User:Optakeover/sandbox

Tutor-Marked Assignment 01 (TMA01): January 2020 Presentation James Chan Weng Yan PSY205 Social Psychology Singapore University of Social Sciences

Part a) The self-concept of Martin can be analysed through his self-schemas, as the former is often defined by the latter thereof (Myers & Twenge, 2017). Martin may have already had a self-schema of a competent worker. Self-schemas are defined as belief and ideas we have of ourselves that guide how we process information that relates to us (Myers & Twenge, 2017). These self-schemas are often based on prior experiences (Markus, 1977). In this case, Martin may have had been working in that job and position for a substantial amount of time and was satisfied with his current standing and his outlook. Despite the feedback he received from the editor, he would have felt that such issues with his punctuality was part of his job, and his performance so far allowed him to successfully remain in the position. This formed his self-schema of his level of work, seeing the regular patterns of lateness of work which his editor expressed their dissatisfaction to him about as being part and parcel of his work as a writer in that position. Such a self-schema is formed by a few processes: namely self-esteem and self-efficacy. When people with high self-esteem fall short, they often exaggerate their levels of superiority over others and think others are also in a similar situation, to maintain their self-worth (Tan, 2019). In the case of Martin, in an attempt to make himself feel better about his inability to keep up with his work deadlines, he engaged in social comparison by comparing himself with other individuals and attempted to rationalise that other people were prone to the same behaviour, especially quoting evidence about only 10 percent of writers submitting their work on time. Evidence shows when individuals compare themselves to others, especially those who are less better-off than them, they tend to feel better about their current situations (Krause & Weber, 2018, as cited in Mares & Cantor, 1992). Although the evidence that Martin quoted about the majority of other writers having similar behaviour of late submission did not explicitly mention whether they were of a higher or lower competency as Martin, it could have been interpreted that the issue of lateness could equally affect all writers less, similarly or more skilled or competent than Martin. Thus it could be concluded that downwards social comparison did occur as part of the processes of Martin’s behaviour by noticing how other writers had the same lateness issue as him, but was further bolstered by the comparison with individuals who may inexplicitly be of an equal or higher competency as him, thereby maintaining his self-esteem. Martin’s social comparison behaviour was also largely caused by his sense of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is defined as “people's beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives” (Bandura, 1994, p. 2). In a study done on university students, it was shown that perceived self-efficacy and downwards social comparison can contribute to more positive feelings about their performance levels in school (Vrugt, 1994). What this means is that Martin probably already had a strong sense of his own competency, despite the feedback from his superiors regarding his work. In an attempt to rationalise his understanding of his adequacy, he compared himself to the behaviours of other individuals stated in the evidence. With positive confirmation of his own self-efficacy, Martin would have no doubt been consoled into thinking his situation was not as bad as other individuals like him were also having similar difficulties. In short, Martin used this technique to cope with the feedback from the editor, in order to tell himself that things were not as bad as it seemed, because other people were said to be having the same issue. This helped him protect his positive self-concept of his own competency formed from positive self-efficacy, despite his inability to submit work in a timely fashion. In summary, Martin’s self-concept was formed through self-schemas, that were in turn formed through his self-esteem and self-efficacy processes of thinking. This allowed him to remain with a positive self-concept of his abilities and competencies at work contrary to the feedback he received about his work performance. Part b) Martin’s behaviours can be analysed through identifying fallacies of thought that relate to self-serving bias, which is the propensity to view oneself favourably (Myers & Twenge, 2017). One of these fallacies of thought is the false consensus effect, which is defined as the tendency to overestimate how common our thoughts and behaviours are in other people (Myers & Twenge, 2017). To preserve his self-concept, Martin sought to rationalise his lateness, thinking others were doing the same thing. Such rationalisation could also be explained by cognitive dissonance he probably experienced when given feedback that went against his feelings of self-efficacy. Cognitive dissonance is the unpleasant feeling resulting from the conflict of at least two distinct thoughts, thus resulting in a need to reduce the level of the unpleasant feeling experienced ("cognitive dissonance", n.d.). In this case, the cognitive dissonance experienced was addressed by the attempt to rationalise his repeated late submission of work through the cherry-picking of evidence that apparently affirmed the presence of such a behaviour in a large majority of writers. The attempt to cherry-pick evidence was definitely fallacious, not only because of the overgeneralisation of the evidence’s findings to a larger group of people that he concluded did apply to, but also committing context minimisation error, which is defined in community psychology as misattributing the extent of contexts when analysing issues encountered by other people and groups in society (Kloos, et al., 2012). For example, the 90% of the sampled writers inferred to not submit work on time in the quoted evidence may be because of contextual differences, as some workplaces may have condoned or even encouraged a less strict policy on deadlines while other workplaces may not have been as forgiving, which was something Martin did not consider. In summary, the feedback from his editor on his lateness affected his sense of self-efficacy, causing the cognitive dissonance experienced, resulting in rationalisation behaviour, which then resulted in the cherry-picking and confirmation of his initial thoughts that his lateness was far more common than what was the case. Such an analysis demonstrates the applicability of the false consensus effect to explain Martin’s behaviours. The strategies I suggest for managing Martin’s misimpressions and improving his task management is partly in direct response to the fallacious thought processes analysed above. Firstly, more evidence can be compiled that analyses lateness in writers and other occupations and their prevalence, that shows a more complete view on the issue. Secondly, Martin should be reminded of his job’s essential requirements and that of his editors’, and that other workplaces would simply not have a similar leeway in expectations and thus they should not be overgeneralised to apply throughout Martin’s industry. Thirdly, considering Martin’s repeated failure to meet deadlines and milestones, his editor and employers could request Martin to create a structured schedule to guide himself in prioritising his work and meeting hard deadlines. Fourthly, such a structured schedule and other milestones to be assessed in employee appraisal should enforced with negative consequences; e.g. phasing-out the employee if their work punctuality and time management does not improve further.

References cognitive dissonance. (n.d.). Retrieved from APA Dictionary of Psychology: https://dictionary.apa.org/cognitive-dissonance Kloos, B., Hill, J., Thomas, E., Wandersman, A., Elias, M. J., & Dalton, J. (2012). Community psychology : linking individuals and communities (3rd ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Krause, S., & Weber, S. (2018). Lift Me Up by Looking Down: Social Comparison Effects of Narratives. Front. Psychol., 9:1889. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01889 Mares, M.-L., & Cantor, J. (1992). Elderly Viewers' Responses to Televised Portrayals of Old Age: Empathy and Mood Management Versus Social Comparison. Community Research, 19, 459-478. doi:10.1177/009365092019004004 Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(2), 63-78. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.2.63 Myers, D. G., & Twenge, J. M. (2017). Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill International Edition. Tan, D. (2019). PSY205 Social psychology (study guide). Singapore: Singapore University of Social Sciences. Vrugt, A. (1994). Perceived self-efficacy, social comparison, affective reactions and academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64(Pt 3), 465-72. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1994.tb01117.x