Republic of the Philippines

UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN PHILIPPINES

University Town, Northern Samar
Web: http://uep.edu.ph, Email: uepnsofficial@gmail.com

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND COMMUNICATION

Department of Social Sciences

Understanding the Self

Module 3: The Psychological Self

Learner Profile:

Name:_________________________________________ Course and Year:___________________________

Class Schedule: Subject Teacher: _Arlyn G. Lopez, LPT__
Address: _______________________________________ Mobile Number:__________________________
 CHAPTER 3
The Psychological Self

Learning Objectives

At the end of the lesson, the students are able to:

1. Demonstrate critical and reflective thought in analysing the different psychological theories in the study of
the “self”
2. Expound the self as a cognitive construction
3. Examine the self as proactive and agentic.

Activity 1. “You” Through Others’ Eyes

This activity has two parts that try to compare how we look at ourselves against how people perceive us depending
on how we present ourselves to them. For the first part, list 10 to 15 qualities or things that you think define who
you are around the human figure representing you.

For the second part, look for a person who is not that close to you. In the space below, instruct him/her to write “I
am __________ (your name). Who do you think I am based on what you see me do or hear me say? As he/she fill out
the paper of you, tell him/her to write briefly and only those that observe about you. Do not use any bad words. For
proof, send two pictures (1-paper of this person and 1-during his/her filling) on Google class or you may paste it here
inside the box.
ABSTRACTION

In confidence or in an attempt to avoid further analytical discussion, a lot of people say, “I am who I am.” Yet, this
statement still begs the question, “If you are who you are, then who are you that makes you who you are?”

As mentioned earlier, there are various definitions of the “self” and other similar or interchangeable concepts in
psychology. Simply put, “self’ is the sense of personal identity and of who we are as individuals. The psychology of
the self focuses on the representation of an individual based on his/her experiences. These experiences are either
from home, school, and other groups, organizations or affiliations he/she engaged in. Seemingly, the self is one of
the most heavily researched ares in social and personality psychology, where concepts are introduced that beyond
our physical attributes, lies our psychological identity.

I. The Self as a Cognitive Construction

Cognitive construction is a cognitive approach that focuses on the mental processes rather than the observable
behaviour. This approach will assist individuals in assimilating new information to their existing knowledge and will
enable to make the appropriate modification to their existing intellectual framework to accommodate their new
information.

I.1 William James and the Me-Self, I-Self

Material Self- consists of things that belong to us or that we belong to. Things like family, clothes, our body,
and money are some of what make up our material selves.

Social Self- our social selves are who we are in a given social situation. For James, people change how they
act depending on the social situation that they are in. James believed that people had as many social selves
as they had social situations they participated in.

Spiritual Self- is who we are at our core. The spiritual self is more concrete or permanent that the other two
selves. The spiritual self is our subjective and and most intimate self. Aspects of an individual’s spiritual self
include things like his/her personality, core values, and conscience that do not typically change throughout a
lifetime.

I.2 Global versus Differentiated Models

In the past 30 years, self-esteem has become deeply embedded in popular culture. It is a person’s overall
self-evaluation or sense of self-worth. There are three types of self-esteem:

a. Global self-esteem is a personality variable that represents the way people geerally feel about
themselves. It is relatively enduring across tme and situations. According to researchers, global self-
esteem is a decision people make about their worth as a person.
b. State self-esteem (feelings of self-worth)- refers to temporary feelings or momentary emotional
reactions to positive and negative events where we feel good or bad about ourselves during these
situations or experiences.
c. Domain Specific Self-esteem (self-evaluation)- focuses on how people evaluate their various abilities
and attributes. This is making distinctions or differentiation on how good or bad people are in specific
physical attributes, abilities and personal characteristics.

I.3 Real and Ideal Self-Concepts

Carl Rogers with his Person-Centered Theory established a conception of self, involving the real self and
ideal self. One of his main ideas about personality regards self-concept, our thoughts and feelings about
ourselves. How would you respond to the question, “Who am I?” Your answer can show how you see
yourself. If your response is primarily positive, then you tend to feel good about who you are, and you see
the world as a safe and positive place. If your response is mainly negative, then you may feel unhappy with
who you are. Rogers further divided the self into two categories: the ideal self and the real self. The ideal self
is the person that you would like to be; the real self is the person you actually are. Rogers focused on the
idea that we need to achieve consistency between these two selves. We experience congruence when our
 thoughts about our real self and ideal self are very similar—in other words, when our self-concept is
accurate. High congruence leads to a greater sense of self-worth and a healthy, productive life. Parents can
help their children achieve this by giving them unconditional positive regard, or unconditional love.
According to Rogers (1980), “As persons are accepted and prized, they tend to develop a more caring
attitude towards themselves”. Conversely, when there is a great discrepancy between our ideal and actual
selves, we experience a state Rogers called incongruence, which can lead to maladjustment.

A wide gap between the ideal self and the real self indicates incongruence and an unhealthy personality. If
the way I am (the real self) is aligned with the way I want to be (the ideal self), then I will feel a sense of
mental well-being or peace of mind. If the way that I am is not aligned with how I want to be, the
incongruence, or lack of alignment, will result in mental distress or anxiety. The greater the level of
incongruence between the ideal and real self, the greater is the level of resulting distress.

1.4. Multiple versus Unified Selves

Theorists believe that there is no answer to the question, “Who Am I?” as one person can undergo several
transitions in his life and create multiple versions of himself. However, there is still the contention of the importance
of mental well-being, of maintaining a unified, centralized, coherent self.

Multiple Selves, according to J. Gergen, are the capacities we carry within us from multiple relationships. These are
not ‘discovered’ but ‘created’ in our relationships with other people.

Unified Selves, as strongly pointed out in Traditional Psychology emphasizes that well-being comes when our
personality dynamics are congruent, cohesive, and consistent. It is understood that a person is essentially connected
with selfhood and identity.

1.5. True versus False Selves

Donald W. Winnicott distinguished what he called the “true self” from the “false self” in the huma personality,
considering the true self as based on a sense of being in the experiencing body and the false self as a necessary
defensive organization, a survival kit, a caretaker self, the means by which a threatened person has managed to
survive (Klein, 1994).

True self has a sense of integrity, of connected wholeness that harks to the early stage. False self is used when the
person has to comply with external rules, such as being politeor otherwise following social codes. The false self
constantly seeks to anticipate demandsof others in order to maintain relationship.

2. The Self as Proactive and Agentic

Social Cognitive Theory takes an agentic view of personality, meaning that haumans have the capacity to exercise
control over their own lives. People are self-regulating, proactive, self-reflective, and self-organizing and that they
have the power to influence their own actions to produce desired consequences.

Agent Self- known as the executive function that allows for actions. This is how we, as individuals, make choices and
utilize our control in situation and actions. The agent self, resides over everything that includes decision-making, self-
control, taking charge in situations, and actively responding.

Example: A person might desire to eat unhealthy foods, however, it is his/her agent self that allows that person to
choose to avoid eating them and make a healthier food choice.

Human agency is not a thing but an active process of exploring, manipulating, and influencing the environment in
order to attain the desired outcomes. According to Albert Bandura in his Social Cognitive Theory, the core features of
human agency are intentionality (acts a person performs intentionally) forethought (setting goals, anticipation of
outcomes of actions, selection of behaviors to produce desired outcomes and avoiding undesirable ones), self-
reactiveness (monitoring progress toward fulfilling choices), and self-reflectiveness (examination or evaluation of the
effect of other people’s action on them). These lead to self-efficacy, the belief that they are capable of performing
actions that will produce a desired effect
Activity 2

Make a collage of your “Ideal Self” and “Real Self”. Use cut-out magazine pictures or use your drawing skills to
create a collage that represents your “two selves”. Next, have a friend or family member to make a collage of your
“Actual Self”. Compare them and see what you will learn about yourself. (You may also use some mobile apps like
Canva, PicCollage, StoryLab, etc. to have your collage digital.) 

References:

https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/part/chapter-4/

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/msstate-waymaker-psychology/chapter/humanistic-approaches/#:~:text=Rogers
%20further%20divided%20the%20self,consistency%20between%20these%20two%20selves.