s u c h c a s es , s e lf - d i s-

c r e p a n c y t h e o r y w o u l d p r e d i c t t h a t t h e i n t e n s it y a n d k i n d o f

e m o t i o n a p e r s o n w o u l d b e v u l n e r a b l e t o e x p e r i e n c i n g in t h e

r e l a t io n s h i p w o u l d b e a f u n c t i o n o f t h e m a g n i t u d e a n d t y p e o f

h i s o r h e r a v a i l a b l e s e l f - d i s c r ep a n c y n v o l v i n g t h e p a r t n e r a s s i g -

n i f i c a n t o th e r . ( S ee M c C a n n & H i g g i n s , i n p r e s s , f o r e v i d e n c e

s u p p o r t i n g t h i s p r e d i c t i o n . ) I n o t h e r c a s e s t h e p a r t n e r m a y n o t

b e r e p r e s e n t e d d i r e c t l y a s a s i g n i f ic a n t o t h e r i n a n a v a i l a b l e s e lf -

d i s c r e p a n c y , b u t t h e p a r t n e r m a y h a v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ( e .g . ,p h y s i c a l a n d p e r s o n a l i t y a t t r i b u t e s ; o p i n i o n s a n d a t t i t u d e s ; i n -

t e r a c t i o n s t y le ) t h a t a r e s u b j e c ti v e l y s i m i l a r t o a s i g n i f ic a n t o t h e r

w h o s e s t a n d p o i n t o n t h e i r s e l f i s i n v o l v e d i n a p r e e s t a b l i s h e d

" o t h e r " d i s c r e p a n c y , a n d t h u s e x p o s u r e t o t h e p a r t n e r c o u l d

a c t i v a t e t h e d i s c r e p a n c y a n d i t s a s s o c ia t e d d i s c o m f o r t . I f s o m e -

o n e a t t e m p t s t o r e s o l v e a p r i o r d i s c r e p a n c y t h r o u g h a r e l a t i o n -

s h i p w i t h a n e w p e r s o n , t h e n w e h a v e t h e m a k i n g s f o r a c la s s i c

n e u r o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p (i . e. , " T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p m a k e s m e m i s e r a -

b l e , h u t I f e e l s o m e h o w t h a t I ' m g e t t i n g a l o t o u t o f i t " ) . M o r e -

o v er , b e c a u s e t h e d y n a m i c s o u r c e o f e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s i s t h e

p r e e s t a b l i s h e d s e rf - d i s c r e p an c y a n d n o t t h e p a r t n e r ' s a c t u a l b e -

h a v i o r p e r s e , i t e x p l a i n s w h y t h e p e r s o n o v e r r e a c t s t o t h e s i t u a -

t io n .W i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f su c h n e u r o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s , o n e m i g h t

p r e d i c t m o r e g e n e r a l l y t h a t p e o p l e w o u l d s e e k o u t r e l a t i o n s h i p s

t h a t d e c r e a s e t h e m a g n i t u d e o r a c c e s s i b i l i ty o f t h e i r s e l f - d i sc r e p -

a n c i e s b y m o d i f y i n g t h e i r s el f - c o n c e p t a n d t h a t t h e y w o u l d

a v o i d r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t m o d i f y t h e i r s e l f - c o n c e p t i n a w a y t h a t

i n c r e a s e s t h e m a g n i t u d e o r a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f t h e i r s e l f - d i s c r e p a n -

c i es . I n d e e d , e v e n i n n e u r o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s , su c h a s t h o s e d e -

s c r i b e d b y H o m e y ( 1 9 3 9 ) i n h e r d i s c u s s i o n o f n a r c i s s i s m , t h e

r e l a t i o n s h i p m a y b e m a i n t a i n e d b e c a u s e i t r e d u c e s a s e l f - d i s -

c r e p a n c y o r s u p p o r t s a n e s s e n t ia l n o n d i s c r e p a n c y .

I f s u p p o r t f o r t h e s e a d d i t i o n a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f s e lf - d i s c re p -

a n c y t h e o r y i s f o u n d i n f u t u r e r e s e a r c h , t h e n t h e t h e o r y w o u l d

h a v e t h e p o t e n t i a l o f p r o v i d i n g a u n i f i e d m o d e l f o r a d d r e s s i n gc e n t r a l i s s u e s t h a t f a ll o n t h e i n t e r f a c e o f s o c i a l , p e r so n a l i ty , a n d

a b n o r m a l p s y c h o l o g y .

R e f e r e n c e s

Abelson, R . P. (1959). M odes of resolution of belief d i lemmas . Journal

o f Conflict Resolution, 3, 343-352.Abelson, R. P. (1983). Whatever becam e of consistency theory? Person-

ality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 37-54 .

Abelson, R. P., & Rosenberg, M. J. (1958). S ym boli c psychologic: A

mod el of attitud inal cognition. Behavioral Science, 3, I - 13.

Adler, A. (1964). Problems of neurosis . New York : Harper & Row.

Allport, G. W. (1955). Becoming. New Haven, CT: Y ale UniversityPress.

Anderson, N. H. (1968). Likableness ratings of 555 personality-trait

words. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 272-279.

Ariet i, S. , & B empo rad, J . (1978). Severe and m iM depression: Thep sy-chotherapeutic approach. New York: Basic Books.

Aronson, E. (1969). The th eory of cognitive dissonance: A c urren t per-

spective. In L . Berkow itz (Ed.), Advances in experimental socialpsy-chology (Vol. 4, pp. 1-34). New York: Academ ic Press .

Aseh, S. E. (1952). Socialpsychology Englewood C liffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Atldnson , J . W. (1964). An introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ:Van Nostran d.

Ausubel, D. P. (1955). Relationships between shame and guilt in the

socializing process. Psychological Review,, 62, 378-390.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A socialcognition theory. Englcwood C liffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bargh, J. A. (1984). Automatic an d conscious processing of social info r-

mation. In R . S. Wyer, Jr., & T K. S rull (Eds.), Handbook of socialcognition (Vol. 3, pp. 1--43). Hillsdale, NJ: E rlbau m.

Bargh, J . A. , Bond, R. N ., Lomb ardi, W. J . , & Tota, M. E. (1986). The

addi t ive na tu re o f chron ic and tempo ra ry sources o f cons truc t acces -

sibility. Journa l o f Person ality a nd S ocial Psycholog3z, 50, 869-878.

Bargh, J. A . , & Pietromonaco, P. (1982). Automatic inform ation pro -cessing and social perception: The influence o f trait inform ation pre-

sented o utside of conscious awareness on impression forma tion.

Journa l o f Person ality a nd S ocial Psycholog3z, 43, 437-449 .

Bargh, J . A. , & T hein, R . D. (1985). Individ ual construct accessibility,

person m emory , and the recall-judgment link: The case of informa-

tion overload. Journal o f Personafity and Social P sychology, 49,1 1 2 9 - 1 1 4 6 .

Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Causes and treatment. Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.

Beck, A. T. (1983). Cognitive therap y of depression: N ew perspectives.

In P. J. Clayton & J. E. Barrett (Eds.), Treatment of depression: Oldcontroversies and new approaches (pp. 315-350). New York: Raven

Press.Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbangh, J.

(1961). An inv entory for m easuring depression. Archives of G eneralPsychiatrs 4, 561-571.

Bentler, P. M. (1980 ). Mu ltiva riate analysis with laten t variables: Causalmodeling. An nua l R evie w o f Psycholog2z, 31, 419--456.

Bibring, E. (1953). The m echanism of depression. In P. Grecn acre

(Ed.), Affective disorders (pp. 13--48). New Y ork: Internatio nal Uni-versities Press.

Blatt, S. J., D'Afflitti, J. P., & Quinlan, D. M. (1976). Experiences ofdepression in nor ma l young adults . Journal o f AbnormaIPsychology,,86 , 203-223 .

Bramel, D . (1968). Dissonance, expectation, an d the self. In R. P. Abel-son, E. Aronson, W. J . MeG uire, T M. Newcomb, M . J . Rosenberg,

& P. H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: Asourcebook (pp. 355-365). Chicago: Ran d McN ally.

Breckler, S. J., & Greenwald, A. G. (1986). Motivational facets of the

self. In R. M. Sorentino & E . T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook o f motiva-

tion and cognition: Foundations o f social behavior (pp. 145-164).New York: Guilf ord Press .

Brim , O. G. (1976). Th eories of the m ale mid-life cris is. Counseling

Psychologist, 6, 3-35.

Buss, A. H. (1980). Self-consciousness and social anxiety. San Fran-cisco: Freeman .

Cameron, N. (1963). Personality development and psychopathology.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Cantor, N. , & Kihlstro m, J. E (1986). Personality and social intelli-gence. Englewood C liffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Page 20: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 20/22

338 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

Carver, C . S . , & Gan e l len , R . J . (1983). Depress ion and com ponen ts o f

self-punitiveness: High standards, self-criticism, and overgeneraliza-

t ion . Journal o fAbnorm al Psychology. 92, 3 3 0 - 3 3 7 .

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. E (1978). Self-focusing effects of disposi-

t ional self-consciousness, mirror presence, and audience presence.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 3 2 4 - 3 3 2 .

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. E (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A

control-theory approach to hum an behavior. New York: Springer-Ver-lag.

Cattel l , R. B . (1973). Personality and m ood b y questionnaire. San Fran-cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Colby , K . M . (1968) . A p rogram mable theory o f cogn i t ion and a f fec t in

ind iv idua l pe rsona l be l i e f systems . In R . P . Abe lson , E . Aronson ,

W. J . McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J . Rosenberg, & P. H. Tannen-

bau m (Eds. ), Theories o f cognitive consistency: A source book (pp.

520-525). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Cooley, C. H. (1964). Hum an nature and the social order New York:

Sehocken Books. (Original work publish ed 1902)

Coop ersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents o f self-esteem. San Franc i sco :

F r e e m a n .

Coy ne, J . C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). Cog nit ive style , s tress perception ,

and coping. In I . Kuta sh & L. Sehlesinger (Eds.) , Handbook on stressand anxiety: Contemporary knowledge, theory and treatment. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dalai, H. (1979). The ap peti te hypothesis o f emo tions: A new psychoa n-

a ly t ic mod e l o f m ot iva t ion . In C . E . I za rd (Ed .) , Em otions inperson-

ality and psychopathology (pp. 201-225) . New York : P lenum Press.

Dem o, D . H . (1985) . The mea surem ent o f se l f-esteem: Re l in ing our

methods . Journal of Personality and S ocia l Psychology, 48, 1 4 9 0 -

1502.

DeRivera, J . (1977). A structura l theor y of the emo tions. PsychologicalIssues, 10(4) , Monograph 40 .

Derogatis , L. R., L ipm an, R. S., Riekels , K., U li lenh uth , E. H., & Covi,

L. (1974). The Hopkins Symptom Checklis t (HSCL): A self-report

s y m p t o m i n v e n to r y .Behavioral Science, 19, I - 15 .

Durkhe im, E . (1951) . Suicide:A study in sociology. New York: Free

Press.Duva l , S . , & W ick lund , R . A . (1972) . A theory o f objective self-aware-

ness. New York: Aca dem ic Press.

Epstein, S. (1973). T he self-concept revisi ted, or a th eory of a theory.

American Psychologist, 28, 404 -4 16.

Epstein, S. (1980). Th e self-concept: A review an d the proposal o f an

integrated theo ry of personality . I n E. Sta ub (Ed.), Personality: Basi caspects and current research (pp. 82-1 32). E nglewo od Cliffs , NJ:

Prentice-Hall .

Erikson , E. H. (1963). Childhood and society (2n d ed.). New York: Nor-

ton . (Or ig ina l work pub l i shed 1950)

Erikson , E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Nor ton .

Ewert , O . (1970). The a t t i tud ina l charac te r o f emot ion . In M. B . Arno ld

(Ed.), Feelings and emotions: The Loyola Sy mp osium (pp . 233-240) .

New Y ork: Acad emic Press.Feniehel, O. (1945). The psychoanalytic theory o f neurosis. New York:

N o r t o n .

Fenigstein, A., Scheier , M. E, & Buss, A. H. (1975). Pub lic and private

self-consciousness: A ssessmen t and theory. Journal o f Consulting a nd

Clinica l Psychologs 43, 522-527 .

Fest inger , L. (1942). A theoret ical inte rpreta t ion of shif ts in level of aspi-

ra t ion . Psychological Review, 49, 2 3 5 - 2 5 0 .

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory o f cognitive dissonance. Evans ton , IL :

Row, Peterson.

Freud, S. (1957). In st inct s an d their vicissi tudes. In J . Straehey (Ed. an d

Trans.), The standard edition o f the complete psychological works o fS igmund Freud (Vol. 14, pp. 109-140). Lon don: Hoga rth Press.

(Or ig ina l work pub l i shed 1915)

Freud , S . (1959) . M ourn in g and m elancho l ia . In E . Jones (Ed .) , Sig-

round Freud: Collected Papers (Vol. 4, pp. 152-170). New York: Basic

Books. (Original work publish ed 1917)

Freud, S. (1961). The ego and the id. In J . Strachey (Ed. and Trans.) ,

The standard edition of he complete psychological works of SigmundFreud (Vol. 19, pp. 3-66). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work

pub l i shed 1923)

Go tl ib, I . H., & M eC ann , C. D. (1984). C onstr uct accessibi l ity and de-pression: A n e xam inatio n of cognit ive and affeet ive factors . Journalo f Personality and S ocial Psychology, 47, 427--439.

Gree nwa ld, A. G., & Pratka nis , A. R. (1984). Th e self. In R. S. Wyer &

T. K. Srull (Eds.) , Handbook ofsocial cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 129-178).

HiUsdale, N J: Erl bau m.

Guid ano , V . E , & L io t t i, G . (1983) . Cognitive processes and emotionaldisorders. New York: Gu ilford Press.

Harter , S. (1986). Co gnit ive-develop mental processes in the integrat io n

of concep ts abou t em ot ions and the se lf . Social Cognition, 4, 119-

151.

Has to r f , A . H . , R ichardson , S . A . , & Dornb usch , S . M. (1958) . The

prob lem of re levance in the s tudy o f pe r son pe rcep t ion and in te rpe r -

sonal behavior . In. R . Tag iuri & L. Petrul lo (Eds.), Person perception

and interpersonal behavior (pp. 54-62) . S tanford , CA: S tanford Uni -

versity Press.

Heidet; E (1958). The psychology o f interpersonal relations. New York:

Wiley.

Higgins, E. T., & Bargh, J . A~ (1987). Social co gnit io n and social percep-

t ion . A n n u a l R e v iew o fPsychology, 38, 369-425 .

Higgins, E. T., Bargh, J . A., & Lombardi , W. (1985). The nature of

p r im ing e ffect s on ca tegor iza t ion . Journal o f Experimental Psychol-

ogy." Learning, M em ory an d Cognition, 11, 59-69 .

Higgins, E. T., Bond, R. N., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1986). Self-

d i sc repanc ies and emot ion a l vu lne rab i l i ty : How magni tude , access i-

bi li ty, an d typ e of discrepa ncy influen ce affect . Journal o f Personality

and So cial Psycholog~, 51, 5 -15.

Higgins, E. T., & King , G. (1981). Accessibi li ty of social constructs:

In fo rm at ion p rocess ing consequences o f ind iv idua l and con tex tua l

variabili ty. In N. C anto r & J. Kihlstro m (Eds.) , Personality, cognition,and social interaction (pp. 69- 121 ) . Hil lsdale, N J: Erlb aum .

Higgins, E. T., Kin g, G. A., & Ma vin, G. H. (1982). In dividu al cons truct

accessibil i ty an d subject ive impre ssions an d recal l . Journal o fPerson-ality a nd S ocial Psycholog~, 43, 3 5 - 4 7 .

Higgins, E. T., Klein, R., & Stra um an, T. (1985). Self-concept discrep-

ancy theory : A psychological m odel for dist ing uishing am ong differ-

ent aspects o f depression an d anxiety. Socia l Cognition, 3, 51-76 .

Higgins, E. T., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1987). Self-discrepancies:

Dist ing uishin g am ong self-states , self-s tate conflicts , a nd em otiona l

vulnera bil i t ies . In K. M . Yardley & T M. H oness (Eds.) , S e l f a n d

identity: Psychosocialperspectives (pp. 173-186). New York: Wiley.

Higgins, E. T, Rholes, W. S., & Jones, C. R. (1977). C ategory accessibil-

i ty and impress ion fo rmat ion . Journal o f Experim ental Social Psy-

cholog)z, 13, 141-154 .Higgins, E. T , S trauman, T , & Kle in , R . (1986). Standards and the

process of self-evaluat ion: Mu lt iple affects from mu lt iple s tages. In

R. M . Sor re n t ino & E . T Higg ins (Eds . ), Handbook of motivationand cognition: Foundations o f social behavior (pp. 23-63 ). New York:

Gu ilford Press.

Hof fman , M . L . (1971). Iden t i f ica t ion and consc ience development .

Child Development, 42, 1071-1082 .

Hoffm an, M. L. (1975). Sex differences in mo ral internal iza t ion. Jour-

n a l o f Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 720-729 .

Hoge, D. R ., & McCarthy, J . D. (1983). Issues of val idi ty an d rel iabi l i ty

in the use of real- ideal discrepancy scores to measure self-regard.

Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog3z, 44, 1048-1055 .

Hol t , R . R . (1976). Dr ive o r wish? A recons ide ra t ion o f the psychoana-

Page 21: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 21/22

S E L F - D IS C R E P A N C Y T H E O R Y 339

ly t ic theory o f mot iva t ion . In M. M. G i l l & P . S . Ho lzm an (Eds .) ,

Psycho logy ve rsus metapsycho logy : Psychoana ly t ic e ssays in m em ory

of Geo rge S. Klein [Special issue]. Psychological Issues, 9(4), 158-

197.

Hom ey , K. (1939) . New ways in psychoanalysis . N e w Y o rk : N o r t o n .

Hom ey , K. (1946) . Ou r inner conflicts: A constructive th eory of neurosis .

L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e & K e g a n P a u l .

Hom ey , K. (1950) . Neurosis and hu ma n growth. N e w Y o rk : N o r t o n .Jacobs , D . ( 1 9 7 1 ) . M o o d s - e m o t i o n - af f e c t: T h e n a t u r e o f a n d m a n i p u l a -

tion of affeetive states with particular reference to posit ive affective

s ta tes and em ot iona l i llness . In A. Jaeobs & L . B . Saehs (Eds. ), T h e

psychology of private events (pp . 118-142) . N ew York: Acad emic

Press.

Jacobson , E . (1946) . The e f fec t o f d isappo in tm en t on ego and superego

f o r m a t i o n i n n o r m a l a n d d e p r e s s iv e d e ve l o p m e n t . Psychoanalytic Re-

view, 33, 129-147 .

James, W. (1948). Psychology. New York : Wor ld . (Or ig ina l work pub-

lished 1890)

Kel ley , H. H . (1952) . Two func t ion s o f re fe rence g roups . In G. E . Swan-

son , T. M. New comb , & E . L . Har t ley (Eds .) , Readings in soc ia lpsy -

chology (2nd ed . , pp . 410-414) . New York : Ho l t , R in ehar t & W in-

ston.

Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs . New Y ork:

N o r t o n .

Kemper, T. D. (1978). A social interactional theory o f emotions. Ne w

York: Wiley.

Klein, G. S. (1970). Perception, motives and pe rsonali ty New York :

K n o p f .

Klein, R. , & Higgins, E. T. (1984). Standp oint relevance as a determi-

nant o f the magnitu de of discomfort from discrepant sel f-concepts .Unpu bl ished m anuscr ip t , New Y ork Univers ity .

K u h l , J . (1978). Standard se t t ing and r i sk p re fe rence : An e lab ora t ion o f

t h e t h e o r y o f a c h ie v e m e n t m o t i v a t i o n a n d a n e m p i r i c a l t e s t. Psycho-

logical Review, 85 , 2 3 9 - 2 4 8 .

Kuiper , N. A. , & D erry , P . A. ( 1981). The se l f a s a cog n i t ive p ro to type :

An app l ica t ion to pe rson pe rcep t ion and depress ion . In N. Can to r &

J . E Klh ls t rom (Eds . ) , Personality, cognition and social interaction(pp. 215-232 ) . H i l l sda le , NJ : E r lbaum .

Kukla , A . (1978) . A n a t t r ibu t iona l theo ry o f cho ice . In L . Berkowi tz

(Ed.), Advances in ex perime ntal social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 113 -

144). New York : Academ ic P ress .

laza rus , A. A. (1968) . Learn ing theory and the t rea tm en t o f depress ion .

Behavior Research and Th erapy 6, 8 3 - 8 9 .

Lecky, P. (1961). Self-consistency: A theo ry of per son ality N e w Y o rk :

Shoe S t r ing P ress.

Lewin , K . ( 1935). A d ynamic theory o f personali ty N e w Y o r k : M c G r a w -

Hi l l .

Lew in, K . ( 1951). Field theory in social science. Ne w York: Harper.

Lewis, H. B. (1979). Sha me in depress ion and hysteria . In C . E. Izard

(Ed.), E mo tions in personali ty and psychopathology (pp. 371-396).

New York : P lenum Press .Markus , H . (1977). Se l f - schem ata and p rocess ing in fo rma t ion abou t

the self. Journa l of Personali ty and Social Psychology, 35, 6 3 - 7 8 .

Markus, H. , & Nurius, P. (1987). Possible selves. In K. M. Yardley &

T. M. H oness (Eds.) , Se lf an d identity: P sychosocialperspectives (pp.

157-172). New York: Wiley.

Markus , H. , & Sm ith , J . (1981). The in f luence o f se l f- schema on the

percep t ion o f o the rs . I n N. Can to r & J . E Klh ls t ro m (Eds .) , Personal-

ity, cognition andsocial interaction (pp . 233-262 ) . Hi l l sda le , N J : E r l -

b a u m .

Mc Cann , C . D . , & Higg ins , E . T. ( in p ress ) . M ot iva t ion and a f fect in

in te rpe rsona l re la t ions : The ro le o f pe rsona l o r ien ta t ions an d d isc rep -

ancies. In H . E. Sypher, L. Donoh ew, & E. T. Higgin s (Eds.) , C o m m u -

nication, soc ial cognition, a nd affect. H i l l s da l e , N J : E d b a u m .

McCle l land , D. C . (1961) . The achieving society Pr ince ton , N J : V an

N o s t r a n d .

M c G u i r e , W . J . (1 9 68 ). T h e o r y o f t h e s t r u c tu r e o f h u m a n t h o u g h t . I n

R . P . Abc lson , E . Aronson , W. J . McGuire , T . M. Ncwcomb, M. J .

Rosenberg , & P . H. Ta nnen baum (Eds. ), Theories of cognitive consis-

tency." A source bo ok (pp . 140-162) . Ch icago : Ran d McNal ly .

Mead , G . H. (1934) . Mind , sel f , and society Chicago : Un ivers i ty o f Ch i -

eagn Press.Men dels, J . (1970). Concepts o f depression. New York : Wiley .

Mer ton , R . K. (1957). Social theory an d soc ial s tructure. G l e n c o e , I L :

Free Press.

Miller , G. A. , Galanter, E. , & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the

structure o f behavior New York : Ho l t , R inehar t , & Wins ton .

Misehe i , W. (1984). Convergences and cha l lenges in the sea rch fo r con-

sistency. Am erican Psychologist, 39, 351-364 .

More t t i , M. , & Higg ins , E . T. (1987, June) . Attribute valence vs. guide

discrepancy a s predictors o f depression a nd self-esteem. Paper pre-

sen ted a t the m ee t ings o f the Can ad ian Psycho log ica l Assoc ia t ion ,

Vancouver, B r i t i sh Co lum bia , Canada .

Morse, S. J . , & Gergen, K. J . (1970). Social comparison, self-consis-

tency , and the co ncep t o f se lf . Journ al of Personality a nd So cial Psy-

chology, 16, 148-156 .

Mowrer, O . H. (1960). Learn ing theory and behavior. New York: Wiley.

Murray , H. A. (1938) . Exploration in personali ty. New York : Oxford

Un iversity Press.

Na ta le , M. , & H an tas , M . (1982). E f fec t o f tem pora ry m ood s tates on

se lec t ive m em ory a bou t th e se lf . Journa l of Personali ty and Socia l

Psychology,, 42, 9 2 7 - 9 3 4 .

Newcomb, T . M. (1961) . The acquaintance process. N e w Y o r k : H o l t ,

R i n e h a r t , & W i n s to n .

Newcomb, T . M. (1968) . In te rpe rsona l ba lance . In R . P . Abe lson , E .

Aronso n , W. J . McG uire , T . M. N ewcom b, M. J . Rosenberg , & P . H.

Tannenbaum (Eds . ) , Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook

(pp. 28 -51 ) . Ch icago : Ran d McN al ly .

Olson , J . M . , & Zanna , M. P . (1979) . A new look a t se lec tive exposure .

Journ al of Exp erim ental Socia l Psychology,, 15, 1 15.

Osgood , C . E . , & Tanne nbaum , P . H. (1955) . Th e p r inc ip le o f congru i tyin the p red ic t ion o f a t t i tude change . PsychologicalReview,, 62, 4 2 - 5 5 .

Piers, G . , & Singer, M. B. (1971). Sha me and gu il t. N e w Y o rk : N o r t o n .

Phitchik, R. (1962). The emotions: Facts, theories, and a new model.

N e w Y o r k: R a n d o m H o u s e .

Rado , S . (1956) . Th e p rob le m o f melanch o l ia . In S . Rado , Collected

papers (Vol. 1 , pp . 220-246) . New York : G run e & S t ra t ton . (Or ig ina l

work pub l i shed 1927)

Rogers, C. R. (1959). A the ory of therapy, personality , and inte rperson al

re la t ionsh ips , a s deve loped in the c l ien t -cen te red f ramework . In S .

Ko ch (Ed . ), Psychology: A study o f a science: Volum e 3. Formulations

o f the person and the soc ia l con tex t (pp. 184-256). Ne w York: Mc -

G r a w - H i l l .

Rogers, C. R . ( 1961). On becom ing a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin .

Rosem an , I . J . (1984) . Cogn i t ive de te rm inan ts o f emo t ion : A s t ruc tu ra ltheory. Rev iew of Personali ty and Social Psycholog3A 5, 11-36.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society a nd the adolescent sel f- image. P r i n c e t o n ,

NJ : P r ince ton Univers i ty P ress.

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving t he self. Ne w York: Basic Books.

Ro t te r , J . B . (1942) . Leve l o f a sp i ra t ion as a me thod o f s tudy ing pe rson-

a l ity : 1 . A c r i t ica l rev iew o f methodo logy . Psychological Review, 49,

463--474.

Russe l l , J . A. (1980) . A c i rcum plex m ode l o f a ffect . Journal of Personal-

ity a nd Soc ial Psychology,, 39, 1161-1178 .

Sand er , J . , & Jo f fe , W. G. (1965) . N o tes on ch i ldhood depress ion . Inter-

national J ournal of Psychoanalysis, 46 , 88 -96 .

Sarbin, T. R. , Taft , R. , & Bailey, D. E. (1960). Clinical inference and

cognitive theory. New York : Ho l t , R ine har t , & W ins ton .

Page 22: Self Discrepancy Theory

8/22/2019 Self Discrepancy Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/self-discrepancy-theory 22/22

3 4 0 E . T O R Y H I G G I N S

Sehafer, R. (1967). Ideals , the ego ideal, and th e ideal self . In R . R. H olt

(Ed .) , M ot ives and thou gh t : Psych oana ly t ic e ssays in hono r o f Dav id

Rapaport [Special issue]. Psychological Issues, 5(2-3 ) , 131-174 .

Scheie r, M . E , & C arver , C . S . (1977). Se l f - focused a t ten t ion and the

exper ienc e o f emot ion : A t t rac t ion , repu ls ion , e la t ion , and depres -

sion. J o u r n a l o f PerSonality and S ocia l Psychology,, 35 , 625-636 .

Scheier, M. E , & C arver, C. S. (1982). C ogn ition, affect, and self-regula-

tion. In M. S. Clark & S. T. Fiske (Eds.) , Affect and cognit ion: The

seventeenth annual Carnegie Symposium on cognit ion (pp. 157-

183). Hi l l sda le , N J : E r lbaum .

Seheier, M. E, & Carver, C. S. (1983). Two sides o f the self: One for you

and one fo r me . In J . Su ls & A. G. G reenw ald (Eds .) , Psychological

perspectives on the se l f (pp . 123-157). Hi l l sda le , N J : E r lbaum .

Sehienker, B. R. (1985). Ide ntity and self-identif ication. In B. R.

Sehlenker (Ed.) , T h e s e l fand social l i fe (pp. 65 -10 0) . N ew York : Mc -

G r a w - H i l l .

Shrauger, J . S . , & Patterson, M. B. (1974). Self-ev aluation and the selec-

t ion o f d imen s ions fo r eva lua t ing o the rs. Journ al o f Personality , 42,

569-585 .

Snyder, M. (1979). Self- mo nitor ing processes. In L. Berko witz (Ed.) ,

Advances in expe rimenta l social psychology ( Vol . 12) . New York : Aca-

dem ic P ress.

Snygg D. , & Combs , A. W. (1949) . Individual behavior. New York :H a r p e r & R o w .

Srull , T . K. , & Wyer, R. S. , Jr . (1979). T he role o f category accessibili ty

in the in te rp re ta t ion o f in fo rmat io n abou t pe rsons : Som e de te rm i-

nan ts and impl ica t ions . Journa l o f Personality a nd So cial Psychology,,

37 , 1660-1672 .

Sruil , T . K. , & W yer, R. S. , Jr. (1980). Cate gory acce ssibil i ty and so cial

p e r c ep t i o n : S o m e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y o f p e rs o n m e m o r y a n d

in te rpe rsona l judgments . Journa l of Personality and Social Psychol-

ogy, 38, 8 4 1 - 8 5 6 .

S te in , N. L . , & Jewet t , J . L . (1982) . A co ncep tua l ana lys is o f the mea n-

i n g o f n e g a t i v e e m o t i o n s : I m p l i c a t io n s f o r a t h e o r y o f d e v e l o p m e n t .

In C . E . Iza rd (Ed . ), Mea suring emotion s in infants and children (pp.

401--443) . New York : Cam br idge Univers i ty P ress .

Stra um an, T. J . ,. & Higgins, E . T. ( in press) . A utom atic activation o fd is t inc t sel f-d isc repanc ies and e mo t iona l syndrom es . Journa l o f Per-

sonali ty a nd S ocial Psychology

Strau ma n, T. J . , & Higgins, E. T. (1987). Vulnerability to specific kind s

of chronic emotio nal problems as a unctio n of self-discrepancies. U n -

pub l i shed m anuscr ip t , New York Univers i ty .

Sullivan, H . S. ( 1953 ) . The collected works of Harry Stac k Sull ivan (Vol.

1 , H. S . Pe r ry & M . L . Gaw el , Eds. ). N ew York : Nor ton .

Swa nn, W. B. , Jr . (1983). Self-verif ication: Bring ing social reali ty into

harmony wi th the se l f . In J . Su ls & A. G. Greenwald (Eds . ) , Soc ia l

psychological perspectives on the self (Voi. 2 , pp. 33-66). Hillsdale,

N J: E r l b a u m .

Tag iu r i , R . (1969) . Pe rson pe rcep t ion . In G. L indzey & E . Aronson

(Eds. ), The handbook o f soc ia lpsycho logy (2nd ed . , Vo i . 3 , pp . 39 5-

449). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Tom pkins, S. S. (1984). Affect theory. In K. R. Sehe rer & P. Ek ma n

(Eds.), Approaches to emo tion (pp. 163-195). Hillsda le, NJ : Erl-

b a u m .

Tul ving , E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versu s accessibility o f

i n f o r m a t i o n i n m e m o r y f o r w o rd s. Journa l o f Verba l Learn ing and

Verbal Behavior, 5, 3 8 1 - 3 9 I .

Turner , R . H . (1956) . Ro le - tak ing , ro le s tandpo in t , a nd re fe rence-g roup

behavior. Amer ican Journa l o f Socio logy, 61 , 316-328 .Van Hook, E. , & Higgins, E. T. (1986). E m o t i o n a l p r o b le m s o f t h e s e l f

bey ond th e self-concept: Th e case o f conflicting self-guides. U n p u b -

fished ma nusc ript, Ne w York University .

Watson, D. , & Fr iend , R . (1969). Mea surem ent o f soc ia l -eva lua tive anx-

iety. Journa l of Consult ing and Clinical Psychology, 33, 4 4 8 - 4 5 7 .

Weiner, B. (1972). Theories o f motivation: From mech anism to cogni-

tion. C h i c a g o : R a n d M c N a l l y .

Weiner, B . (1986). Cogn i t ion , emo t ion , and ac t ion . In R . M . Sor ren t ino

& E . T. Higgins (Eds.), Han dboo k o f motivation and cognition: Foun-

dations of social behavior (pp . 281-312) . New Y ork : Gu i l f o rd P ress .

Weiner, B ., Russe ll , D . , & Lerm an , D . (1979). The cogn i t ion -em ot ion

process in ach ievement- re la ted con tex ts . Journa l of Personali ty an d

Soc ial P sychology,, 37, 1211-1220 .

Wells , L . E. , & Marwell , G. (1976). Self-esteem: Its conceptualization

and measurement . Bever ly Hi l l s , CA: Sage.Wh i te , R . W. (1964) . The abnormal personali ty (3rd ed.) . New York:

Ron a ld P ress.

Wick lund , R . A. , & Brehm , J . W. (1976) . Perspectives on cognitive dis-

sonance. H i l l sd a l e , N J : E r l b a u m .

Wick lund , R . A . , & Gol lwi tze r , P. M. (1982). Sym bolic sel f-complet ion.Hil lsda le , N J : E r lba um.

Wiener, N . (1948). Cybernetics: Control and c omm unication in the ani-

mal and the m ach ine . Cam br idge , M A: M. I .T . P ress.

Wierzb icka , A. (1972). Sem antic primit ives. Frankfu r t , Wes t Germany :

A t h e n a u m .

Wright, J . , & M ischel, W. (1982). Inf luen ce of affect on cog nitive social

lea rn ing pe rson va r iab les . Journa l of Personality and S ocial Psychol-

ogy, 43, 9 0 1 - 9 1 4 .

Wyer, R. S. , & Srull , T . K. (1981). Cate gory accessibil i ty: Som e theoreti-ca l and em pir ica l i s sues conce rn ing the p rocess ing o f soc ia l s t imulus

in fo rm at ion . In E . T. Higg ins , C . E H erm an , & M . E Z anna (Eds. ),

Social cognit ion: The Ontario Sympo sium . Hil lsda le , NJ : E r lbaum .

Wylie, R. C. ( 1961). The sel f concept. L i n c o l n : U n i v e r si t y o f N e b r a s k a

Press.

Wylie, R. C. (1979). The self-concept (rev. ed.) . Lincoln: University of

Nebraska P ress .

Zuckerman , M. , & Lub in , B . (1965) . Man ual for the Mul t ip le A f fec t

Adject ive Check List . San Diego , CA: Educa t iona l and Indus t r ia l

Testing Service.

R e c e i v e d J u l y 8 , 1 9 8 6

R e v i s i o n r e c e i v e d J a n u a r y 9 , 1 9 8 7

A c c e p t e d J a n u a r y 1 2, 19 8 7 9