Epictetus said - Be not swept off your feet by the vividness of the impression, but say, "Impression, wait for me a little. Let me see what you are and what you represent. Let me try you." Well, that tells us how to respond (i.e., our response) to someone who is trying to impress. As Epictetus said, "We cannot choose our external circumstances, but we can always choose how we respond to them." But the "action" part of the question still remained unanswered - how to impress without bragging? Impression management seems to be a big issue in this age of self-marketing for success.
Jamie G. McMinn in the Psychology Department at the Westminster College, New Wilmington, PA has some online teaching notes that I chanced upon while honing my 'google-ing' skills. >>
From the online notes >>
This case study presents an example that is based on an experiment reported in Vohs, Baumeister, and Ciarocco [Vohs, K.D., R.F. Baumeister, and N.J. Ciarocco. 2005. Self-regulation and self-presentation: Regulatory resource depletion impairs impression management and effortful self-presentation depletes regulatory processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 632–657.] These researchers suspected that impression management strategies would require different levels of behavioral regulation, depending on the audience whose impression is being managed. For example, compared with being modest, more regulation is required when we brag to someone we know well because that person has a lot of information about us and can verify the impression we are making. Similarly, we need to regulate our behaviors more when being modest to a stranger, rather than bragging about ourselves. This is because it makes sense to present ourselves in the most positive fashion to people who do not know us well, and being modest does not achieve this goal.
The case describes four college roommates who attend a party where they see friends and classmates who know them well, and also meet new people who know nothing about them. The young men have conversations with either friends or strangers, and they either brag about their accomplishments or present themselves in a modest manner. Later on, the roommates are faced with a temptation where regulating their behavior is very important. Students are asked to make predictions about how well each man will respond to the temptation. They are then given the opportunity to compare their predictions with the pattern of results found in the Vohs et al. (2005) study. <<
Two theories were presented to explain the interplay between self-promotion and self-regulation >>
Impression Management Theory
According to impression management theory, people are generally motivated to enhance the self, and one way to do this is to present themselves in ways that lead others to evaluate them positively. The ability to manage the impressions that others have of us is vital to many activities, such as when we interview for jobs and try to impress an employer, or when we present ourselves as helpless when asking for another’s assistance. As such, impression management theory focuses on an interpersonal process.
There are many strategies that people use to convey a desired image to others (cf. Cialdini, 1989; Jones and Pittman, 1982). Some of these include flattering those who have resources that we want (ingratiation), associating with successful others (basking in reflected glory), dissociating with unsuccessful others (cutting off reflected failure), accentuating negative relationships with undesirable others (blaring), creating excuses for our failures (self-handicapping), and intimidating other people.
The two strategies that are highlighted in this case are bragging and modesty. Bragging occurs when we exaggerate our positive qualities and hide our negative qualities. Modesty occurs when we present our qualities in a way that is neither boastful nor self-deprecating (Tice et al., 1995).
Self-Regulation
Self-regulation theory focuses on people’s ability to monitor and control their behavior to achieve desired goals (Baumeister and Heatherton, 1996). It is associated with an ability to modify “automatic, habitual, or innate behaviors, urges, emotions, or desires that would otherwise interfere with goal directed behavior” (Muraven, Shmueli, and Burkley, 2006, p. 524). For example, students self-regulate when they study for an exam rather than engage in other activities, like socializing with friends or going to bed. The ability to regulate one’s behavior is believed to be finite, meaning that a person can deplete the resources that are required to regulate behavior. When that happens, the person is less able to regulate later behaviors (cf. Muraven et al., 2006). Thus, a student may be readily able to study for an exam in the morning when regulation resources are high, but less able to do so at night when daily activities have exhausted these resources. Self-regulation theory focuses on an intrapersonal process.
Connecting Impression Management and Self-Regulation
Managing the impressions that we make on other people requires us to monitor and control our behaviors. Some impression management strategies are easy and require very little regulation, whereas others require much more regulation (Vohs et al., 2005). As we manage impressions, we tap into resources that enable self-regulation. The more we manage impressions or use strategies that require substantial control, the fewer resources we have to regulate other behaviors. The connection between managing impressions and regulating behavior was tested in a series of experiments by Vohs and her colleagues (2005). College participants were asked to present themselves either modestly or favorably to either a friend or a stranger in an interview with fifteen questions. They were later asked to work on a series of challenging multiplication problems until all were solved or until they decided to stop working on the task. The results showed that participants who presented modestly to a stranger or who bragged to a friend stopped working on the multiplication problems sooner than those whose impression management efforts required less control.<<
These all relates to SELF and so SELF has to be identified to discuss SELF-promotion and SELF-regulation. Buddha says >>
The body [rupa], monks, is not self. If the body were the self, this body would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible (to say) with regard to the body, “Let my body be thus. Let my body be not thus.” But precisely because the body is not self, the body lends itself to dis-ease. And it is not possible (to say) with regard to the body, “Let my body be thus. Let my body not be thus.” <<
So if body is not the SELF then what is SELF? Is it the consciousness of our BEING in this world, that makes us perform activities of daily living, make friends and foes, work hard for the success in the rat race? If it's that consciousness then should that consciousness be controlled for better visibility and acceptance? Like be 'nice' because people like 'nice' people and you will be liked? Or can it be controlled as Epictetus said, "self-regulation, an ideal state in which one is in total control of all that transpires within the inner citadel. The fact that we are far from this ideal in our present state does nothing to refute it." Epictetus in the handbook - Echiridion - gives a list>>
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment