Motivation and Significance

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Motivation and Significance

The focus of psychology has shifted over the past decades from an emphasis on psychological dysfunction to positive psychology, that focuses on the function of “positive”

variables like optimism, psychological health and well-being, and life satisfaction (Seligman &

Csikszentmihalyu, 2000; Sheldon & King, 2001). From the standpoint of positive psychology, one of the major preoccupations of psychologist has been investigating the self-enhancement related variables such as optimism and hope that have been related to positive psychological functioning and to other character strengths (Aspinwall & Staudinger, 2003; Peterson, 2006;

Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Snyder & Lopes, 2007). On the basis of Taylor and Brown’s (1988) review, researchers found healthy individuals often engaged in a variety of self-enhancing behaviors (e.g., overly positive self-evaluations, exaggerated perceptions of personal control, and unrealistic optimism for the self). And, self-enhancement has gathered great importance for understanding why and how individuals remain positive and resilient despite negative experiences (Hoyle, Kernis, Leary, & Baldwin, 1999). Therefore, in the previous decade, the emergence of a positive focus in psychology gave rise to the popular but unfounded belief that

“feeling good about oneself is a key to fulfilling one’s potentials”. This folk theory, especially the emphasis on the benefits of self-enhancement (e.g., reinforcing positive self-perceptions, providing unrealistically positive performance feedback) is featured in numerous popular books, the media, and daily communications (Miller, Wang, Sandel, & Cho, 2002).

Indeed, the fact that people evaluate themselves better than an average peer is a recognized phenomenon in social psychology. For, example, a College Board (1976-1977) survey of nearly one million high school seniors found that only 2% of them perceived themselves to be worse

2

than average on leadership ability, and no respondents believed that they were worse than average on the ability to get along with others. Cross (1977) noted that more than 94% of university professors thought that they had better-than-average teaching ability; even college students rated themselves as better than average on 38 of 40 positive personality traits (Alicke, Klotz, Breitenbecher, Yurak, & Vredenburg, 1995).

However, is self-enhancement always beneficial? Past findings on the effects of self-enhancement have been problematic. On the one hand, some evidence seems to support the idea that self-enhancing (holding a more positive view of oneself than is accurate) can result in favorable outcomes, including improved emotional well-being (Brown & Dutton, 1995; Taylor &

Brown, 1988; Taylor, Lerner, Sherman, Sage, & McDowell, 2003a; 2003b; Gramzow, Willard, &

Mendes, 2008), and better psychological health (e.g., higher happiness, better psychological adjustment, lower depression; see Taylor & Brown, 1988; Taylor et.al.,2003a). Positive self-perceptions are also related to increased motivation, persistence (e.g., Bandura, 1977;

Baumeister & Tice, 2006; Felson, 1984; Isen & Daubman, 1984; Isen & Means, 1983), and performance (e.g., Baumeister, Hamilton, & Tice, 1985). On the other hand, the negative consequences of overly positive illusions about oneself have also been reported (Colvin & Griffo, 2008; Colvin, Block, & Funder, 1995; Colvin & Block, 1994a; Colvin & Block, 1994b; Greham, Lane, ManMillan, Bocian, & Ward, 2000; Robins & Beer, 2001; Klein & Cooper, 2008; Klein &

Cerully, 2007; Kurt & Paulhus, 2008; Kwan, John, Robins, & Kuang, 2008; McNulty, O’Mara, &

Karney, 2008; McNulty & Karney, 2004; Kim, Zou, & Chiu, 2010; Kim & Chiu, 2011). For instance, the degree of overly positive self-assessments of personality characteristics predicts more maladjustment and relational problems (Colvin et al., 1995; Greham et al., 2000). Gresham et al. (2000) noted that illusory positive self-perceptions are correlated with poorer social skills, more problem behaviors, and lower academic competence. Similarly, Kwan et al. (2008) have noted that the self-enhancement bias is associated with lower levels of resilience, higher levels of

3

defensiveness, poorer social skills, high levels of narcissism, and lower grade point averages (GPA). Thus, the effects of illusory positive self-perceptions can be seen to be inconsistent and confusing.

These studies appear to contradict one another, and the reasons could be methodological disparities in previous research both in definition and measurement of self-enhancement. And, on conventional measures of self-enhancement, East Asians' apparently inconsistent and weak tendencies to self-enhance should not be seen as an absense of self-enhancement in these cultures (Brown, 2003; Kim, Chiu, Peng, Cai, & Tov, 2010; Kurman, 2003). Although the self-enhancement motive might be present in East Asian cultures, it may expressed in subtle forms. Some investigators have advised inquiry into how self-enhancement operates among diverse populations (Chang et al., 2008; Chang & Asakawa, 2003; Chang, Asakawa, & Sanna, 2001; Sedikides, Gaertner, & Toguchi, 2003), because the majority of conclusions about self-enhancement have been based on Caucasian North American subjects. For instance, Heine and his colleagues (1999) stated, “the need for positive self-regard, as it is currently conceptualized, is not universal, but rather is rooted in significant aspects of North American culture”(p. 766). Kim and Chiu (2011b) observed that whether or not studies identified a need for positive self-regard among East Asians depended on how the phenomenon was defined and measured.

In sum, a more precise model of self-enhancement is needed in order to clarify the complexities of this phenomenon (Chang, Chang, Sanna, & Kade, 2008). Thus, the methodological inconsistencies and their consequences in previous research are addressed in detail in Chapter 2. Then, a refined methodology that amends the operational errors of previous research will be outlined. This model does not negate the value of positive thinking, positive attitudes, or general positive self-regard, but holds nonetheless that excessive self-enhancement

4

can be problematic and even harmful. With a clear definition and refined measures, it will then be possible to undertake a deep theoretical analysis of self-enhancement as expressed among East Asians.