Self-Perception, Culture, and Impressions in Leadership

Culture and Social Cognition

Humans have the most highly organized social structure of any creature on earth. In an attempt to ascertain our relative position in a complex social hierarchy, we constantly evaluate and re-evaluate ourselves by comparing ourselves to other human beings. We use this information to establish our opinions of ourselves, the various social groups to which we belong, and our opinions of others. We belong to many social groups — our family, our group of friends at school, a community, and a culture that includes our ethnic backgrounds. We must make decisions about our place in each of these groups. These opinions constitute what we think of ourselves and give us our self-esteem, or self-worth.

Our attitudes and beliefs regarding ourselves and others affect our ability to learn, our acceptance of subordination to authority figures, and our ability to achieve a goal. Many studies have focused on how our beliefs about others and ourselves develop, and other studies have examined how these beliefs affect our ability to perform a task. The following research integrates this information and discusses the interrelationship of these many factors — concerning how we form our perceptions of ourselves and others — in hopes of gaining a synthesis of the many studies and theories on this topic. This will be accomplished through a review and critique of past research on the various subject areas.

Everyone on earth belongs to a culture with which they identify. This culture is the largest social group to which we belong. A culture is defined as a set of rules that govern a particular people. Within this group are the many families and subgroups that make up the larger whole. The most defining attributes of a particular culture are the foods it eats, the clothes it wears, the manners of etiquette to which it adheres, and the holidays or special days that have a prescribed ritual shared by everyone in that group. Within a culture there is usually a formal hierarchy, which in some cases may be strictly defined.

Even in cases of ethnic mixing, culture is still the highest social group that we use to define ourselves and make comparisons. In cases of mixed ancestry, a person will often identify most strongly with one culture and discard all or part of the other. Sometimes they will select elements of both cultures and combine them in their own unique way. This can form into a new culture if there are a sufficient number of people in this situation, or it may fade away after the individual is gone, leaving the two individual cultures intact.

This discussion of culture is important because culture is the largest group to which we belong. We decide if we fit into a culture by making comparisons between ourselves and other members of that group — comparing physical attributes, emotional responses to certain situations, and attitudes and feelings. We then act and dress to emulate others in the group, reinforcing in ourselves and in others that we are members. It may be noted at this point that American popular culture is one of the largest cultural groups worldwide, and media images dictate how millions act and dress in order to "fit in."

There is not one human being on earth who is not a member of one culture or another. A child's development is affected most profoundly by the attitudes and norms of those around it during the formative years. This leads us to the social cognition model of development. Social cognition simply means the learned way of thinking that a child inherits from the environment in which it is raised.

The child adapts to his or her environment by responding to stimuli provided by parents and siblings. The child then receives praise or negative feedback for their reactions and adapts their behavior accordingly the next time. This eventually forms a set of rules that the child uses to elicit the desired response from those around them. This is how social cognition develops — it is simply that knowledge which comes from a person's particular group.

As stated before, we make comparisons between ourselves and others to establish our opinions about ourselves and those around us. When we do not fit the idealized mold of what we expect of ourselves, it can cause low self-esteem and can affect how we perceive others who more closely fit the cultural standard by which we are judging. Social cognition gives us a set of categories by which to judge others and ourselves. In a high school setting there are often subcultures and categories, all of which carry prescribed expectations about dress and behavior — the "brainy" group, the "nerd group," the "beauty queen" group, the "athletic superstar" group — and everyone compares themselves to these various groups to find out where they fit.

When a person feels that they do not belong to a group, or that the group to which they feel they belong is undesirable to them, it can lead to social adaptation problems, low self-esteem, and teenage depression. The teen years are the most sensitive as far as social cognition theories are concerned, and problems that occur at this stage can have lasting effects well into adulthood. This summarizes the work performed by Bugental et al. (1993) concerning these various categories and how they define the way we will respond when we meet a social challenge. They found that when faced with a social challenge — a situation that does not follow the prescribed set of rules — various cultural and subcultural attributes would largely define individual responses. Lackey et al. (1996) found that these social norms also had an effect on how a person perceived their level of support when facing a crisis.

Lackey et al. (1996) and others determined that social support has a profound effect on a person's ability to overcome stress and to adapt to new situations. It has been found to be an important element in the success of medical treatments and in the overall health of people. We seek this social support from those around us. Therefore, those who do not feel a connection to any culture will not perceive a great amount of social support, which in turn can lead to feelings of isolation and depression. Social support is critical in motivating a person to recover from a disease, and those who have it demonstrably have better outcomes.

Social norms and attitudes towards others may not always be accurate and may lead to unrealistic perceptions of other people. These false perceptions are called stereotypes and cause us to make inaccurate categorizations of others based on false information. Krueger and his many associates studied these effects in in-groups and termed these stereotypes "false consensus" — meaning that the perception that one is a member of a group is, in fact, false; there is actually no genuine consensus. They found that false consensus was a powerful phenomenon (Krueger & Clement, 1994) and often overrode logic in many cases.

The consensus view of stereotypes and social norms states that we compare our attitudes and beliefs to those of others. When they match, the person feels that their own values and beliefs are validated and therefore correct. This leads to a feeling of self-esteem. It has been found that individuals are more likely to engage in false consensus in order to boost their own self-esteem. A real-world example is when low-self-esteem boys become gang members in order to feel part of a group, even when they are nothing like the other members. This false belief that they are like the other gang members raises their self-esteem by giving them a justification for their belief system through comparison. The inability to find a group in which to justify one's belief system leads to low self-esteem. We, as humans, must find a place where we "belong."

Self-Perception and Self-Esteem

Work on false consensus between in-group members and out-groups was conducted by Krueger & Zeiger (1993). The in-group referred to the group with which the individual identified, whereas the out-group referred to those outside the individual's group. Their research confirmed and synthesized past studies regarding this phenomenon. Krueger and Zeiger found that even when a person's beliefs about those outside their group were proven false, they still did not abandon their false perceptions but held onto them as long as the rest of their group continued to do so. This explains the persistence of hate groups and bigotry, in which members hold onto ideas about those of other cultures even when those beliefs are not based on fact. When we are afraid or uncomfortable, a sense of belonging brings comfort and can override other stimuli and logic in many cases.

We have found that the need for a sense of belonging can have powerful effects on our perceptions about others and ourselves. These norms are learned by watching and emulating those around us. Being a member of a group gives us a place to validate our beliefs, and beliefs that cannot be validated can have profound negative effects on an individual. These influences can be very powerful and can even override the truth. Humans will seek out a group in which to belong, even if they truly do not represent a member of that group. Studies have clearly shown that we are social animals who must belong to a group with which we feel a connection.

Self-perception and self-esteem have been studied more than any other area of social psychology. The leading principle behind the popularity of this subject is the need to determine what motivates us to perform an action. In the previous section we found that the culture to which we belong can have an effect on our self-esteem and that we will do a great deal to avoid being alone. If that is so, what motivates people to act in ways that violate the prescribed social norms of the group to which they belong?

Protection motivation theory also has an effect on our actions. Orbell (1998) performed a longitudinal study of women and their motivation to take precautionary health measures — specifically, cervical cancer screening — based on protection motivation theory. Protection motivation theory states that a person will be motivated to perform an action when they perceive that it will prevent some future harm. Orbell (1998) concluded that protection motivation theory offers a partial explanation of the results but that there are obviously other factors involved in the decision to undergo the test.

This raises important issues in the field of social psychology. We know that every action has a perceived cost and a perceived benefit, and that early detection of cervical cancer gives a woman a much higher chance of a positive outcome than if the disease is detected in its later stages. The test is painless, simple, and does not require a large amount of time. It would seem logical that any woman would perceive greater benefits than costs for this procedure. However, there are still a relatively high number of women who do not undergo these tests.

If motivation were purely based on cost versus benefit, one would expect a higher compliance rate than that obtained by Orbell (1998). This suggests that some other motivating factor influences the decision not to have the test — most likely social factors and learned perceptions or stigmas attached to the procedure.

We get many of our responses from our culture, but in addition to seeking validation from the group, we also seek validation from ourselves. Our expectations of ourselves must match our perceptions of ourselves in order to obtain self-esteem. If we have an expectation — such as the ability to perform on a math test — and we then perform accordingly, our perceptions of our ability are validated. Eventually, if this idea is continuously reinforced, it becomes part of our belief system about ourselves and we will either lower or raise our future expectations accordingly. When we expect success, we are likely to act in ways that validate this perception — such as studying or taking other steps to improve our chances. Likewise, if we expect failure, we will act in ways that validate that belief and lead us to fail as a result of our own reactions.

This phenomenon is just as powerful as the idea of false consensus in the cultural context. We must have our beliefs about ourselves validated and we will act in ways to validate them. This has commonly been called the self-fulfilling prophecy and has been shown to be a strong motivator of human actions. What a person believes about him- or herself influences their actions, and those actions in turn make their beliefs a reality. This concept was discussed in Feldman et al. (1988), a study that brought together all the elements of self-validity, attitude, intention, and behavior. The connection found was unmistakable and had been echoed in many previous studies: our attitudes about ourselves have a profound effect on our behaviors.

There is a connection between cultural values and self-fulfilled values. As we continually seek to act in ways that achieve a sense of belonging, we seek feedback from others. This feedback can have a profound effect on how we feel about ourselves. If we constantly receive feedback that we are a failure or a "good student," we will act in ways to validate that belief. We will internalize others' perceptions of ourselves. This serves a dual purpose: we can validate the perceptions of the group and validate our perceptions about ourselves at the same time. In this way, the perceptions of the group can lead to a type of self-fulfilling prophecy that does not come from within, but from the attitudes of others about us.

When our self-perceptions do not match the feedback that we receive from others, we have two choices: either change the way we believe and act to match the group, or find another group. Which action a person takes depends on their already established sense of self-efficacy and self-esteem. Those with high self-esteem will likely disregard the opinions of the group and seek their own validity. However, those with low self-esteem will often change their actions and express beliefs more closely resembling the group. If they truly do not feel the way in which they act, it will lead to internal conflict, often manifesting as symptoms such as depression and maladaptive behaviors.

Conclusion

In determining what motivates us, there are many interrelating factors. In an attempt to define the relationships between these factors, Baron and Kenny (1986) developed the moderator-mediator model. This model has attempted to find the mediating relationships between a person's cultural background, their actions, and their final motivations. It has proven useful in some cases; however, these relationships are complex and the model still fails to account for every variation. This is a shortcoming in previous research concerning social factors and personal motivation. A working model should be a priority of future research — the Baron and Kenny model is a place to start, but there is still much work to be done.

The concept of "group-think" is important in helping individuals validate their own self-image. When the image matches, the person will act in ways to validate this idea, in turn creating their own destiny. The idea of self-fulfilled prophecy has been recognized for many years and has largely to do with the cumulation of past experiences. A person is unlikely to act in a way that is inconsistent with their preconceived ideals and expectations.

Our lives are a series of experiences that we use to create our own personal experience libraries. We reference these libraries when faced with a new situation. The first libraries are formed in infancy, through interactions with those closest to us. This forms our cultural library and is the primary one from which all other libraries will be created. As we move through life, we meet people and have experiences, categorize these people and events, and continuously build our libraries. We continue to use these libraries to form opinions about others and ourselves.

The mass media has taken this concept of personal libraries and capitalized on it by feeding it images purposely associated with a concept or idea. The mass media has applied the interrelationship of self-perceptions, culturally based perceptions, and impressions to influence and motivate the public. These ideas are put into practical application to influence our decisions every day. The field of marketing could not exist without the field of social psychology. This research has synthesized information that was once considered to belong to separate fields, culminating in an understanding of the techniques that have been used to shape public behavior for many years.

In our everyday lives, we often do not think about the concepts of social psychology, yet — either consciously or unconsciously — we are subject to their effects every day. Those who know these concepts can use them to influence large numbers of people to act and dress in a certain way. The first step in introducing a new product is to make it a fashion statement associated with positive imagery. This imagery can be enhanced by showing a popular celebrity using the product. The thought pattern goes something like: "If a celebrated figure is good and uses this product, then this product must be good." As more and more people buy into this idea, the product becomes a normal part of society and is accepted.

This same dynamic can work in reverse. This can be seen in America's past with the Jim Crow laws — a set of laws that granted certain privileges to white Americans while isolating the Black community. Many white Americans at the time may not have agreed with these laws and may have recognized them as being based on false fears and stereotypes, yet few did anything about them for fear of social excommunication. As long as the Jim Crow laws were in effect, many white Americans conformed to them outwardly, at least, so as not to place themselves outside their group. This illustrates how strong the urge to remain a part of the group can be, as discussed by Krueger and Zeiger (1993).

Our sense of belonging can be a strong motivator for both good and harm. We have a deep need to be part of a group. In our evolutionary and not-so-distant historical past, this need could mean survival — there was strength and protection in numbers, and a single person had far less chance of survival than one who was part of a group. In this way, humans came to depend on each other, and it is this dependence that fuels our need for acceptance. We are not solitary creatures, and we are in a constant quest to retain acceptance and group status.

There are other factors that weigh into our motivations, and we seek validation of who we are and what we should do. The media is a powerful source of standards and it is clear the effect that it can have on society. These theories do not just exist on paper; they are an integral part of our everyday lives, whether we realize it or not.

Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

Bugental, B., Blue, J., Cortez, V., Fleck, K., Kopeikin, H., Lewis, J. C., & Lyon, J. (1993). Social cognitions as organizers of autonomic and affective response to social challenge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(1), 94–103.

Christopher, A. (1998). The psychology of names: An empirical reexamination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1173–1195.

Feldman, J., & Lynch, J., Jr. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 431–435.

Hassebrauck, M. (1988). Beauty is more than "name" deep: The effect of women's first names on ratings of physical attractiveness and personality attributes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 721–726.

Lakey, B., McCabe, K., Fisicaro, S., & Drew, J. (1996). Environmental and personal determinants of support perceptions: Three generalizability studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1270–1280.

Lau, S. (1982). The effect of smiling on personal perception. Journal of Social Psychology, 117.

Krueger, J., & Clement, R. (1994). The truly false consensus effect: An ineradicable and egocentric bias in social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 596–610.

Krueger, J., & Zeiger, J. (1993). Social categorization and the truly false consensus effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 670–680.

Mehrabian, A., & Piercy, M. (1993). Affective and personality characteristics inferred from length of first names. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(6), 755–758.

Nesler, M., Aguinis, H., Quigley, B., & Tedeschi, J. (1993). The effect of credibility on perceived power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1407–1425.

Orbell, S., & Sheeran, P. (1998). "Inclined abstainers": A problem for predicting health-related behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 151–165.

Watt, H., & Bornholt, L. (2000). Social categories and student perceptions in high school mathematics. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1492–1503.

Young, R., Kennedy, A., Newhouse, A., Browne, P., & Thiessen, D. (1993). The effects of names on perception of intelligence, popularity, and competence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1770–1788.