We report the results of two experiments that examined the way individuals test hypotheses about themselves. Both experiments were based on the work of Snyder (e.g., Snyder, 1981;Snyder & Skrypnek, 1981), which suggests that individuals have a confirmatory bias when testing hypotheses about others and about themselves. In Experiment 1, we examined the extent to which this bias toward confirmation persists when a negative (e.g., depression) or nonconsistent (not consistent with the individual's evaluation of him-or herself) personal hypothesis is tested. Results suggest that the negative or positive nature of a personal hypothesis does not directly influence the way individuals test their hypothesis. However, the way individuals tested personal hypotheses was influenced by hypothesis consistency. In Experiment 2, we examined the relation of a cognitive schematic variable (i.e., vulnerability for depression) and hypothesis testing. Results suggest that vulnerability is related to the way individuals test a personal hypothesis about depression. Vulnerable, low-depression participants were confirmatory when testing a depression hypothesis, whereas nonvulnerable, low-depression participants were disconfirmatory. We discuss implications for counseling and future directions for research.Let us then, instead of occupying ourselves with man the biological organism or man the lucky guy, have a look at man the scientist.... Might not the individual man, each in his own personal way, assume more of the stature of a scientist, ever seeking to predict and control the course of events with which he is involved? Would not he have his theories, test his hypotheses, and weigh his experimental evidence? (G. A. Kelly, 1955, pp. 5-6) We wish to thank Janet Gorsky, Cheryl Lowman, and Marie Walbridge for their assistance in conducting these experiments. We also thank Richard Haasc for his comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. Finally, we acknowledge reviewers of earlier versions of this article for comments that clarified me interpretation of this data.

No abstract