DEFINITIONS OF SELF-ESTEEM

- 39 -

value themselves differently, depending on what is asked of them within a specific context? Simmons (1987) points out that a consensus seems to be emerging which does embrace both these concepts of self-evaluation. Further, if we assume that self-esteem does exist as a distinct entity, are specific self-esteem areas able to predict global measures of self-esteem? Finally, can self-esteem work as a self-regulator in order to maintain a positive self-concept? It seems that studies about the concepts of self-esteem and self-concept will be more meaningful both in psychology and in education, when researchers’ thoughts become clearer about the issue. However, the distinction between self-esteem and self-concept constructs has yet to be investigated.

- 40 -

person actually perceives himself with respect to some quality or ability and how he might be or ought to be” (James, 1890, p.310).

Cooley (1902) was the first to point out the importance of subjectively interpreted feedback from others as a main source of data about the self. For him a self-idea had three principal elements: “the imagination of our appearance to the other person; the imagination of his judgement of that appearance; and some self-feeling” (p. 152). It seems clear that his view about the person’s self-esteem is significantly influenced by his perception and interpretation of the reaction of other persons to him.

According to Mead (1934) self is not in existence at birth, “but arises in the process of social experience... through the individual’s relations with the entire process and the individuals within the social construct” (p.139). She considered self-esteem as an object which occurs in social interaction as a consequence of the individual’s concern about how others react to him or her. By this she means that the individual can anticipate other people’s reactions in order to behave appropriately. The individual then learns to interpret the environment as the others do. The consideration of others eventually comes to guide and maintain behaviour even if external forces are no longer present. Self, then, is a social structure which arises out of social experience. The important point about Mead’s theory is that self is a process, not a structure.

For Rogers (1951), self-esteem is the way an individual views himself as a “person of worth, worthy of respect rather than condemnation” (p. 376). In his more comprehensive definition of self-concept, he states: “the self-concept, or self-structure, may be thought of as an organised configuration of perception of the self which is admissible to awareness. It is composed of such elements as the perceptions of one’s characteristics and abilities; the percepts and concepts of the self in relation to others and to the environment; the value qualities which are perceived as associated with experiences and objects; and goals and ideas which are perceived as having positive and

- 41 -

negative valence” (pp. 136-137). For Rogers, self-esteem is primarily a social product and is acquired through social contact. He believed that when we interact with significant people in our environment we begin to develop a concept of self that is largely based on the evaluation of others. That means, we evaluate ourselves in terms of what others think and not in terms of what we feel. Coopersmith (1967) has defined self-esteem as follows:

“by self-esteem we refer to the evaluation which the individual makes and customarily maintains with regard to himself. It expresses an attitude of approval or disapproval and indicates the extent to which the individual believes himself to be capable, significant, successful and worthy. In short, self-esteem is a personal judgement of worthiness that is expressed in the attitudes the individual holds toward himself” (pp. 4-5).

The definition of Coopersmith is too general and does not provide a precise definition of self-esteem.

Rosenberg defines esteem in a similar way to Coopersmith and he also sees self-esteem as a self-evaluation component. According to Rosenberg (1965) self-self-esteem is

“a positive or negative attitude towards a particular object, namely, the self” (p. 30).

High self-esteem, he suggests, is when “the individual respects himself, considers himself worthy ... recognises his limitations and expects to grow and improve. Low self-esteem, on the other hand, implies self-rejection, self-dissatisfaction, self-contempt.

The individual lacks respect for the self he observes. The self-picture is disagreeable, and he wishes it were otherwise” (p. 31).

The definition of Semuels (1977) is similar to Rosenberg: “Self-esteem is the evaluative sector of the self-concept. An individual who has high self-esteem, respects herself and considers herself worthy, feels competent, and has a sense of belonging. If her

self-- 42 self--

esteem is low, she lacks respect for the self and believes she is incapable, insignificant, unsuccessful and unworthy”.

A broad definition of self-esteem has been put forward by Deaux & Wrightsman (1988) as “the evaluation of oneself in either a positive or negative way”. Their definition seems a reflection of Rosenberg’s (1965) theory which employs self-esteem to designate a kind of overall well-being.

For Faust (1980) self-esteem is a thinking experience. It is related to ideas or thoughts but not to emotion. He points out that esteem reflects an individual’s degree of self-respect, how an individual values himself as a person. For him self-esteem is

“influenced by feedback from those who people your world. When you add your own feedback or judgements about what kind of individual you are, this all adds up to ideas you hold about yourself which is called self-esteem”.

The definition of Young & Bagley (1982) is very close to Coopersmith’s. According to them self-esteem is “what the individual sees about himself or herself as salient and important, and how such characteristics are evaluated”.

Self-esteem is also defined as the discrepancy between ideal self and self-image (Lawrence, 1988). It was also defined as congruency between self and ideal self ratings in the work carried out by Carlson (1965) and Soares & Soares (1969). Their definitions of esteem are not much different to the definition of Wylie (1961). He defined self-esteem as follows: “self-regard is self-self-esteem, the congruence between self and ideal self, and discrepancies between self and ideal self” (p. 40).

O’Malley & Bachman (1983) viewed self-esteem as a stable component of personality that is reflected in attitudes about one’s self-worth. The definition of Youngs (1993) also emphasises worth. He defines esteem as follows: “Self-esteem is self-regard. It’s the value each of us assigns to our personhood. Self-esteem is a composite

- 43 -

picture of self-value. It’s a self-picture, the reputation you hold with yourself. It’s a total score, your value - your price tag, so to speak. The building blocks for a healthy self-esteem depend on positive experiences that shape and affirm a sense of self-efficacy and self-respect” (p. 60).

Self-esteem could be accepted as a sub-aspect of self-concept (Burns, 1982; Shavelson and Bolus, 1982; Gross, 1993). According to Burns (1981), “The esteem or self-evaluation is the process in which the individual examines his performance, capabilities and attributes according to his personal standards and values, which have been internalised from society and significant others. These evaluations promote behaviour consistent with the self-knowledge. This conceptualisation of the self-concept places it firmly within the ambit of attitude study” (pp. 68-69). According to Shavelson, Hubner,

& Stanton (1976), Shavelson & Bolus (1982), and Marsh & Shavelson (1985) self-esteem and self-concept are not empirically separable. Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton (1976) emphasise that self-esteem and self-concept are indistinguishable and empirically related to each other. However, according to Pope et al. (1988) self-esteem can be differentiated from self-concept, which is the constellation of things a person uses to describe himself. For him self-esteem is an evaluation of the information contained in the self-concept, and is derived from a person’s feelings about all the things he is. The definition of Beane & Lipka (1986) also differentiates self-esteem from self-concept. They state: “self-concept is defined here as the description an individual attaches to himself or herself. The self-concept is based on the roles one plays and the attributes one believes he or she possesses” (pp. 5-6). For them self-concept is descriptive, and self-esteem is the evaluative dimension of self perceptions.

The definition of Gross (1993) is as follows: “self-concept can be thought of as the individual’s beliefs about his / her personality -how the individual perceives his / her personality” (p. 607). For him “self-image is essentially descriptive, self-esteem is essentially evaluative: it refers to the extent to which we like and accept or approve of

- 44 -

ourselves, how worthwhile a person we think we are” (p. 609). It is clear that Gross (1993) sees self-image as many authors see self-concept. However, self-esteem, for him, is one of the three major components of self-concept alongside self-image and ideal-self.

Both the past and the present reviews and definitions indicate that not only self-esteem and self-concept, but also, the other self are terms which are used interchangeably.

Many researchers used esteem scales to measure concept, and also used self-concept scales in order to measure self-esteem. Sometimes authors used both of the concepts to refer to the same construct. Despite the great deal of studies to distinguish self-esteem and self-concept constructs, there is still controversy over the definitions of the concepts. Therefore, in the present study, the terms self-esteem and self-concept will be used interchangeably in accord with previous psychologists such as Wylie (1968), Shavelson, et al. (1976), Rosenberg (1979), Burns (1981), Abdallah, (1989), Cassidy (1991), and Burnet (1994).