The Self as an Interpersonal Actor 333current relationships to perceived eligibility for such relation-
ships is one way to address this problem, but more research is
needed to verify whether that solution is correct.
Social and Interpersonal Patterns
Self-esteem is also associated with different patterns of social
behavior. Indeed, such differences constituted one of the orig-
inal sources of research interest in self-esteem. Janis (1954)
hypothesized that people with low self-esteem are more easily
persuaded than people with high self-esteem. One of the most
influential and popular measures of self-esteem was devel-
oped specifically for use in studies of attitude change (Janis &
Field, 1959). This measure, usually known as the Janis-Field
Feelings of Inadequacy scale, cemented the view that individ-
uals with low self-esteem feel little self-confidence and are
easily swayed by other people’s arguments.
The view that low self-esteem is associated with greater
persuasibility was supported in those early studies, and sub-
sequent work built upon those studies to link low self-
esteem to a broad range of susceptibility to influence and
manipulation. A seminal review article by Brockner (1984)
concluded that low self-esteem is marked by what he called
“behavioral plasticity”—the idea that people with low self-
esteem are broadly malleable and easily influenced by others.
For example, anxiety-provoking stimuli produce stronger
and more reliable effects in people with low self-esteem;
their reactions are more influenced by the anxiety-provoking
situation than are those of people with high self-esteem.
People with low self-esteem also show stronger responses to
expectancy effects and self-focus inductions.
Self-esteem also effects choices between self-enhancement
and self-protection. Many self-esteem differences occur more
frequently (or only) in interpersonal situations, and self-
esteem may be fundamentally tied toward self-presentational
patterns (see Baumeister, Tice, & Hutton, 1989, for review). In
general, people with high self-esteem are oriented toward self-
enhancement, whereas people with low self-esteem tend to-
ward self-protection. People with high self-esteem want to
capitalize on their strengths and virtues and are willing to take
chances in order to stand out in a positive way. On the other
hand, people with low self-esteem want to remedy their defi-
ciencies and seek to avoid standing out in a negative way.
High self-esteem people’s tendency toward self-
enhancement can sometimes make them less likable to others.
After receiving a negative evaluation, people high in self-
esteem emphasized their independence and separateness
from others, whereas people with low self-esteem empha-
sized their interdependence and connectedness with others
(Vohs & Heatherton, 2001). These self-construals had direct
consequences for interpersonal perceptions. Interaction part-
ners saw independent people as less likable and interdepen-
dent people as more likable. Given the differences in behavior
based on level of self-esteem, this meant that partners saw
low self-esteem individuals as more likable than high self-
esteem individuals. However, these differences occurred only
after the individuals being perceived had received negative
evaluations; presumably self-esteem moderates reactions to
ego threat.
The evidence reviewed thus far does not paint an entirely
consistent picture of people with low self-esteem. On the one
hand, people with low self-esteem seem to desire success, ac-
ceptance, and approval, but on the other hand they seem
skeptical about it and less willing to pursue it openly. Work
by Brown (e.g., 1993) has addressed this conflict directly by
proposing that people with low self-esteem suffer from a mo-
tivational conflict. Brown and McGill (1989) found that pos-
itive, pleasant life events had adverse effects on the physical
health of people with low self-esteem; such people actually
became ill when too many good things happened. In contrast,
people with high self-esteem are healthier when life treats
them well. It may be that positive events exceed the expecta-
tions of people with low self-esteem. This may force them to
revise their self-concepts in a positive direction, and these
self-concept changes may be sufficiently stressful to make
them sick.Social Identity TheoryAnother way that interpersonal relationships influence self-
esteem is through group memberships. Social identity theory
(e.g., Tajfel, 1982; Tajfel & Turner, 1979; Turner, 1982)
argues that the self-concept contains both personal and social
attributes. Self-esteem usually focuses on personal attributes,
but group memberships are also important. A person will ex-
perience higher self-esteem when his or her important social
groups are valued and compare favorably to other groups (see
also Rosenberg, 1979). Empirical research has confirmed this
theory;collective self-esteem(feeling that one’s social groups
are positive) is correlated with global personal self-esteem
(Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). This is particularly true for
members of racial or ethnic minorities (Crocker, Luhtanen,
Blaine, & Broadnax, 1994). This most likely occurs because
minority group members identify more strongly with their
ethnic groups, and these groups are obvious and salient to
others. In addition, improving the status of the group tends to
increase personal self-esteem. For example, favoring in-
groups over out-groups in allocation of points or rewards can
enhance self-esteem, even when the self does not personally
benefit from those allocations (e.g., Lemyre & Smith, 1985;