Social perception: A test of the role of arousal in self‐evaluation maintenance processes

Abstract

Social prediction was used to examine the causal role of physiological arousal in selfevaluation maintenance ( S E M ) processes. Subjects' level of arousal was manipulated by having half of the subjects engage in physical exercise and half of the subjects relax prior to receiving performance feedback on high and low relevance tasks. On each task, subjects were given an opportunity to predict the performance of a friend or a stranger. The SEM modelpredicts that the more relevant the task the less charitable one's perception of another S performance, particularly a close other. Subjects in the hrgh arousal condition showed a pattern of behavrour which was significantly closer to that predicted by the SEM model than subjects in the low arousal condition. Thus. arousal appears to play a causal role in the unfolding of SEM behavrours.

Self-Enhancement: Food for Thought

“…Indeed, people have less favorable perceptions of targets' performance in ego-relevant domains when those targets are close rather than distant (Tesser & Campbell, 1982). The aversive nature of these perceptions is attested to by the higher levels of accompanying physiological arousal (Achee, Tesser, & Pilkington, 1994). To escape or forestall such negative feelings, people resort to several strategies including adjusting their perceptions of task relevance (Tesser & Paulhus, 1983); choosing friends who, despite being roughly matched in level and type of ability, are somewhat less able in ego-relevant domains and are somewhat more able in ego-irrelevant domains (Tesser, Campbell, & Smith, 1984); and acting so as to hinder close others' performance in ego-relevant domains (Pemberton & Sedikides, 2001).…”

On the Confluence of Self-Esteem Maintenance Mechanisms

“…Here are some things that are known: All three mechanisms-dissonance (e.g., Fazio & Cooper, 1983), SEM (e.g., Tesser, Millar, & Moore, 1988), and self-affirmation (Koole, Smeets, van Knippenberg, & Dijksterhuis, 1999)-are associ-ated with affect. Both the dissonance mechanism (e.g., Cooper & Fazio, 1984) and the SEM processes (e.g., Achee, Tesser, & Pilkington, 1994;Tesser, Pilkington, & McIntosch, 1989) are mediated by affect; that is, dissonance reduction and SEM behaviors do not manifest themselves in the absence of affect. Much of this research depends on a misattribution paradigm (e.g., Schachter, 1964;Zillman, 1983); that is, when arousal associated with dissonance or SEM is attributed to an irrelevant source, there is little in the way of dissonance reduction or SEM resolutions.…”

Confluence of Self-Esteem Regulation Mechanisms: On Integrating the Self-Zoo

“…Both the dissonance mechanism (e.g., Cooper & Fazio, 1984) and the SEM processes (e.g., Achee, Tesser, & Pilkington, 1994;Tesser, Pilkington, & McIntosch, 1989) are mediated by affect, that is, dissonance reduction and SEM behaviors do not manifest themselves in the absence of affect. We know, too, that affect is often misattributed (e.g., Schachter, 1964;Zillmann, 1983).…”

“…Here are some things that are known: Dissonance arousal is associated with affect (e.g., Fazio & Cooper, 1983) and SEM processes are associated with affect (e.g., Tesser, Millar, & Moore, 1988). Both the dissonance mechanism (e.g., Cooper & Fazio, 1984) and the SEM processes (e.g., Achee, Tesser, & Pilkington, 1994;Tesser, Pilkington, & McIntosch, 1989) are mediated by affect, that is, dissonance reduction and SEM behaviors do not manifest themselves in the absence of affect. We know, too, that affect is often misattributed (e.g., Schachter, 1964;Zillmann, 1983).…”