By: hailey ripple
Talkative. Sarcastic. Independent. Graduate Student. Anxious. Small-town girl. Daughter. Sister. Friend. All of the previously mentioned words are words that I would use to describe myself, but what do those words really say about me? How is it that I have come to the conclusion that these words describe me? Klein (2012) notes that while “the self” is a widely used term, it is arguably one of the least understood. Fiske (2014) makes an interesting point that makes it easy to draw the line between whether it is something that you identify as being part of your “self”: What is your emotional reaction to the loss or damage of some characteristic, place, experience, etc.? If you find yourself getting defensive, it is likely that you consider that characteristic or experience to be a part of your “self”. However, how did this grouping of characteristics or experiences that I would become defensive about come to be who I consider to be “me”?
Conceptualization of the Self
Fiske (2014) identifies two potential ways in which to conceptualize the self: across four levels of body self, inner self, interpersonal self, and societal self or the “I” and the “me”. In the first, the body self would simply refer to the most minimal level of the self, such as the body. The next step up, the inner self, refers to a person’s private and reflective experiences (i.e. thoughts and feelings). In the example above I mentioned several examples of inner self-descriptors including talkative, sarcastic, independent, and anxious. Interpersonal self refers to the roles that a person takes on, such as the examples I listed in the opening paragraph: graduate student, small-town girl, daughter, sister, and friend. Lastly, the societal self involves aspects such as gender, age, class, and religion, which I touched on through the use of the words small-town girl (arguably addressing class and gender), daughter, and sister.
However, if you attempt to dissect my initial description using the “I” and the “me”, my description would likely lean more heavily to a “me” description. This is because my description focuses on the part of the self that is being analyzed by others. However, the “I” focuses primarily on action and what the self is making the conscious decision to do. While these are ways to describe the self, it is most important to examine how the self is being measured by social psychologists.
Measurements of the Self
Currently, social psychologists use self-concept, self-esteem, and self-presentation to measure the self (Fiske, 2014). Self-concept uses a dimensional approach to better understand how individuals view themselves in terms of certain traits. Another way to examine the self is to measure to what extent someone feels they are worthwhile. Lastly, self-presentation is about an individual’s behavior in common social interactions and how that person may go about trying to present aspects of their identity to others. Another way researchers are measuring aspects of the self is by examining images of the brain during tasks that requires the participant to engage in thought processes relating to the self. Northoff, Heinzel, de Greck, Bermpohl, Dobrowolny, and Panksepp (2006) examined images of the brain while processing self-referential and non-self-referential stimuli. Findings indicated the medial regions of our brain’s cortex, or the cortical midline structures, became activated when processing self-referential stimuli. Further, activation occurred in the verbal, spatial, emotional, and facial domains of the CMS. Final conclusions revealed that the combination of cortical and subcortical midline systems plays a role in the human self.
So, What is the Self?
Psychologists have long tried to answer the question about what exactly the self is. However, it appears that there are many contributing factors and ways to conceptualize and measure the self. All in all, I agree with the thoughts of Skowronski (2012) in that there are several mental subsystems at work when it comes to the development and maintenance of the self. Skowronski asserts that the self can take on many roles including the subjective self, the objective self, and the symbolic self. Another aspect of this specific view is the emphasis on the value of language in the development and maintenance of the self. Skowronski specifically states that without language, we would be unable to develop a narrative about ourselves to relay to others. Overall, I do not think that the self is contained in one part of the brain or within one thought process. I believe the self is a compilation of processes in the brain, experiences, thoughts, beliefs, and environmental factors.
- Fiske, S. T. (2014). Social Beings: Core Motives in Social Psychology (3rd edition). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
- Klein, S. B. (2012). “What is the self?”: approaches to a very elusive question. Social Cognition 30(4), 363-366.
- Northoff, G., Heinzel, A., de Greck, M., Bermpohl, F., Dobrowolny, H., & Panksepp, J. (2006). Self-referential processing in our brain – a meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self. NeuroImage, 31, 440-457.
- Skowronski, J. J. (2012). I, me, mine: variations on the theme of selfness. Social Cognition, 30(4), 396-414.