Personality and Individual Differences 30 (2001) 59±70

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

The Estonian Self-Concept Clarity Scale: psychometric

properties and personality correlates
Hillar Matto *, Anu Realo
Department of Psychology, University of Tartu, Tiigi 78, 50410, Tartu, Estonia

Received 31 December 1998; received in revised form 6 January 2000; accepted 24 January 2000

Abstract
The goals of this study were twofold: our ®rst aim concerned generalizability of the Self-Concept Clarity
Scale (SCCS; Campbell, J. D., Trapnell, P. D., Heine, S. J., Katz, I. M., Lavallee, L. F., & Lehman, D. R.
(1996). Self-concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 70, 141±156) across di€erent languages and cultures. Second, we aimed to
give a more explicit picture of the relations between self-concept clarity and other personality constructs
(i.e., general self-esteem, Five-Factor Model of personality and self-consciousness) than reported in pre-
vious studies (cf. Campbell et al., 1996). To accomplish these two goals, we set o€ with an adaptation of
the SCCS to the Estonian language, which, in general, turned out to be successful. On the one hand, our
research provided further evidence of the generalizability of the self-concept clarity construct across dif-
ferent languages and cultures, at least within the boundaries of the Western cultural space. On the other
hand, the results reported in this study suggested that although a considerable proportion of the variability
of self-concept clarity can be predicted from personality measures, the clarity does not seem to be invari-
ably related simply to a single speci®c personality trait or to their combination: a pattern of associations
between the Estonian version of the SCCS and other personality variables emerging in the correlation and
regression analyses was fairly unstable and largely in¯uenced by the intercorrelations of the other mea-
sures. # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Self-concept clarity; Self-esteem; Self-consciousness; Personality traits

1. Introduction

The basic terminology to describe a person's self-concept was established more than 100 years
ago. According to James (1890/1950), a person has di€erent kinds of selves that are ranged in a

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +372-7-375902; fax: +372-7-375900.

E-mail address: matto@ut.ee (H. Matto).

0191-8869/00/$ - see front matter # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0191-8869(00)00010-6
60 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70

hierarchical scale according to their worth. Despite James' pioneering conceptualization of

di€erent selves, the structural aspects of self were largely abandoned by psychologists for the
majority of decades of this century: self was mostly seen as a monolithic entity and
researchers concentrated primarily on a single evaluative aspect of self-self-esteem (cf.
Campbell, 1990). Only in the last two decades have researchers begun to emphasize cognitive
aspects of self (for reviews see Greenwald & Pratkanis, 1984; Kihlstrom & Cantor, 1984),
de®ning self as a multifaceted, dynamic, and organized entity that is active, forceful, and
capable of change and that mediates and regulates most signi®cant intrapersonal and inter-
personal functioning (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Markus & Wurf, 1987; Oyserman & Markus,
1993).
According to Campbell (1990; Campbell et al., 1996), the contemporary conceptualization of
the self enables a distinction between the contents and structural aspects of the self-concept. The
contents, on the one hand, may be further divided into two major components: (a) knowledge Ð
speci®c beliefs about one's attributes, but also one's roles, values, and personal goals; and
(b) evaluative component Ð a global personal feeling of self-worth and the positivity of the
speci®c self-beliefs. Structural aspects of the self-concept, on the other hand, relate to the way
the speci®c self-beliefs are organized in one's mind. One important structural aspect of the
self-concept has been found to be self-concept clarity (Campbell, 1990; Campbell & Lavallee,
1993; Campbell et al., 1996), de®ned as ``the extent to which the contents of an individual's
self-concept (e.g., perceived personal attributes) are clearly and con®dently de®ned, internally
consistent, and temporally stable'' (Campbell et al., 1996, p. 141). Identity integration, self-
concept stability, role variability, and self-consistency are merely a few other personality con-
structs with which, at least to some extent, self-concept clarity may overlap. Yet, self-concept
clarity has been empirically proven to be a distinct and relatively stable trait that can be reliably
captured by means of self-reports (cf. Campbell et al., 1996). It has been demonstrated that the
structural integrity of one's self-beliefs makes a unique and independent prediction to several
vital personality constructs like self-esteem, chronic self-analysis and neuroticism but also to
preferences for coping styles and decision-making strategies (see Campbell et al., 1996 for
overview).

1.1. Self-concept clarity scale

To measure self-concept clarity, Campbell, Katz, Lavallee & Trapnell (1991b) devised a scale
on the basis of 40 items covering various topics related to the construct of clarity: the perceived
certainty, temporal stability, and internal consistency of self-beliefs; decisiveness; and articulation
of goals. As a result, the initial 20-item version of the scale comprised three intercorrelated
factors Ð generalized clarity, goal-directedness, and decisiveness (Campbell et al., 1991b). The
scale was later modi®ed Ð with an aim to focus solely on a single and univocal aspect of self-
concept clarity, only the items that loaded signi®cantly on the ®rst generalized clarity factor were
retained. As a result, the ®nal unidimensional version of the self-concept clarity scale (SCCS;
Campbell et al., 1996) consists of 12 items that measure the perceived internal consistency and
temporal stability of self-beliefs.
The SCCS has exhibited high internal consistency with an average item-total correlation of
0.54 and the average Cronbach alpha of 0.86 across various samples as well as excellent temporal
 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70 61

stability with the test-retest correlations of 0.79 and 0.70 after 4- and 5-month intervals, respec-
tively (Campbell et al., 1996).
As already mentioned above, the SCCS has also been examined in relation to several other
personality constructs. Namely, self-concept clarity has been found to be substantially related
with measures of general self-esteem: people higher in self-esteem also tend to have more positive
and well-articulated self-concepts whereas the self-beliefs of the low self-esteem people may be
described as neutral (not negative) and characterized by relatively low clarity and instability
(Baumgardner, 1990; Campbell, 1990; Campbell, Chew & Scratchley, 1991a; Campbell & Fehr,
1990; Campbell & Lavallee, 1993; Campbell et al., 1996; Smith, Wethington & Zhan, 1996).
Studying the relations between self-concept clarity and dispositional self-focused attention,
Campbell and colleagues (1996) found that the SCCS was moderately negatively correlated both
with the scales of Private and Public Self-Consciousness (Fenigstein, Scheier & Buss, 1975), sug-
gesting that people with more articulated self-concepts incline to pay less attention to their
internal states as well as to their public appearance. Likewise, the SCCS has exhibited strong
negative correlations with the PANAS Negative A€ectivity (Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988) and
the NEO-FFI Neuroticism (Costa & McCrae, 1989) scales but moderate positive correlations
with the PANAS Positive A€ectivity, the NEO-FFI Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and
Agreeableness scales (Campbell et al., 1996). This pattern suggests that individuals with more
confused self-concepts tend to be anxious, moody, and sensitive; they are quiet and quite intro-
verted but also rather egocentric, skeptical, and lackadaisical (cf. Costa & McCrae, 1992).

1.2. Goals of this research

In this article we report a successful adaptation of the SCCS to the Estonian language and
examine its relations with several other personality constructs, including self-esteem, Five-Factor
Model of personality, and self-consciousness. Yet, the aims of our study extended beyond a
relatively narrow scope of the adaptation procedure.
The ®rst goal of our study was to widen cultural boundaries of the construct of self-concept
clarity. Despite the ascertained position in the network of other personality constructs, the gen-
eralizability of self-concept clarity across di€erent languages and cultures still needs to be estab-
lished. Having been developed on the North-American English-speaking population, the SCCS
has later been applied only in Japan. In this study, we report on development and validation of
the SCCS in Estonian which belongs to the Uralic (Fenno-Ugric) language family. The most
characteristic features of Estonian are the great number of cases, the lack of grammatical gender
and articles, and the basic vocabulary di€erent from that of Indo±European languages. In the
course of history Ð despite the close relations with Scandinavia and Germany Ð Estonia has
retained a marginal position in the Western world.
The second goal of the present research was to specify the established relations between self-
concept clarity and other personality constructs (cf. Campbell et al., 1996). For that purpose, we
used the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992), which
allowed us to measure not only the ®ve main personality factors but also six speci®c subthemes
(facets) within each factor. A further aim, given the established relations between self-concept
clarity, self-esteem, personality traits, and self-consciousness, was to determine independent con-
tributions of these constructs to the prediction of self-concept clarity.
62 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Altogether, 2801 Estonians (172 women and 108 men) whose ages ranged from 14 to 80 with
the mean age 33.3 years (SD ˆ 14:8) participated in this research. The participants di€ered in
terms of cultural and social background and were recruited on a voluntary basis. Data were col-
lected during the years 1997±1998.

2.2. Self-Concept Clarity Scale (SCCS)

To adapt the SCCS (Campbell et al., 1996) to the Estonian language2, the original 12 items
were translated into Estonian. To ensure that the adaptation process takes full account of
linguistic and cultural di€erences among a population for whom the adapted version of the
instrument is intended (cf. van de Vijver & Leung, 1997), our item-pool included two or three
di€erent wordings of each original item along with a few new items covering main themes repre-
sented in the SCCS. In total, the item-pool consisted of 35 statements. Subjects were instructed to
respond to the items on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree).

2.3. Other measures

2.3.1. General self-esteem

Two hundred and seventy eight subjects (171 females and 107 males) completed the Estonian
version (ERSES) of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965). The ERSES (Pullmann
& Allik, 2000) consists of 10 items that are devised to measure global feelings of self-worth. The
internal consistency coecient of the scale was 0.85.

2.3.2. Self-consciousness
Two hundred and sixty three participants (161 females and 102 males) ®lled in the Estonian
Self-Consciousness Scale (ESCS; Realo & Allik, 1998). As in the original Self-Consciousness
Scale (cf. Fenigstein et al., 1975), the 26 items of the ESCS divide into three subscales (10 ‡ 8 ‡ 8)
that are labeled as Private Self-Consciousness (PrivSC), Public Self-Consciousness (PubSC), and
Social Anxiety (SAnx). According to Fenigstein and his colleagues (1975), PrivSC and PubSC
refer to a process of self-focused attention, whereas SAnx refers to a reaction to this process. The
Cronbach alphas of the subscales were 0.79, 0.78, and 0.83, respectively.

2.3.3. Personality dimensions

The Five-Factor Model of personality was measured with the Estonian version of the NEO-
PI-R (Kallasmaa, Allik, Realo & McCrae, in press; see also Costa et al., in press) that was

1
The number of subjects varies slightly across analyses because of missing data.
2
Permission to adapt the measure to Estonian was kindly provided by Jennifer D. Campbell.
 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70 63

administered to 185 respondents (112 females and 73 males). The Estonian NEO-PI-R is a 240-
item questionnaire consisting of ®ve domain scales (each of which contains six subscales)
designed to measure the ®ve major domains of personality: Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E),
Openness to Experience (O), Conscientiousness (C), and Agreeableness (A). The Cronbach
alphas were 0.93, 0.93, 0.91, 0.89, and 0.87 for N, E, O, C, and A domains, respectively.
The participants were asked to respond to all scale items on 5-point Likert scales anchored by
strongly disagree (0) and strongly agree (4).

3. Results

3.1. Adaptation of the SCCS to the Estonian language

An exploratory principal component factor analysis of the 35 items revealed the existence of a
single dominant factor accounting for 32.5% of the total variance. On the basis of the factor
loadings, 12 items were selected that served as the best Estonian equivalents to the original items
of the SCCS. Once again, a principal component factor analysis was used to determine the factor
structure of the selected 12 items. Two factors had eigenvalues above 1 but both Cattell scree-test
and parallel analysis (cf. Zwick & Velicer, 1986) clearly supported one-factor solution accounting
for 41.2% of the total variance. One-factor solution also yielded a simple factor structure,
resulting in all 12 items loading above 0.45 on the ®rst single factor. Tucker coecient of con-
gruence between the North-American (Campbell et al., 1996, Table 1) and Estonian ®rst principal
components was 0.97 indicating high concordance between the two factor solutions. The factor
structure of 12 items remained simple and stable also in principal factors analyses using di€erent
communality estimates (multiple R2 and principal axis method). Factor loadings on the ®rst
unrotated factor across di€erent exploratory factor analyses and communalities of the items are
shown in Table 1.
These selected 12 items were then back-translated into English by a translator who was not
aware of the content of this study to ensure the equivalence of the Estonian items with their ori-
ginal counterparts. Indeed, the back-translated items were found to be very similar to the original
English items of the SCCS by the author of the scale, Dr Jennifer D. Campbell (J. D. Campbell,
personal communication, April 20, 1998). As a result, the items were included into the Estonian
SCCS (ESCCS).

3.2. Psychometric properties of the ESCCS

The mean value of the ESCCS was 40.2 (SD ˆ 9:6). Men (M ˆ 41:2, SD ˆ 9:5) scored higher
than woman (M=39.6, SD ˆ 9:6) but the di€erence was not statistically signi®cant, t…276† ˆ 1:4,
p ˆ 0:17. Self-concept clarity was slightly correlated with age, r ˆ 0:13, p < 0:05.
The items of the ESCCS demonstrated high internal consistency: Cronbach  ˆ 0:86 with a
mean interitem correlation of 0.35. To examine a temporal stability of the scale, the ESCCS was
re-administered to 79 subjects after an interval of 5 months. The test±retest correlation was 0.67
(p < 0:001) being highly similar to that reported by Campbell and colleagues (1996) in their study
(r ˆ 0:70, respectively).
 64
H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70
Table 1
Factor loadings and communalities of the items of the ESCCS across various exploratory factor analysesa
No. Item Factor loadings

Principal Communalities= Principal Communalities

components multiple R2 axis

1 My beliefs about myself often con¯ict with one anotherb 0.84 0.83 0.84 0.65
2 On one day I might have one opinion of myself and on another day I might have a di€erent opinionb 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.61
3 I spend a lot of time wondering about what kind of person I really amb 0.59 0.54 0.54 0.33
4 Sometimes I feel that I am not really the person that I appear to be b 0.59 0.54 0.54 0.31
5 When I think about the kind of person I have been in the past, I'm not sure what I was really likeb 0.50 0.46 0.45 0.31
6 I seldom experience con¯ict between the di€erent aspects of my personality 0.46 0.42 0.41 0.26
7 Sometimes I think I know other people better than I know myselfb 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.25
8 My beliefs about myself seem to change very frequentlyb 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.61
9 If I were asked to describe my personality, my description might end up being di€erent from one day to another dayb 0.57 0.53 0.52 0.35
b
10 Even if I wanted to, I don't think I could tell someone what I'm really like 0.54 0.49 0.49 0.33
11 In general, I have a clear sense of who I am and what I amb 0.75 0.72 0.72 0.54
12 It is often hard for me to make up my mind about things because I don't really know what I wantb 0.67 0.63 0.63 0.42
Explained variance 41.2% 36.8% 36.5%
a
N=278. ESCCS=Estonian self-concept clarity scale.
b
Reverse-keyed item.
 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70 65

3.3. Personality correlates of the ESCCS

The correlations of the ESCCS with the ERSES, the ESCS, and the NEO-PI-R scales are
shown in Table 2.

3.3.1. Self-esteem
The ESCCS showed a strong positive correlation with the ERSES Scale, r ˆ 0:43, p < 0:001,
con®rming previous ®ndings of Campbell (1990) and colleagues (1996) that people higher in
global self-esteem tend also to be higher in self-clarity.

3.3.2. Self-consciousness
All the ESCS subscales had moderate, yet signi®cant negative correlations with the ESCCS
score ranging from ÿ0.21 (PrivSC) to ÿ0.29 (PubSC). These initial correlations suggested that
people with more articulated self-concepts tend to pay less attention to their inner thoughts and
feelings as well as to their public appearance. Also, individuals higher in clarity seem to be less
anxious while encountering new situations or facing large groups of people3.

3.3.3. Five-factor model of personality

As expected, the ESCCS was substantially and negatively correlated with the NEO-PI-R
domain N (r ˆ ÿ0:50), strongly and positively with C (r ˆ 0:37), and uncorrelated with O
(r ˆ ÿ0:05). Divergently from Campbell and colleagues (1996), who found people higher in
clarity to be also more extraverted, the self-concept clarity was not correlated with E in our study
(r ˆ 0:08). Also, the correlation between the ESCCS and the NEO-PI-R A dimension (r ˆ 0:14,
n.s.) was somewhat weaker in our study than reported by Campbell et al. (1996).
To obtain a more detailed picture of the relations between the self-concept clarity and the ®ve
personality dimensions, we also examined the correlations between the ESCCS and the NEO-PI-
R facet scales. Across all the NEO-PI-R facet scales, the highest correlations were found between
the ESCCS and N3 Ð Depression (r ˆ ÿ0:43), N6 Ð Vulnerability (r ˆ ÿ0:41), and N1 Ð
Anxiety (r ˆ ÿ0:40), all correlations signi®cant at the 0.001 level. As expected, the ESCCS
exhibited signi®cant correlations with all N (negative) and C (positive) facet scales. Additionally,
the ESCCS was also moderately related to several other facet scales, e.g., O1 Ð Fantasy
(r ˆ ÿ0:25), A1 Ð Trust (r ˆ 0:18), A4 Ð Compliance (r ˆ 0:18), E3 Ð Assertiveness (r ˆ 0:18),
and E1 Ð Warmth (r ˆ 0:16) at the 0.05 level.

3.4. Regression analyses

As has repeatedly been shown by various researchers, many personality constructs tend to be
substantially related to each other. Among the measures used in our study, the NEO-PI-R
domain N and global self-esteem (Campbell 1990; Campbell et al., 1996; Pullmann & Allik,
2000); N and the PubSC subscale from the ESCS; the NEO-PI-R dimension E and the ESCS

3
Later analyses, however, showed that the correlations of the ESCCS with the PrivSC and PubSC virtually dis-
appeared after controlling for other personality variables (the NEO-PI-R domains and the ERSES score) in the stan-
dard multiple regression equation.
66 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70

Table 2
Correlations of the ESCCS with the ERSES, the ESCS, and the NEO-PI-R Scalesa
Scale ESCCS SCCSb

Pearson r Partial correlationc Partial correlationd Pearson r

ERSES 0.43 0.30 0.23 0.61

ESCS
Private Self-Consciousness ÿ0.21 ÿ0.05 ÿ0.09 ÿ0.27
Public Self-Consciousness ÿ0.29 0.09 ÿ0.05 ÿ0.26
Social Anxiety ÿ0.26 ÿ0.19 ÿ0.11 not reported
NEO-PI-R domains
Neuroticism ÿ0.50 ÿ0.21 ÿ0.64
Extraversion 0.08 ÿ0.19 0.27
Openness ÿ0.05 ÿ0.04 ÿ0.01
Conscientiousness 0.37 0.11 0.43
Agreeableness 0.14 0.15 0.26
NEO-PI-R facets
N1 Ð Anxiety ÿ0.40 ÿ0.11
N2 Ð Hostility ÿ0.39 ÿ0.03
N3 Ð Depression ÿ0.43 ÿ0.00
N4 Ð self-Consciousness ÿ0.37 0.03
N5 Ð Impulsiveness ÿ0.31 ÿ0.05
N6 Ð Vulnerability ÿ0.41 ÿ0.08
E1 Ð Warmth 0.16 0.02
E2 Ð Gregariousness 0.07 0.11
E3 Ð Assertiveness 0.18 0.03
E4 Ð Activity 0.07 ÿ0.05
E5 Ð Excitement-Seeking ÿ0.06 ÿ0.18
E6 Ð Positive Emotions ÿ0.01 ÿ0.11
O1 Ð Fantasy ÿ0.25 ÿ0.03
O2 Ð Aesthetics ÿ0.01 0.02
O3 Ð Feelings ÿ0.09 ÿ0.01
O4 Ð Actions 0.07 ÿ0.01
O5 Ð Ideas 0.01 ÿ0.03
O6 Ð Values 0.12 0.05
A1 Ð Trust 0.18 0.14
A2 Ð Straightforwardness 0.14 0.17
A3 Ð Altruism 0.11 0.04
A4 Ð Compliance 0.18 ÿ0.04
A5 Ð Modesty ÿ0.06 ÿ0.15
A6 Ð Tender-Mindedness 0.04 ÿ0.05
C1 Ð Competence 0.33 ÿ0.02
C2 Ð Order 0.23 0.11
C3 Ð Dutifulness 0.18 ÿ0.02
C4 Ð Achievement Striving 0.21 0.02
C5 Ð Self-Discipline 0.35 ÿ0.03
C6 Ð Deliberation 0.34 0.07
a
ESCCS=Estonian Self-Concept Clarity Scale; ERSES=Estonian version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale; ESCS=Estonian
version of the Self-Consciousness Scale; NEO-PI-R=the Estonian Revised NEO Personality Inventory. p<0.001. p<0.01.

p<0.05.
b
Adapted from ``Self-concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries'', by J. D. Campbell, P. D.
Trapnell, S. J. Heine, I. M. Katz, L. F. Lavallee, and D. R. Lehman, 1996, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, pp. 146±
147. Copyright 1996 by the American Psychological Association. Adapted with permission of the author.
c
From standard multiple regression analysis of the ESCCS score on the ERSES, the ESCS, and the NEO-PI-R domain scales.
d
From standard multiple regression analysis of the ESCCS score on the ERSES, the ESCS, and the NEO-PI-R facet scales.
 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70 67

subscale SAnx (Realo & Allik, 1998) have been found to be signi®cantly related to each other.
Also, a consistent strong negative correlation has been reported to exist between the NEO-PI-R
factors N and C (cf. Costa & McCrae, 1992; Kallasmaa et al., in press). Thus, to measure the
independent contributions of these traits to the prediction of self-concept clarity, the NEO-PI-R
domains, the ESCS subscales, and the ERSES scale were entered into a standard multiple
regression equation. As expected, ERSES ( ˆ 0:31) was the strongest predictor but also N
( ˆ ÿ0:26), E ( ˆ ÿ0:25), SAnx ( ˆ ÿ0:24) and A ( ˆ 0:14) made their additional signi®cant
contributions at the 0.05 level. All in all, 36% of the total variance of the ESCCS was explained
by the ®ve personality dimensions, three ESCS subscales, and the global self-esteem measure.
However, after controlling for other variables, the relationships between the ESCCS and several
constructs measured in this study considerably decreased. The partial correlation between the
ESCCS and C, for instance, dropped from 0.37 (p < 0:001) to 0.11 (p ˆ 0:16). Also, the PrivSC
and PubSC subscales failed to make any independent contribution to the prediction of the
ESCCS: the partial correlations decreased from ÿ0.21 (p < 0:01) to ÿ0.05 (n.s.) and from ÿ0.29
(p < 0:001) to 0.09 (n.s.), respectively. As can be seen from Table 2, the ESCCS was indepen-
dently associated with higher levels of global self-esteem (0.30) and A (0.15) and with lower levels
of N (ÿ0.21), SAnx (ÿ0.19), and E (ÿ0.19).
Next, following the idea of Costa and McCrae (1995a,b) that domains of the NEO-PI-R are
not the simple aggregations of their facets, i.e., that the facets contain some unique information
that may become lost in the domain scales, we performed a standard multiple regression analysis
predicting the ESCCS score from the three ESCS subscales, the ERSES, and the NEO-PI-R facet
scales. Altogether, merely 47% of the ESCCS' variability was accounted for with the 34 scales in
the equation, showing a relatively moderate increase (11%) compared to what was obtained in
the ®rst equation reported above. Moreover, quite surprisingly, the best predictors of self-concept
clarity, besides global self-esteem ( ˆ ÿ0:26), were not the facets of N, as one could expect on
the basis of Pearson product±moment correlations, but the facets of E and A: E5 Ð excitement-
seeking ( ˆ ÿ0:26) and A2 Ð straightforwardness ( ˆ 0:19). In addition, these were the only
variables in the equation that made an independent signi®cant contribution to the prediction of
the ESCCS at the level of 0.05 (see also Table 2).

4. Discussion

We started this project with two major goals in mind. Our ®rst aim concerned the general-
izability of the SCCS across di€erent languages and cultures. Second, we aimed to give a more
explicit picture of the relations between self-concept clarity and other personality variables than
has been reported in previous studies (cf. Campbell et al., 1996). To accomplish these two goals,
we set o€ with an adaptation of the SCCS to the Estonian language, which in general, turned out
to be successful.
Indeed, the Estonian version of the SCCS proved to correspond well to its English original
counterpart both by its content and all relevant psychometric properties. Analogously to the
SCCS, the ESCCS had one-factor structure that remained simple and stable both in exploratory
principal components and principal factor analyses using di€erent communality estimates. Fur-
thermore, similarly to what was obtained by Campbell and colleagues (1996) in the Canadian
68 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70

samples, the items of the ESCCS showed both high internal consistency (Cronbach  ˆ 0:86) as
well as high temporal stability with a test±retest correlation of 0.67 after a 5-month interval.
The correlations between the ESCCS and other personality variables measured in this study
were generally consistent with previous research providing further evidence for the validity of the
ESCCS (see Table 2). As in the earlier studies (see Campbell et al., 1996 for overview), the ESCCS
exhibited a strong negative correlation with the NEO-PI-R domain N and signi®cant positive
correlations with global self-esteem and the NEO-PI-R domain C. Also, moderate negative cor-
relations were found between the ESCCS and the ESCS subscales.
With an aim to determine which personality variables measured in our study would best pre-
dict self-concept clarity, a standard multiple regression analysis was undertaken. The ®ve
domains of the NEO-PI-R, three ESCS subscales, and the global self-esteem measure accounted
for approximately one third of the original variability of the ESCCS. After controlling for all
other independent variables in the equation, however, the ESCCS showed signi®cant correlations
only with the ERSES score (0.30), the NEO-PI-R domain N (ÿ0.21), E (ÿ0.19), A (0.15), and the
ESCS subscale SAnx (ÿ0.19). The ®nding that several personality variables made almost no (e.g.,
PrivSC, PubSC) or very little (e.g., C) independent contribution to the prediction of self-concept
clarity in the regression analysis implies that the signi®cant Pearson product-moment correlations
of these variables with the ESCCS score were either due to their intercorrelations or to their
substantial relations with N. The ®nding that PrivSC and PubSC did not emerge as independent
contributors to the ESCCS conforms well with our previous claims that these two scales ``seem to
add little to what has already been captured by the general personality factors'' (Realo & Allik,
1998, p. 121). Therefore, with respect to the relation between self-concept clarity and self-con-
sciousness, our results would rather support Campbell and colleagues' (1996) suggestion that ``it
has been generally assumed that the frequency of self-focused attention is related to self-knowl-
edge, but it is possible that the relation depends more on the motive for attending the self than on
the frequency of doing so'' (p. 153). Yet, until a new more thorough research the issue remains
open to speculations.
Studying the relations between self-concept clarity and personality traits we were particularly
interested in correlations between the ESCCS and the NEO-PI-R facet scales, as in previous stu-
dies solely the relations between the clarity and the ®ve major dimensions/domains of personality
have been measured. At the level of the NEO-PI-R facet scales, the ESCCS was associated with
all facets of N (negatively) and C (positively) Ð most strongly with N3 (Depression), N6 (Vul-
nerability), and N1 (Anxiety) Ð but also with several facets of O, A, and E. On the basis of these
Pearson product±moment correlations one could suggest that people high in self-concept clarity,
®rst and foremost, rarely experience feelings of sadness, loneliness (N3), fear, and anxiety (N1)
and that they perceive themselves as capable of coping in dicult situations (N6). Furthermore,
high-clarity individuals tend to be quite ``prosaic and prefer to keep their minds on the task at
hand'' (O1; Costa & McCrae, 1992, p. 17) but also somewhat trusting (A1), compliant (A4),
socially ascendant (E3), and friendly (E1). Yet, the results of the regression analysis revealed a
strikingly di€erent picture. Namely, when regressing the ESCCS on the measures of self-con-
sciousness, general self-esteem, and the 30 facet scales of the NEO-PI-R, neither facets of N nor C
predicted unique variance in the ESCCS score: the only variables in that equation that emerged as
independent predictors of self-concept clarity were the global self-esteem and the NEO-PI-R
facets E5 (Excitement-Seeking) and A5 (Straightforwardness). Furthermore, an inspection of the
 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70 69

partial correlations between the ESCCS and the NEO-PI-R facet scales revealed that whereas the
ESCCS had small positive correlations with two facet scales of E and A (E2, r ˆ 0:11 and A1,
r ˆ 0:14, respectively), it had also moderate negative correlations with other facets of the same
domains, E5 (ÿ0.18) and A5 (ÿ0.15), respectively. On the one hand, these results suggest that a
pattern of associations between self-concept clarity and the Big Five dimensions (as measured by
the NEO-PI-R) is much more complicated than it appears while studying merely Pearson corre-
lations of the clarity with the ®ve major factors of personality. On the other hand, the ®ndings
reported in this study imply that although a considerable proportion of the variability of self-
concept clarity can be predicted from personality measures, the clarity does not seem to be
invariably related simply to a single speci®c personality trait or to their combination: the pattern
of associations between the ESCCS and the NEO-PI-R scales emerging in the correlation and
regression analyses was fairly unstable and largely in¯uenced by the intercorrelations of the
NEO-PI-R scales. Such an outcome, in turn, may suggest that individuals with di€erent person-
ality types are relatively indistinguishable in the extent to which their self-concepts are clearly and
con®dently de®ned, internally consistent, and temporally stable.
Taken together, our research provided further evidence of generalizability of self-clarity con-
struct across di€erent languages and cultures, yet, merely within the boundaries of the Western
cultural space Ð the signi®cance and applicability of self-concept clarity in non-Western cultures
(other than Japan) still remains to be explored.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Jennifer D. Campbell for her permission to adapt the SCCS to Estonian. We
also thank JuÈri Allik and Kersti Meinart for their useful comments on earlier versions of this
article and Helle Pullmann for her help with collecting and organizing the data.

References

Baumgardner, A. H. (1990). To know oneself is to like oneself: Self-certainty and self-a€ect. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 58, 1062±1072.
Campbell, J. D. (1990). Self-esteem and clarity of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59,
538±549.
Campbell, J. D., Chew, B., & Scratchley, L. S. (1991a). Cognitive and emotional reaction to daily events: The e€ects of
self-esteem and self-complexity. Journal of Personality, 59, 473±505.
Campbell, J. D., & Fehr, B. (1990). Self-esteem and perceptions of conveyed impressions: Is negative a€ectivity asso-
ciated with greater realism? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 122±133.
Campbell J. D., Katz, I. M., Lavallee L. F., & Trapnell P. D. (1991b) Development and validation of a self-report scale
of self-concept clarity. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Psychological Society, Washington,
DC
Campbell, J. D., & Lavallee, L. F. (1993). Who am I?: The role of self-concept confusion in understanding the behavior
of people with low self-esteem. In R. F. Baumeister, Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp. 3±20). New York:
Plenum.
Campbell, J. D., Trapnell, P. D., Heine, S. J., Katz, I. M., Lavallee, L. F., & Lehman, D. R. (1996). Self-concept
clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
70, 141±156.
70 H. Matto, A. Realo / Personality and Individual Di€erences 30 (2001) 59±70

Costa, P. T. Jr, & McCrae, R. R. (1989). The NEO-PI/NEO-FFI manual supplement. Odessa, FL: Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T. Jr, & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor
Inventory (NEO-FFI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T. Jr, & McCrae, R. R. (1995a). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised
NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 21±50.
Costa, P. T. Jr, & McCrae, R. R. (1995b). Six approaches to the explication of facet-level traits: Examples from con-
scientiousness. European Journal of Personality, 12, 117±132.
Costa, P. T. Jr, McCrae, R. R., Martin, T. A., Oryol, V. E., Senin, I. G., Rukavishnikov, A. A. et al. (in press). Per-
sonality development from adolescence through adulthood: Further cross-cultural comparisons of age di€erences. In
V. J. Molfese & D. Molfese (Eds.), Temperament and personality development across the life span, Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522±527.
Greenwald, A. G., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1984). The self. In J. R. S. Wyer, & T. K. Srull, Handbook of social cogni-
tionVol. 3 (pp. 129±178). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
James, W. (1890/1950). The principles of psychology, Vol. 1, Dover Publications IncNew York.
Kallasmaa, T., Allik, J., Realo, A., & McCrae, R. R. (in press). The Estonian version of the NEO-PI-R: An exam-
ination of universal and culture-speci®c aspects of the Five-Factor Model. European Journal of Personality
Kihlstrom, J. F., & Cantor, N. (1984). Mental representations of the self. In L. Berkowitz, Advances in experimental
social psychologyVol. 17 (pp. 1±47). New York: Academic Press.
Markus, H. R., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954±969.
Markus, H. R., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 38, 299±337.
Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1993). The sociocultural self. In J. Suls, Psychological perspectives on the self: The self
in social perspectiveVol. 4 (pp. 187±220). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2000). General self-esteem: Its dimensionality, stability, and personality correlates in Esto-
nian. Personality and Individual Di€erences, 28, 701±715.
Realo, A., & Allik, J. (1998). The Estonian Self-Consciousness Scale and its relation to the Five-Factor Model of
personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 70, 109±124.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
Smith, M., Wethington, E., & Zhan, G. (1996). Self-concept clarity and preferred coping styles. Journal of Personality,
64, 407±434.
van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and nega-
tive a€ect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063±1070.
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of ®ve rules of determining the number of components to retain.
Psychological Bulletin, 99, 432±442.