346 The Social Self
during the 1970s, reaching historic lows that have not been
equaled since. Children did not fit into the picture of individ-
ual self-fulfillment—after all, what could they really do for
their parents?
Not only did the general societal ethos promote the self, but
aself-esteem movement(an offshoot of the human-potential
and self-growth movements) gained prevalence, arguing that
“the basis foreverythingwe do is self-esteem” (MacDonald,
1986, p. 27; quoted in Seligman, 1995). During the early
1980s, educators began to actively promote self-esteem in
school children. This was partially accomplished by affirma-
tion (children were given T-shirts that said “I’m lovable and
capable” or sang songs about self-love; e.g., Swann, 1996). In
addition, many schools discouraged criticism, telling teachers
not to correct misspellings or grammar mistakes, so as not to
harm a child’s self-esteem (Sykes, 1995). Thus the culture in-
creasingly promoted self-esteem as an end unto itself, rather
than as an outcome of accomplishment or meaningful per-
sonal relationships.
This popular interest in the self also meant that young peo-
ple became increasingly exposed to self-esteem as a desirable
goal. Gergen (1973) argued that the popularization of
psychological concepts often creates changes in the responses
of the subject populations. Self-esteem is a prime candidate
for changes based on popularization. Not only has self-esteem
been directly trumpeted by social movements and promoters,
but the concept has received wide media attention in newspa-
pers, magazines, television programs, and popular music
(Whitney Houston sings about it, and a popular song in the
mid-1990s explained the singer’s misguided actions as result-
ing from “low self-esteem”). If anything, this attention in-
creased during the 1980s; while the self-esteem and human
potential movements reached only some people in the 1970s,
the 1980s and 1990s saw talk about self-esteem enter the
mainstream.
Empirical searches show that coverage of self-esteem has
increased substantially in the popular press (these searches
were originally performed for Twenge & Campbell, 2001). In
1965, theReader’s Guide to Periodical Literaturedid not even
include a listing forself-esteem(nor did it list any articles
underself-respectorself-love). In 1995, theReader’s Guide
listed 27 magazine articles devoted solely to the topic of self-
esteem. In addition, a search of the Lexis-Nexus database for
1995 articles mentioning self-esteem exceeded the search
limit of 1,000 articles; the 1,000-article limit was still ex-
ceeded even when the search was limited to a single month
(June 1995). In the academic literature, PsycLit also shows a
steady increase in articles mentioning self-esteem. From 1970
to 1974, .6% of all articles in the database mentioned self-
esteem. This number increased steadily, reaching .10% from
1975 to 1979 and .12% from 1980 to 1984; the number has
since leveled off at .12% to .13%. Thus, over the time period in
question, academic publications examining self-esteem have
doubled.
One consequence of these cultural changes has been in-
creases in self-esteem as measured by popular question-
naires. Twenge and Campbell (2001) found that college
students’ scores on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale rose
more than a half a standard deviation between the late 1960s
and the early 1990s. Children’s scores on the Coopersmith
Self-Esteem Inventory also increased from the early 1980s to
the early 1990s. The authors argued that much of this change
can be traced to the self-esteem movement and the general
emphasis on the individual self in the larger society. In-
creases in assertiveness (Twenge, 2001b) and extraversion
(Twenge, 2001a) complete the picture of a generation in-
creasingly concerned with the self, individual rights, and
self-expression.
To sum up: The self cannot be fully understood without
reference to culture, whether that culture differs with respect
to region or with respect to time. Research on cultural differ-
ences has blossomed into an extensive and growing subfield,
while research on birth cohort and change over time is just
beginning to be conducted. As Caspi (1987) argued, many
aspects of development and personality must be understood
within the context of time, because the larger sociocultural
environment changes so much from decade to decade (also
see Gergen, 1973). When we are born, grow up, and discover
our adolescent and adult identities has a substantial effect on
how we see the self as an entity.REFERENCESAinsworth, M. D. (1989). Attachments beyond infancy. American
Psychologist, 44,709–716.
Baldwin, J. A., & Hopkins, R. (1990). African-American and
European-American cultural differences as assessed by the
worldviews paradigm: An empirical analysis. Western Journal of
Black Studies, 14,38–52.
Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phe-
nomena.Psychological Bulletin, 91,3–26.
Baumeister, R. F. (1987). How the self became a problem: A psy-
chological review of historical research. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 52,163–176.
Baumeister, R. F. (1991). Meanings of life.New York: Guilford
Press.
Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Esteem threat, self-regulatory breakdown,
and emotional distress as factors in self-defeating behavior.
Review of General Psychology, 1,145–174.