Module 3

The Psychological Perspective of

Self

Module Duration:

Week 7

GE 005
UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
 SAN MATEO MUNICIPAL COLLEGE
General Luna St., Guitnang Bayan I, San Mateo, Rizal
Tel. No. (02) 997-9070
www.smmc.edu.ph

MODULE 3: Psychological View of Self

Most people would say that they do not want to talk about themselves. But in actuality, most people like
hearing life stories of another person as a chance to talk about themselves or to relate self to others.
The famous line of "me, myself, and I" is often used in movies, animation and even in social media - as
caption to pictures or as shout-outs.
________________________________________________________________________________________________

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After this module the students are expected to:

 Demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analyzing the different psychological theories in the study of the
“Self”.
 Expound the Self as a cognitive construction.
 Examine the self as proactive and agentic.
________________________________________________________________________________________________

INPUT INFORMATION

The psychology of self focuses on the representation of an individual based on his experiences. These experiences
are either from the home, school and other groups, organizations or affiliation he engaged in. Seemingly, the ‘self’ is one
of the most heavily researched areas in social and personality psychology, where concepts are introduced that beyond
our physical attributes, lies our psychological identity. Questions of 'who am I?' or 'what am I beyond my looks?' are
thoughts of many that continuously search for a deeper sense of self which can be traced back from some time of
human history. “Drawing on caves suggests that sometime during the dawn of history, human being began to give
serious thought to their nonphysical, psychological selves. With the advent of written history, writers would describe this
awareness of self in terms of spirit, psyche, or soul.” (Pajares & Schunck, 2002) From ancient to current times, the
concept of the self is always an interesting subject for many as it is very personal that it talks about
intrapersonal properties. In oxfordbibliographies.com (2-13), it is mentioned that whatever stance one adopts regarding
the self’s ontological status, there is little doubt that the many phenomena of which the self is a predicate --self-
knowledge, self-awareness, self-esteem, self-enhancement, self-regulation, self-deception, self-presentation ----to
name just a few, are indispensable research areas.

The Self as a Cognitive Construction

Cognitive Construction is a cognitive approach that focuses on the mental processes rather than the observable behavior.
This approach will assist individuals in assimilating new information to their existing knowledge and will enable to make
the appropriate modification to their existing intellectual framework to accommodate their new information.

William James and the Me-Self, I-Self

With the initiative of Wilhelm Wundt, The father of Scientific Psychology, scientific methods in studying what
Aguirre et al. (2011) mentioned as 'phenomenon of the consciousness', urged interest in further studies of the self and
its role in human behavior. It is in this time that William James’ classic distinction between the self as knower (or pure
ego) and the self as known (or empirical self) provides a useful scheme within which to view the multitudinous aspects of
self-functioning (oxfordbibliographies.com (2013).

W. James suggested that "the total self of 'Me', being as it were duplex" is composed of “partly object and partly
subject". As a consequence, he differentiated between the self as knower, or the “I”, and the self as known or “Me”. He
referred to the "I" as pure ego and suggested that this component of self is consciousness itself. The "Me", on the other
hand, is one of the many things that the I may be conscious of, and it consists of three components, one physical or
material, one social, and one spiritual (Pajares & Schunck, 2002).
 Material self - consists of things that belong to us or that we belong to. Things like family, clothes, our body, and
money are some of what make up our material selves.

Social Self - our social selves are who we are in a given social situation. For James, people change how they act
depending on the social situation that they are in. James believed that people had as many social selves as they had
social situations they participated in.

Spiritual Self - is who we are at our core. The spiritual self is more concrete or permanent than the other two
selves. The spiritual self is our subjective and most intimate self. Aspects of an individual’s spiritual self include things
like his personality, core values, and conscience that do not typically change throughout a lifetime.

Global versus Differentiated Models

There had been postulation that one's self may be fragmented into different parts and different selves which may
be in conflict or needs regulation from each other. Although W. James gave a very interesting perspective on the self, and
was even among the first writers to coin the term 'Self-Esteem', other theories emerged to study on the selfhood as an
integrated part of one's psyche. In the past 30 years, self-esteem has become deeply embedded in popular culture
(Brown & Marchall, 2006). It is a person's overall self-evaluation or sense of self-worth.

Global Self-esteem (a.k.a. Trait self-esteem), is a personality variable that represents the way people generally
feel about themselves. It is relatively enduring across time and situations. According to researchers (e.g Crocker & Park,
2004; Crocker & Wolfe, 2001), Global self-esteem is a decision people make about their worth as a person.

State Self-Esteem (a.k.a. Feelings of Self-worth), refers to temporary feelings or momentary emotional reactions
to positive and negative events where we feel good or bad about ourselves during these situations or experiences.

Domain Specific Self-Esteem (a.k.a. Self-evaluations), is focused on how people evaluate their various abilities
and attitudes. This is making distinctions or differentiation on how good or bad people are in specific physical attributes,
abilities and personal characteristics.

Real and Ideal Self Concepts

The self as the regulating center of an individual's personality and self-processes under the guise of id, ego
and superego functioning (Pajares & Schunck, 2002), rocked Psychology as the biggest breakthrough in
understanding the psychological self. From this milestone, prominent psychologists followed with their own
perspectives of the self to contest the roles and functions of ego as the self. These were the landmarks of Contemporary
Psychology and the understanding of the internal processes of man. A group of psychologists called for renewed attention
to inner experience, internal processes, and self-constructs. These perspectives assert the overall dignity and worth of
human beings and their capacity for self-realization (Hall, Lindzey, Loehlin & Manosevitz, 1997).

Karen Horney - Feminine Psychology,

Sestablished that a person has an ‘ideal self’, `actual self’ and the `real self’.
She believed that everyone experiences basic anxiety through which we
experience conflict and strive to cope and employ tension reduction
approaches. Hall, et al. (1997) mentioned that Horney believed people
develop a number of strategies to cope with basic anxiety. Because people
feel inferior, an idealized self-image - an imaginary picture of the self as the
possessor of unlimited powers and superlative qualities, is developed. On
the other hand, the actual self, the person one is in everyday life, is often
despised because it fails to fulfill the requirement of the idealized
image. Underlying both the idealized self and the actual self is the real self,
which is revealed only as a person begins to shed the various techniques
developed to deal with basic anxiety and to find ways of resolving conflicts.
The real self is not an entity but a `force` that impels growth and self-
realization.
 Carl Rogers - Person-Centered Theory, establish a conception of self, involving the Real Self (a.k.a. Self-
concept) and Ideal Self. The Real Self includes all those aspects of one`s being and one`s experiences that are
perceived in awareness (though not always accurately) by the individual (Feist, Feist & Roberts, 2013). It is the
part of ourselves where we feel, think, look, and act involving our self-image. On the other hand, the Ideal Self
revolves around goals and ambitions in life, is dynamic, the idealized image that we have developed over time. This is
what our parents have taught us considering: what we admire in others, what our society promotes, what we think are in
our best interest. A wide gap between the ideal self and the real self indicates incongruence and an unhealthy
personality (Feist et al., 2013). If the way that I am (the real self) is aligned with the way that I want to be (the ideal self),
then I will feel a sense of mental well-being or peace of mind. If the way that I am is not aligned with how I want to be,
the incongruence, or lack of alignment, will result in mental distress or anxiety. The greater the level of
incongruence between the ideal self and real self, the greater is the level of resulting distress.

Multiple versus Unified Selves

Postmodern psychology contends that man has an identity that shifts and morphs in different social situations
and in response to different stimuli, as Kenneth Gergen argues that having a flexible sense of self in different context
is more socially adaptable than force oneself to stick to one self-concept (ctlsites.uga.edu, 2016, danielew).

Theorists believed that there is no one answer to the question, “Who am I?” as one person can undergo several
transitions in his life and create multiple versions of himself. However, there is still the contention of the importance of
mental well-being, of maintaining a unified, centralized, coherent self.

Multiple Selves, according to K. Gergen, are the capacities we carry within us from multiple relationships. These
are not ‘discovered’ but ‘created’ in our relationship with other people.

Unified Selves, as strongly pointed out in Traditional Psychology emphasizes that well-being comes
when our personality dynamics are congruent, cohesive and consistent. It is understood that a person is essentially
connected with selfhood and identity. In a healthy person the ego remains at the helm of the mind, coherent and
organized, staying at the center (ctlsites.uga.edu, 2016, danielcw).

True versus False Selves

Donald W. Winnicott distinguished what he called the ‘true self’ from the ‘false self’ in the human personality,
considering the true self as based on a sense of being in the experiencing body and the false self as a necessary
defensive organization, a survival kit, a caretaker self, the means by which a threatened person has managed to survive
(Klein, 1994).
 True Self has a sense of integrity, of connected wholeness that harks to the early stage. False Self is used when
the person has to comply with external rules, such as being polite or otherwise following social codes. The false
self constantly seeks to anticipate demands of others in order to maintain the relationship. The Healthy False Self
is functional, can be compliant but without the feeling that it has betrayed its true self. The Unhealthy False Self fits in but
through a feeling of forced compliance rather than loving adaptation (changingminds.org 2016). False Selves, as
investigated by Heinz Kohut (1971), can lead towards narcissistic personality, which identifies with external factors at the
cost of one’s own autonomous creativity.

The Self as Proactive and Agentic

Social Cognitive Theory takes an agentic view of personality, meaning that humans have the capacity to
exercise control over their own lives. People are self-regulating, proactive, self-reflective, and self-organizing and that
they have the power to influence their own actions to produce desired consequences. People consciously act on
their environment in a manner that permits growth toward psychological health. An adequate theory of personality,
according to G. Allport must allow for proactive behavior (Feist et al., 2013).

Agent Self- The agent self is known as the executive function that allows for actions. This is how we, as
individuals, make choices and utilize our control in situations and actions. The agent self, resides over everything that
involves decision making, self-control, taking charge in situations, and actively responding. A person might desire to
eat unhealthy foods, however, it is his agent self that allows that person to choose to avoid eating them and make a
healthier food choice (Baumeister, & Bushman, 2011). Human agency is not a thing but an active process of
exploring, manipulating and influencing the environment in order to attain desired outcomes. According to Albert
Bandura, the core features of human agency are intentionality (acts a person performs intentionally) forethought (setting
goals, anticipation of outcomes of actions, selection of behaviors to produce desired outcomes and avoiding
undesirable ones), self-reactiveness (monitoring progress toward fulfilling choices), and self-reflectiveness
(examination of own functioning, evaluation of the effect of other people’s action on them). These lead to self-efficacy,
the belief that they are capable of performing actions that will produce a desired effect (Feist, et.al.,2013).

Self-Efficacy lies in the center of Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory. It is the measure of one’s ability to complete
goals. People with high self-efficacy often are eager to accept challenges because they believe they can overcome
them, while people with low self-efficacy may avoid challenges, or believe experiences are more challenging than they
actually are (appsychtextbk.wikispaces.com, 2014).

LEARNING ACTIVITIES

ASSIGNMENT

________________________________________________________________________________________________

LEARNING RESOURCES

 Doyaoen, E. L. (2021). Understanding the Self. Technological University of the Philippines. 2021