This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, S. E. Articles by Wayment, H. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Taylor, S. E. Articles by Wayment, H. A. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Self-Evaluation Processes

University of California, Los Angeles

Efrat Neter

Technion University

Heidi A. Wayment

University of California, Los Angeles

Four motives (self-assessment, self-enhancement, self-verification, and self-improvement) are hypothesized to guide self-evaluation. Results of an empirical investigation suggest that two sets of circumstances may commonly elicit all four motives: a situation of past threat or failure and anticipation of some important future threat or challenge. These findings suggest the need to develop an integrative approach to self-evaluation that specifies not only the distinctive circumstances in which each motive may be satisfied but also the ways multiple motives may be simultaneously satisfied. Evidence is presented to suggest that the four motives are satisfied by drawing on different information sources. Individual differences and domain under investigation are also found to moderate self-evaluation processes. Directions for future integrative efforts are suggested.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. El-Alayli and S. Gabriel To Prove or to Improve? Which Motive Distorts Perceptions of Personality Controllability? Pers Soc Psychol Bull, November 1, 2007; 33(11): 1572 - 1586. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. A. Wayment It Could Have Been Me: Vicarious Victims and Disaster-Focused Distress Pers Soc Psychol Bull, April 1, 2004; 30(4): 515 - 528. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Renner Biased Reasoning: Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback Pers Soc Psychol Bull, March 1, 2004; 30(3): 384 - 396. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. D. Markman and M. N. McMullen A Reflection and Evaluation Model of Comparative Thinking Personality and Social Psychology Review, August 1, 2003; 7(3): 244 - 267. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. B. Arnkelsson and W. P. Smith The Impact of Stable and Unstable Attributes on Ability Assessment in Social Comparison Pers Soc Psychol Bull, October 1, 2000; 26(8): 936 - 947. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. A. Wayment and S. Campbell How are We Doing? The Impact of Motives and Information Use on the Evaluation of Romantic Relationships Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, February 1, 2000; 17(1): 31 - 52. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Wheeler, R. Martin, and J. Suls The Proxy Model of Social Comparison for Self-Assessment of Ability Personality and Social Psychology Review, January 1, 1997; 1(1): 54 - 61. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Sedikides and M. J. Strube The Multiply Motivated Self Pers Soc Psychol Bull, December 1, 1995; 21(12): 1330 - 1335. [Abstract]