Private Self-Consciousness Subscales: Correlates with Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Self-Discrepancy

Abstract

Two studies investigated the relationships between the two dimensions of Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss' Private Self-Consciousness Scale [1], namely, self-reflectiveness and internal-state awareness, and neuroticism, extraversion, and self-discrepancy. Study 1 focused on neuroticism and extraversion and Study 2 focused on discrepancies between different domains of the self. Self-reflectiveness was related positively with neuroticism and negatively with extraversion, whereas internal-state awareness showed the opposite pattern of relationships: It was related negatively with neuroticism and positively with extraversion. In addition, only self-reflectiveness, and not internal-state awareness, was associated with greater self-discrepancy. The importance of reconceptualizing self-consciousness and the need for a new scale for self-consciousness are discussed.Dispositional self-consciousness has been a central construct in the field of personality since Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss developed the Self-Consciousness Scale [1]. The Self-Consciousness Scale was originally defined as consisting of three factors: private self-consciousness, public self-consciousness, and social anxiety. Until relatively recently, all research on self-consciousness has relied exclusively on the Self-Consciousness Scale as a measure of self-consciousness. However, in the past 10 years, researchers have begun to examine the internal and predictive validity of the Self-Consciousness Scale-especially its Private 21 Ó 2002, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc.Note: AI = actual-ideal; AO = actual-ought. Within each dependent measure, means with different subscripts (a and b) are significantly different at p < .05.

Factor Structure of the Private Self-Consciousness Scale: Role of Item Wording

“…Exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) for the Hebrew version of the full SCS conducted with data obtained from several samples of hundreds of participants have replicated the three-factor structure reported for the original version (Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001, 194 participants;Ben-Artzi, Mikulincer, & Glaubman, 1995, 303 participants;Haetzni, 2001, 652 participants;Jaimovich, 1992, 186 participants;Schwimmer, 1988, 240 participants). Adequate evidence for construct validity was reported for the Hebrew version of the PrSC, which was found to correlate positively with depression, anxiety, and loneliness (Ben-Artzi et al, 1995), differentiations of emotions (Jaimovich, 1999), neuroticism (Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001), expressed em-FACTORS OF THE PRIVATE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS SCALE pathy (Jaimovich, 1999), and sex (Ben-Artzi et al, 1995) in accordance with results of previous reports. Adequate evidence for construct validity was reported for the Hebrew version of the PrSC, which was found to correlate positively with depression, anxiety, and loneliness (Ben-Artzi et al, 1995), differentiations of emotions (Jaimovich, 1999), neuroticism (Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001), expressed em-FACTORS OF THE PRIVATE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS SCALE pathy (Jaimovich, 1999), and sex (Ben-Artzi et al, 1995) in accordance with results of previous reports.…”

“…Translation quality was evaluated by comparing the psychometric properties of the Hebrew version of the SCS with those reported for the original version. Internal consistency levels of the Hebrew version of the PrSC were found to be similar to those of the English version, ranging from .69 to .76 (e.g., Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001;Ben-Artzi et al, 1995;Jaimovich, 1992;Schwimmer, 1988). Internal consistency levels of the Hebrew version of the PrSC were found to be similar to those of the English version, ranging from .69 to .76 (e.g., Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001;Ben-Artzi et al, 1995;Jaimovich, 1992;Schwimmer, 1988).…”

“…For example, whereas SR correlates positively with measures of negative affectivity (e.g., Anderson et al, 1996;Conway, Giannopoulos, Csank, & Mendelson, 1993;Kingree & Ruback, 1996), neuroticism (e.g., Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001;Creed & Funder, 1998;Trapnell & Campbell, 1999), self-concept clarity (Campbell et al, 1996), and loneliness (Watson, Milliron, & Morris, 1995), ISA shows either null or opposite associations with these measures (Anderson et al, 1996;Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001;Kingree & Ruback, 1996;Piliavin & Charng, 1988;Watson, Hickman, Morris, Stutz, & Whiting, 1994). For example, whereas SR correlates positively with measures of negative affectivity (e.g., Anderson et al, 1996;Conway, Giannopoulos, Csank, & Mendelson, 1993;Kingree & Ruback, 1996), neuroticism (e.g., Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001;Creed & Funder, 1998;Trapnell & Campbell, 1999), self-concept clarity (Campbell et al, 1996), and loneliness (Watson, Milliron, & Morris, 1995), ISA shows either null or opposite associations with these measures (Anderson et al, 1996;Ben-Artzi & Hamburger, 2001;Kingree & Ruback, 1996;Piliavin & Charng, 1988;Watson, Hickman, Morris, Stutz, & Whiting, 1994).…”

Internally directed cognition and mindfulness: an integrative perspective derived from predictive and reactive control systems theory

“…Notably, research on individual differences in internally directed mental states such as self-consciousness suggests that two states can be discriminated that are in some regards very different but are nevertheless positively correlated and easily confounded: rumination and reflection ( Trapnell and Campbell, 1999 ). They are different in their correlations with third variables, reflection being associated with more accurate and extensive self-knowledge and lower psychological distress whereas rumination is associated with higher psychological distress, social anxiety, depression, obsessive thinking, external control, self-discrepancy, and other-directedness ( Watson et al, 1996 ; Trapnell and Campbell, 1999 ; Ben-Artzi and Hamburger, 2001–2002 ; Ghorbani et al, 2004 ; Takano and Tanno, 2009 ). We discussed the role of the DMN and predictive control in prospective reflection in Section “The Default Mode Network as Part of The Predictive System.” In Section “The Ruminating Mind,” we build on the role of the left IFG/AI in integrating novel information with internal models, to explain the role, mechanism and place of rumination in PARCS.…”

Internally-directed cognition and mindfulness: An integrative perspective derived from reactive versus predictive control systems theory

“…Notably, research on individual differences in internally-directed mental states such as self-consciousness suggests that two states can be discriminated that are in some regards very different but are nevertheless positively correlated and easily confounded: rumination and reflection (Trapnell and Campbell, 1999). They are different in their correlations with third variables, reflection being associated with more accurate and extensive self-knowledge and lower psychological distress whereas rumination is associated with higher psychological distress, social anxiety, depression, obsessive thinking, external control, self-discrepancy and other-directedness (Ben-Artzi andHamburger, 2001-2002;Ghorbani et al, 2004;Takano and Tanno, 2009;Trapnell and Campbell, 1999;Watson et al, 1996). We discussed the role of the DMN and predictive control in prospective reflection in Section 2.2.…”