Social psychology

6 and 7th April 2020. read today and audio lecture to be delivered in 7th
april
How does the self regulate our
behaviour so that we can plan
effectively and pursue our goals
and aspirations?
How does the self regulate our behaviour so that
we can plan effectively and pursue our goals and
aspirations?
• Before you read any further, take a look at yourself in the mirror.
What goes through your mind as you are doing this? Perhaps your
thoughts initially turn to your outward appearance, such as whether
your shirt makes you look slimmer, the urgency with which you need
a new haircut, or if you have blackheads on your nose. But if you are
like most people, your thoughts may quickly turn inwards, to your
personal goals and the expectations that others have of you, and
whether you are living up to those expectations.

• Have a look in the mirror what do you see?

How does the self regulate our behaviour so that
we can plan effectively and pursue our goals and
aspirations?

• Indeed, many scholars of the self have observed that self-reflection

often leads people to think about their goals and aspirations. The self
thus enables people to plan their actions more effectively, and this is
among the major adaptive advantages of having a self.
Self-awareness theory
Self-awareness theory
• When you are turning your attention inward, you become the object
of your own consciousness. This intriguing state of self-focus may
arise when you are looking at yourself in a mirror.
• However, self-focus may also be increased by other factors that lead
you to pay more attention to yourself. For instance, you are likely to
become more self-focused when you see a video recording of
yourself, hear an audio recording of your own voice, when your name
is mentioned, when you somehow experience yourself as different
from the people around you, or when you are writing about yourself.
• Self-focus also tends to become increased in public situations, when
you realize that your actions are being monitored by an audience.
 Self-awareness theory
• One study, for example, showed that self-focus can make people work harder at a
difficult task, especially when their attention is directed at their performance (Dana,
Lalwani, & Duval, 1997). Other studies have shown that self-focus can lead people to
offer more assistance to a person with a legitimate request for help (Gibbons &
Wicklund, 1982). Yet other studies found that self-focus leads people to suppress
socially undesirable stereotypes .

• Notably, the effects of self-focus also depend upon your self-efficacy, or your beliefs
about whether you are capable of acting in a certain manner to achieve certain goals
(Bandura, 1977). For instance, imagine that your parents expect you to do well in maths
at school. If your self-efficacy is high, you believe that you are capable of mastering your
maths lessons. In this case, high self-focus will lead you to invest more time and effort in
studying maths. By contrast, if your self-efficacy is low, you believe that you are unable
to master maths no matter how hard you try. In the latter case, self-focus will lead you
to invest less time and effort in studying maths (Carver, Blaney, & Scheier, 1979).

• The effects of self-focus are therefore quite flexible, and depend upon your beliefs
about what you can realistically accomplish.
Summarizing self awareness theory
• Self-awareness theory proposes that some of our behaviour is the
result of one of our inner processes, namely the ability to self-focus.
When we self-focus, we become the object of our own scrutiny; this
can be made to occur consciously (e.g. looking at yourself in a mirror,
or watching a video-recording of yourself) or may happen
unconsciously as a product of the situation in which we find ourselves
(for example, you are in the presence of a number of people who you
perceive to be very different to yourself).
Self-regulation theory
Self-regulation theory
• Self-focus makes us more inclined to regulate our behaviour. In this
sense, self-focus is closely connected with self-regulation, or the
control ‘of the self by the self’ (Baumeister, Schmeichel, & Vohs,
2007).

• But what does this mean? Should we think of the self as a

‘homunculus’ or little man in our head that takes charge of what we
do or feel? Or is it possible to understand self-regulation in terms of a
concrete mechanism or psychological process?
Self-regulation
• ‘Self-regulation, broadly, is defined by setting a standard to achieve a
goal, investing the necessary effort to move toward reaching the goal,
and monitoring one’s progress in order to shield the goal
Self-regulation theory
• OPERATION OF THE TOTE LOOP ( a way to self regulate behaviour)

• TOTE loop, an acronym for ‘test-operate-test-exit’

• self regulation can be done through TOTE loop, an acronym for ‘test-
operate-test-exit’.

• In the initial test phase, you compare current circumstances to a standard.

For instance, you may wonder whether you have been generous enough to
your friends. If there is a discrepancy, you enter a phase of operation and
take steps to reduce the discrepancy. For instance, if you fear you have been
too much of a tightwad, you may decide to throw a party for your friends.
Then comes another test, to see whether you have met the standard or not.
Can you now say that you are a generous person? If not, the system
continues to operate until you have reached the standard. Perhaps you find
that generosity is not just about material things, so you really should spend
more time with your friends. Finally, when you meet the standard, the
system exits the TOTE loop and the cycle ends.

• The cybernetic theory of self-regulation thus proposes that we self-regulate

by monitoring how we live up to standards, and, when we fall short, by
taking action to bring us closer to these standards.
Another example of TOTE (student studies)
• One proposed method of self-regulation suggests that an individual applies a TOTE (test-
operate-test-exit) loop to their behaviour. For example, a student might reflect on their
academic performance and consider whether they are working hard enough.

• Using the TOTE loop, they might measure how many hours a week they spend studying
(test): if they conclude that the number of hours is not sufficient to produce a good
academic performance, they might decide to change their daily routine (for example, by
going out with their friends an hour later than usual) to incorporate an extra hour of
study a day (operate). At some point in the future, they would again measure their
behaviour to determine if they are now working hard enough (test); if they are, then
they will maintain the new level of behaviour and pay no further attention to the issue
(exit); if they are not, then further behaviour change may be planned. In essence, this
idea suggests that an individual self-regulates their behaviour by monitoring it against a
set of standards and modifying their behaviour to match the desired standards more
closely. In order to monitor their behaviour, an individual initially relies on self-
awareness.
 Which behaviour would you
like to self regulate and why?
Can you see yourself using this technique?
Self-regulatory standards
• The first part of self-regulation means that we adopt some kind of
standard, which may be a personal goal, social norm, expectations of
others and the like. Self-regulatory standards may be formulated
relatively broadly or more specifically.
 Self-regulatory standards (first step)
According to Carver and Scheier (1981, 1998) self-regulatory standards may operate on four different
levels.
• At the highest level are system concepts, which consist of the personal characteristics that
describe the kind of person we want to be (including the ideal and ought selves discussed
earlier). For example, most of us want to be generous, responsible and honest individuals.
• System concepts give rise to the next lower level – principles, which consist of global
behavioural aspirations. For instance, we can become a generous person by adhering to
the principle that we should give and share what we have with other people.
• Principles state values, and are still free of behavioural content, in that they are applicable
to many kinds of behaviour. The specific behaviours that we perform are prescribed by
programmes or scripts (the next lower level). For example, to adhere to one’s principle of
sharing with others, one might donate money to charity or leave a large tip at a
restaurant.
• Finally, programmes such as donating money to charity lead to even more specific goals or
sequences at the lowest level. Sequences consist of motor control goals that are typically
executed without conscious supervision. For instance, the behavioural programme of
leaving a tip might be enacted by the sequence of opening one’s wallet and taking out a
five Euro note
•

• In most situations we like to think of our goals in abstract, high-level

terms .For example, most individuals reading this content will think
of it as ‘studying psychology’ rather than ‘staring at letters’.
• Linking our behaviour to abstract goals renders what we are doing more
meaningful (Vallacher & Wegner, 1987). Because the self is closely associated with
higher-level meanings, more abstract goals are more strongly connected with the
self.

• Indeed, research suggests that self-regulation improves when we think more

abstractly about our goals. For instance, relative to those who are thinking of their
lower-level goals, people who are thinking of their higher-level goals are more
willing to delay immediate gratification to obtain a larger reward, display greater
physical endurance, and are better able to resist temptations (Fujita et al., 2006).

• Specifically, when induced to engage in higher level thinking (think ‘why I try to
maintain my health’, versus ‘how’), participants chose to forgo temptation by
committing to a healthy food regimen in advance, at least if their goal to improve
their health was high (; Fujita & Roberts, 2010). In this way they were able to
protect their goals from anticipated temptations. Conversely, individuals who fail at
self-regulation often tend to think of their goals in more low-level, concrete terms
(Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009; Twenge, Catanese, & Baumeister, 2003).
Thus, when you are reading this
text, you would do better to
think of it as ‘learning about
human nature’ instead of
‘looking at letters’.
Monitoring (second part of
self-regulation )
Monitoring (second part of self-regulation )
The second part of self-regulation is that we start monitoring our behaviour.
According to Carver and Scheier (1981, 1998) this monitoring function is facilitated
by self-awareness, which leads us to assess the self’s standing with regard to
relevant standards.
To test this notion, these researchers asked participants to copy complex figures
from a photograph, while their self-focus was either experimentally heightened (by
a mirror or the presence of an experimenter) or not. In the self-focus conditions,
participants more often checked whether their drawing matched the standard of
the photograph. Related experiments have shown that self-focus led individuals to
seek out information about performance norms. Directing attention to the self thus
leads us to monitor more closely whether our behaviour is in accordance with
standards. The role of monitoring in self-regulation is further supported by
neuroscience findings. Specific brain regions – like the anterior cingulate cortex –
monitor whether we should step up our self-regulatory efforts (Amodio,
Self-regulatory strength
Self-regulatory strength
If you have ever followed a diet or tried to give up smoking, you can verify how
hard self-regulation can be. Translating our self-regulatory standards into actual
behaviour is thus the third important aspect of self-regulation.
Common sense relates self-regulation to ‘willpower’ or ‘strength of character’.
Research by Baumeister and associates indicates that such notions may actually
have a kernel of truth.
These researchers suggest that self-regulation functions like a strength or a muscle
that draws upon limited energy resources (Muraven & Baumeister, 2000). Our
capacity for self-regulation may thus become depleted after sustained use. In line
with this idea, studies have shown that performing a demanding self-regulation
task in one domain often impairs self-regulation in another ostensibly unrelated
domain. For instance, dieters who suppressed their facial expressions during a
funny movie (a task that uses self-regulatory resources) were subsequently more
inclined to indulge in tasty but fattening foods (Vohs & Heatherton, 2000).
Self-regulatory strength
• The notion of regulatory depletion, also referred to as ‘ego depletion’
(Muraven & Baumeister, 2000) is intuitively appealing and potentially
explains many instances of self-regulatory failure. However, the
effects of regulatory depletion are often hard to distinguish from a
lack of monitoring. Indeed, several studies have found that so-called
‘regulatory depletion’ effects disappear when people are encouraged
to monitor their actions more closely. Such monitoring may be
promoted by providing people with regular performance feedback
(Wan & Sternthal, 2008) and increasing self-awareness (Alberts,
Martijn, & De Vries, 2011).
Self-regulatory strength
• Are self-regulatory breakdowns inevitable when we have to self-regulate for extended periods of
time?
• Although the strength model (Muraven & Baumeister, 2000) suggests a pessimistic answer to this
question, other models leave room for optimism. In the 1980s, Billy Ocean wrote a hit song with
the lines, ‘When the going gets tough, the tough get going’. In line with this idea, performing an
initial self-regulatory task can sometimes lead to increases in self-regulatory performance
(Converse & DeShon, 2009; Dewitte, Bruyneel, & Geyskens, 2009; Jostmann & Koole, 2006, 2007).
For instance, when a dieting person has to resist a tasty but fattening food on one occasion, this
person tends to be better at declining a sugar snack on a subsequent occasion (Dewitte et al.,
2009). This is because we can adapt better to a series of self-regulatory tasks when these are all in
the same domain (Dewitte et al., 2009).
• Similarly, providing people with more time to adjust themselves to increases in self-regulatory
demands leads to enhanced self-regulation, rather than the deteriorations predicted by the
depletion model (Converse & DeShon, 2009). The impact of additional self-regulatory demands
may thus depend on how well we can adapt to changes in self-regulatory demands (Koole,
Jostmann, & Baumann, 2011). As long as we can adapt to the situation, we can respond to more
demanding situations by stepping up our self-regulatory efficiency. It is only when we are no
longer capable of such adaptive responding that our self-regulation breaks down.
The dark side of self-
regulation
The dark side of self-regulation
• Our capacity for self-regulation is associated with a wide range of desirable outcomes,
including higher grades in college, fewer reports of psychopathology, higher self-
esteem, less binge eating, better relationships and interpersonal skills, secure
attachment and more optimal emotional responses (Tangney, Baumeister, & Boone,
2004).

• Given these benefits, we may wonder if we can ever engage in too much self-
regulation. The answer appears to be ‘yes’.

• There are at least two ways in which even our best attempts to self-regulate may
backfire. In high-pressure sports settings, such as during penalty kicks or championship
games, well-trained athletes often perform much more poorly than usual. . This
pattern of choking under pressure tends to occur when those athletes are highly self-
focused. It appears that self-focus leads people to pay increased attention to their
behaviour and to control their behaviour in a step-by-step fashion. Attention at this
step-by-step level disrupts the execution of well-learned or proceduralized skills
(Beilock & Carr, 2001). Thus, self-regulation may backfire when we engage in skilful,
well-learned behaviour.
Another disdvantage
• A second drawback of self-regulation is that it leads us to get stuck in
negative emotions. Recall that when we self-regulate, we compare the self
against standards for appropriate behaviour. Most of the time, we do not
completely live up to these standards.

• Consequently, the self-regulation of behaviour inevitably evokes negative

affect. When we experience a series of setbacks and failures, focusing on
our shortcomings will contribute to the onset and maintenance of
depression (Pyszczynski & Greenberg, 1987). In such cases, it may well be
adaptive to cease further attempts at self-regulation. Indeed, longitudinal
studies have found that people who can disengage from unattainable goals
display fewer depressive symptoms (Wrosch & Miller, 2009) and improved
immune functioning.
 Thus, despite the many advantages
that self-regulation brings, it is
healthy to abandon further attempts
at self-regulation when our goals
turn out to be unrealistic.
Escaping the self
Escaping the self
• In view of the dark side of self-regulation, we may sometimes be motivated to
avoid self-aware states. The desire to avoid self-awareness may underlie a
number of seemingly paradoxical and self-destructive behaviours. For instance,
this desire may foster alcohol abuse or comfort eating. Experiments have shown
that consuming alcohol lowers self-awareness (Hull, Levenson, Young, & Sher,
1983).

• Escapist needs may be met by eating binges, which lead awareness to shift
towards the immediate present by invoking strong physical sensations. Finally,
the need to escape self-awareness may lead people to commit the ultimate form
of self-destructive behaviour, namely suicide. Suicidal individuals are often highly
self-focused and tend to hold unrealistically high expectations of themselves
(Baumeister, 1990). Moreover, experimental studies have shown that thoughts of
suicide automatically spring to mind when people realize they are falling short of
their goals (Chatard & Selimbegovi, 2011).
Autonomous self-regulation
as a resource
Autonomous self-regulation as a resource
• In the foregoing paragraphs, we have characterized self-regulation in
highly ambivalent terms.
• On the one hand, self-regulation is an adaptive process that allows us
to strive for meaningful goals and act in accordance with social
norms. On the other hand, self-regulation (and the self-awareness
that supports it) may deplete our energies, and an excessive emphasis
on controlling our natural impulses may lead to anxiety, depression,
binge eating, and even suicide. This mixture of findings seems
puzzling. How can self-regulation be at once adaptive and associated
with severe psychological problems?
self-determination theory,
• One way to resolve this paradox is suggested by Ryan and Deci (2008; see
also Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). According to their self-determination
theory, people’s reasons for regulating their behaviour shape how they go
about the self-regulation process. In some situations, people engage in self-
regulation because they feel pressured to do so by others, like their peers
or authorities. Because such external pressures are often at odds with what
people truly want, this type of self-regulation tends to be effortful, energy-
depleting and laden with psychological conflict. At other times, however,
people may choose to engage in self-regulation on their own accord,
because regulating their behaviour is fully compatible with their own needs
and interests. When self-regulation is thus freely chosen and autonomous,
it is likely to be more harmonious and efficient.
self-determination theory accounts for people’s reasons for
self-regulation: if self-regulation is motivated by external
pressure it is effortful; if it is freely chosen it is much more
efficient without being depleting .
self-determination theory
• Studies indeed suggest that self-regulation demands more energy
when it is externally motivated rather than driven by intrinsic,
autonomous motivations (Muraven, Gagné, & Rosman, 2008,
Experiment 1). Ryan and Deci (2008) have gone even further, by
suggesting that autonomous self-regulation may boost the overall
energy available to the self. This notion was partly inspired by
observations that people’s reported energy levels and vitality increase
markedly over the weekend (Sheldon, Ryan, & Reis, 1996). Follow-up
studies in which participants were paged multiple times a day and
asked to report on their feelings showed that this ‘weekend effect’
was statistically explained by the enhanced autonomy that people
experienced over the weekend
self-determination theory
• Thus the enhanced freedom that comes with weekends may allow people
to replenish their energies. Similar results have been observed for their
recreational activities such as playing video games and skilled sports (see
Ryan & Deci, 2008, for a review). In addition, the pursuit of intrinsic life
goals, such as relationships, personal growth and serving the community is
associated with greater self-reported vitality across different cultures,
including the US and South Korea (Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Kim, Kasser, & Lee,
2003). By contrast, people who adopt many extrinsic life goals, such as
money, fame or image display reduced vitality relative to people who adopt
fewer extrinsic life goals. Taken together, it appears that freely chosen
autonomous self-regulation may maintain or even enhance people’s
energies and vitality.
What did we learn about self
What did we talk about
• The self is an active agent that guides and regulates our actions.
• According to self-awareness theory, when our attention is focused on the self, we
monitor our behaviour more closely. Self-focus thus promotes self-regulation, by leading
us to act more in accordance with our personal goals and prevailing social norms.
• Self-regulation generally promotes adaptive and socially responsible behaviour.
Nevertheless, self-regulation can deplete our limited energy resources when it has to be
sustained over a longer period.
• In addition, increased self-focus can interfere with well-practised routines and lead us to
get stuck in negative emotions. To prevent these problems, we may relax our efforts at
self-regulation by avoiding self-aware states.
• Escapist behaviours may range from alcohol consumption to binge eating and even
suicide. Alternatively, we may reduce the negative sides of self-regulation when we
engage in autonomous self-regulation – when we, in accord with self-determination
theory, self-regulate in the service of intrinsic life goals, such as relationships or personal
growth.
Refernce (material have been taken from the
following books)
• Hewstone, Miles. An Introduction to Social Psychology (BPS Textbooks
in Psychology) . Wiley. Kindle Edition.

• Seager, Paul. Social Psychology: A Complete Introduction: Teach

Yourself . John Murray Press. Kindle Edition.