Maarit Johnson

Competence strivings and self-esteem: An experimental study

Abstract The theoretical assumption that the role of competence for self-esteem acquisition is dependent upon an individuals basic sense of self-esteem was experimentally tested. Sixty psychology students with high or low self-esteem and with or without a need to earn self-esteem by competence (measured by two new scales) received false feedback of success or failure on successive achievement tasks of which they were free to choose degree of difficulty. When confronted with failure, the group characterized by low self-esteem and high need to earn self-esteem employed a maladaptive strategy increasing their ambition (indicated by the measurement of heart-rate and choice of difficulty) at the expense of performance. The two groups with high sense of self-esteem, in turn, lowered their ambition and hence performed better. These findings were interpreted as supporting the general hypothesis that the relation between competence and self-esteem may be hierarchical and asymmetrical in that competence may enhance or maintain a good sense of self-esteem but contribute little when self-esteem is absent.

The vulnerability status of neuroticism: over-reporting or genuine complaints?

Neuroticism is widely documented to reflect an exaggerated reporting of physical symptoms, due to an over-sensitive focus on internal stimuli in individuals high in this trait. This study scrutinized the responses to 409 retrospective health reports to see if negative affect (NA), indicating neuroticism, was differentially related to different types of physical complaints. The role of other personality risk factors, related to neuroticism and coping style were also examined. The findings show that high NA was uniquely related only to diseases of tension type, such as high blood pressure, migraine, or neck pain. Of the other factors, which all correlated with NA, hostility, self-critical attitude, and coping were uniquely related to these same complaints. It is concluded that neuroticism has a more genuine vulnerability potential to disease.

Self-esteem stability: the importance of basic self-esteem and competence strivings for the stability of global self-esteem

The stability of self‐esteem has been increasingly emphasized as crucial for understanding the role and the functioning of self‐esteem. The present study compares two conceptualizations of self‐esteem, Global self‐esteem and Basic self‐esteem, as to stability over time. Moreover, the importance of competence strivings in order to gain self‐esteem is considered. Eighty psychology students completed the scales, which also comprised a measure of current relevant events, six times during a 9 month period. It was shown that Global self‐esteem was more unstable than Basic self‐esteem and that a high need of competence and approval by others in acquiring self‐esteem increased the instability, particularly when these strivings were combined with a low sense of Basic self‐esteem and negative events. Moreover, the events had a greater impact on Global self‐esteem than on Basic self‐esteem. The more temporary nature of Global self‐esteem and its greater sensitivity to self‐presentational influences and response biases are discussed.

Contingent self-esteem structures related to cardiac, exhaustive, and immunological disease: A comparison between groups of outpatients

Abstract Hostile resentful contra repressive avoidant behaviors, widely associated with different health processes, are considered to arise from people’s specific contingent self-esteem strategies. The present study examines competence-based self-esteem (CBSE), referring to self-critical strivings, and relation-based self-esteem (RBSE), referring to rejection sensitivity and compliance, in three groups of outpatients (n = 85) and healthy controls (n = 37). Patients diagnosed with exhaustion syndromes displayed significantly higher CBSE and RBSE than all other groups. Patients diagnosed with cardiac type of disease showed significantly higher CBSE than those with immunological type of disease and healthy controls, whereas the immunological group reported significantly higher RBSE than the cardiac group and healthy controls. Further, cardiac patients displayed significantly higher CBSE than RBSE, whereas immunological patients reported significantly higher RBSE than CBSE. A discriminant analysis, incorporating the theoretical constituents of the contingent SE scales, showed that the four groups could be predicted by their SE profiles. The systematic patterns found in the present results shed light on the role of self-esteem contingency for differential psychosocial coping and health processes.

Dimensionality of the Basic and Earning Self-Esteem Scales: The importance of theoretical basis and item selection

Dåderman and Basinska (2013) explore the factor structure of short Polish self-esteem scales derived from the Basic and Earning SE Scales as originally developed by Lennart Forsman and myself. Their approach is welcomed as no formal abbreviated scales have yet been established. However, the article is plagued with theoretical and methodological shortcomings which undermine the credibility of the results. Foremost, Dåderman and Basinska neglect the theoretical basis underlying the development of the original scales (Forsman & Johnson, 1996). They focus on the dimensionality of the two self-esteem scales, in attempt to reproduce results obtained using the original, long scales. However, they neglect the reasons why the dimensionality was analyzed in the original scales. Forsman and Johnson (1996, p. 2 and p. 4) reason clearly that the concepts and measures of basic (affective experiential) and earning (by competence) SE were created to separate between two phenomena, self-esteem and competence, which is of theoretical importance in the area (see also Johnson & Forsman, 1995). Despite the scales’ relatively high internal consistencies, their dimensions were explored to gain greater understanding of the theoretical constructs underlying the scales (see Forsman & Johnson, 1996, p. 8). The Basic and Earning SE Scales are considered unitary, broad theoretically derived constructs, originally created for experimental studies to show the hierarchical and asymmetrical relation between self-esteem and competence (see Johnson & Forsman, 1995). Accordingly, their theoretical dimensions are not recommended to be seen or used as subscales in empirical studies. Dåderman and Basinska’s reasoning of global self-esteem reveals their neglect or misunderstanding of the rationale behind basic and earning SE concepts. They argue that basic SE is compatible and conceptually close to Rosenberg’s global SE (Abstract, p. 243 and p. 254). This is a surprising statement as the whole point of developing the basic SE concept and measure was to separate self-esteem from competence (earning) aspects of self-worth. It is well known that in the global SE scales competence aspects are mixed with affective aspects (Johnson, 1998; Tafarodi & Swann, 2001). Dåderman and Basinska claim further that global selfesteem, as defined by Rosenberg (1965), is non-contingent (in correspondence with basic selfesteem), despite the global self-esteem’s reference to contingencies such as skills or competencies (Forsman & Johnson, 1996; Tafarodi & Swann, 2001). For instance, they write vaguely without reference: “The results from the Basic Self-esteem Scale are usually interpreted to show that this scale is a measure of global self-esteem with somewhat better qualities than the established scales of self-esteem” (p. 244). In addition, the role of earning self-esteem is misunderstood. For instance, Dåderman and Basinska write: “Earning self-esteem depends on achieving success and being accepted by Nordic Psychology, 2014 Vol. 66, No. 3, 230–232, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2014.964956 LETTER