Some research papers you might find interesting and worthy of discussion:
The Totalitarian Ego
Fabrication and Revision of Personal History
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=we ... 3a3JRYeuBQ
Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
Re: Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
The Pursuit of Self-Esteem: Contingencies of Self-Worth and Self-Regulation
http://www.scu.edu/cas/psychology/facul ... acorta.pdf
http://www.scu.edu/cas/psychology/facul ... acorta.pdf
Re: Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
The Handbook of Self and Identity
http://books.google.ca/books?id=vafgWfg ... CE4Q6AEwBw
http://books.google.ca/books?id=vafgWfg ... CE4Q6AEwBw
Re: Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
The Truth Wears Off: Is there something wrong with the scientific method?
The Decline Effect and the Scientific Method
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010 ... act_lehrer
The Decline Effect and the Scientific Method
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010 ... act_lehrer
Re: Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
All of these address cognitive bias with respect to egotism (what I perceive to be the root of bias) and some of them even illustrate how these biases work there way into the global scientific community. In "The Truth Wears Off" one researcher refuted his own experimental results with an attempt at replicability 5 years later. He found difficulty convincing his peers that his prior findings were incorrect, as they had already been published and accepted as scientific fact.
Re: Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
Animus,
Growing up is like
the opposites. Nice work.
=
Growing up is like
the opposites. Nice work.
=
I am illiterate
Code: Select all
Re: Contingencies of Self-Worth - The Totalitarian Ego
From The Pursuit of Self-Esteem: Contingencies of Self-Worth and Self-Regulation:
"Contingent self-worth depletes self-regulatory resources. Accordingto Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, and Tice (1998), the capacity for self-regulation is like a muscle: it can be strengthened with practice and exhausted by effort. Self-regulation on tasks such as eating a radish instead of a chocolate chip cookie decreases self-regulation on subsequent, unrelated tasks (e.g., Muraven et al., 1998). Brook (2005, Study 2) proposed that self-regulation is more depleting when self-esteem is at stake. Based on this reasoning, she conducted an experiment in which participants completed a measure of academic contingency of self-worth and then did an easy or difficult academic (editing) task. Next, participants worked on a timed anagram task; accuracy on the anagrams task was the critical dependent measure. Results revealed a significant interaction between academic contingency and difficulty of the first task. In the difficult condition, the more students based their self-esteem on academics, the lower their accuracy on the anagrams task. In the easy condition, academic contingency positively (but nonsignificantly) predicted higher accuracy on the anagrams task. These results are consistent with the idea that contingent selfworth leads to greater self-regulatory depletion after difficult tasks."
From http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=1720956:
"Self-control refers to the capacity to alter one’s own responses, in order to bring them in line with standards, and to support the pursuit of long-term goals (Baumeister, Vohs, & Tice, 2007). It enables a person to restrain or override one response, thereby making a different response possible. Research has shown that the ability of people to control these more immediate impulses is not stable, but varies. One condition known to make self-control more difficult is the prior arousal of visceral factors (Loewenstein, 1996). The effects of these visceral factors have been shown not to be bound by the visceral domain. For example, Briers et al. (2006) showed that hunger increases the desire for money and vice versa. Van den Bergh, Dewitte and Warlop (2008) showed that exposing men to sex cues leads to an increase in desire for smaller but sooner rewards over later but larger rewards. Based on neurological evidence (Camerer, Loewenstein, & Prelec, 2005), they argue that the same dopaminergic reward circuitry of the brain is activated for a wide variety of different reinforcers, referred to as a general reward system. This increased intertemporal impatience appeared stronger for people with a relatively sensitive Behavioral Approach System (BAS, Gray, 1990; Torrubia, Avila, Molto, & Caseras, 2001). Li (2008) and Wadhwa, Shiv and Nowlis (2008) provide similar evidence. Thus, prior research suggests the existence of a general reward system with a neurological basis. The reward system can be triggered by reward-related cues, which results in an increased preference for reward-providing cues in general, independent of the nature of the triggering cue. Although these findings highlight important visceral influences on the inclination to follow one’s impulses, they are silent regarding conditions that result in improved ability to control impulses. In the current research, we aim to investigate whether visceral factors which, once aroused call for inhibitory responses (i.e., a filling bladder), do not only result in inhibitory responses within the target domain, but also in unrelated domains. We argue that this inhibitory spillover occurs independently from the previously identified reward system, rather than reflecting a deactivation of the reward system. Preliminary evidence for this claim stems from recent neuroscientific research. Berkman, Burklund and Lieberman (2009) examined the existence of an inhibitory network in the brain. They propose that inhibition of motor, cognitive, and affective responses has a common origin in the same neurological areas. A by-product of this inhibitory network is that inhibitory signals intentionally directed towards one response, unintentionally spill over to unrelated domains, resulting in increasing inhibitory signals in these domains as well. In line with this reasoning, the authors show that motor inhibition (on a go/ nogo task) spills over to unintentional inhibition of otherwise present neurological responses to negative-affect trials, and they show that the same neurological areas are activated during these different trials. Based on these findings, they conclude that inhibitory signals for differential responses originate from the same neural region, which is vulnerable to inhibitory spillover. In the current research, we examine the occurrence of inhibitory spillover effects in the behavioral domain."
"Contingent self-worth depletes self-regulatory resources. Accordingto Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, and Tice (1998), the capacity for self-regulation is like a muscle: it can be strengthened with practice and exhausted by effort. Self-regulation on tasks such as eating a radish instead of a chocolate chip cookie decreases self-regulation on subsequent, unrelated tasks (e.g., Muraven et al., 1998). Brook (2005, Study 2) proposed that self-regulation is more depleting when self-esteem is at stake. Based on this reasoning, she conducted an experiment in which participants completed a measure of academic contingency of self-worth and then did an easy or difficult academic (editing) task. Next, participants worked on a timed anagram task; accuracy on the anagrams task was the critical dependent measure. Results revealed a significant interaction between academic contingency and difficulty of the first task. In the difficult condition, the more students based their self-esteem on academics, the lower their accuracy on the anagrams task. In the easy condition, academic contingency positively (but nonsignificantly) predicted higher accuracy on the anagrams task. These results are consistent with the idea that contingent selfworth leads to greater self-regulatory depletion after difficult tasks."
From http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=1720956:
"Self-control refers to the capacity to alter one’s own responses, in order to bring them in line with standards, and to support the pursuit of long-term goals (Baumeister, Vohs, & Tice, 2007). It enables a person to restrain or override one response, thereby making a different response possible. Research has shown that the ability of people to control these more immediate impulses is not stable, but varies. One condition known to make self-control more difficult is the prior arousal of visceral factors (Loewenstein, 1996). The effects of these visceral factors have been shown not to be bound by the visceral domain. For example, Briers et al. (2006) showed that hunger increases the desire for money and vice versa. Van den Bergh, Dewitte and Warlop (2008) showed that exposing men to sex cues leads to an increase in desire for smaller but sooner rewards over later but larger rewards. Based on neurological evidence (Camerer, Loewenstein, & Prelec, 2005), they argue that the same dopaminergic reward circuitry of the brain is activated for a wide variety of different reinforcers, referred to as a general reward system. This increased intertemporal impatience appeared stronger for people with a relatively sensitive Behavioral Approach System (BAS, Gray, 1990; Torrubia, Avila, Molto, & Caseras, 2001). Li (2008) and Wadhwa, Shiv and Nowlis (2008) provide similar evidence. Thus, prior research suggests the existence of a general reward system with a neurological basis. The reward system can be triggered by reward-related cues, which results in an increased preference for reward-providing cues in general, independent of the nature of the triggering cue. Although these findings highlight important visceral influences on the inclination to follow one’s impulses, they are silent regarding conditions that result in improved ability to control impulses. In the current research, we aim to investigate whether visceral factors which, once aroused call for inhibitory responses (i.e., a filling bladder), do not only result in inhibitory responses within the target domain, but also in unrelated domains. We argue that this inhibitory spillover occurs independently from the previously identified reward system, rather than reflecting a deactivation of the reward system. Preliminary evidence for this claim stems from recent neuroscientific research. Berkman, Burklund and Lieberman (2009) examined the existence of an inhibitory network in the brain. They propose that inhibition of motor, cognitive, and affective responses has a common origin in the same neurological areas. A by-product of this inhibitory network is that inhibitory signals intentionally directed towards one response, unintentionally spill over to unrelated domains, resulting in increasing inhibitory signals in these domains as well. In line with this reasoning, the authors show that motor inhibition (on a go/ nogo task) spills over to unintentional inhibition of otherwise present neurological responses to negative-affect trials, and they show that the same neurological areas are activated during these different trials. Based on these findings, they conclude that inhibitory signals for differential responses originate from the same neural region, which is vulnerable to inhibitory spillover. In the current research, we examine the occurrence of inhibitory spillover effects in the behavioral domain."