Self-Presentation Measurement

Introduction

Self-presentation is the generic term for the human tendency to describe oneself in a self-serving fashion. Because this tendency is assumed to interfere with accurate psychological assessment, much work has been put into devising methods to measure and control for self-presentation. For reviews, see Paulhus (1991) and the entry on Self-Report Distortions' in this volume.

Assessment psychologists would prefer to eliminate or, at least, identify sources of variance that are irrelevant to the attributes being measured (e.g. traits, values, attitudes). Self-presentation is usually assumed to fall in this irrelevant category. Sometimes it is—for example, when a random subset of job applicants is so motivated to land the job that they are faking good. When self-presentation is stable across time and assessment context, however, self-presentation tendencies are called response styles. Because consistent styles must have their own cognitive and/or motivational roots, they can be studied as personality traits in their own right. And their manifestations of self-presentation are likely to go [Page 859]well beyond biased behaviour on self-report instruments.

In this entry, three types of such styles are distinguished and substantiated with popular examples. The first type comprises trait measures of self-aware tendencies to engage in self-presentation (e.g. Self-Monitoring Scale). The second category comprises measures that diagnose the overall social desirability of current responding (e.g. the Impression Management scale). The third category comprises self-deceptive biases in self-descriptions (e.g. the Narcissistic Personality Inventory).

Type 1: Self-Aware Predictors of Trait Self-Presentation

This type refers to measures where respondents accurately report their tendencies toward self-presentation. The classic example is Snyder's (1974) construct of self-monitoring. Although it began with a conception closely linked to the clinical definition (see the entry on ‘Self-Observation’ in this volume), Snyder's construct is now quite distinct. In the most recent elaboration, self-monitoring is described as the active construction of public selves designed to achieve social ends; that is, favourable outcomes (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000).

The instrument designed to assess the construct—Snyder's (1974) Self-Monitoring Scale—has been immensely popular. Median reliabilities are 0.71 (alpha) and 0.73 (2-week test-retest). One repeated criticism concerned the multidimensionality of the original 25 item SMS (e.g. Briggs & Cheek, 1988) and even of the reduced 18-item version (Romera, Luengo, Garra & Otero-Lopez, 1994).

Nonetheless, the SMS has proved especially useful as a pre-test before laboratory studies of self-presentation. For example, it has been shown to predict who will manipulate their self-decriptions to get a date (Rowatt, Cunningham & Druen, 1998). Critics have replied that the bulk of its successful predictions derive from its major component, extraversion (John, Cheek & Klohnen, 1996).

A more complex instrument in this category is the Social Skills Inventory (e.g. Riggio, Watring & Throckmorton, 1993). Respondents are asked about a wide variety of social skills such as empathy, and perspective taking. Again, extraversion appears to be a significant underlying component of this measure.

Type 2: Diagnostic Indicators of Impression Management

This second type of measure indexes the total amount of positivity in an individuaL's self-descriptions. One example is the Impression Management (IM) scale (Paulhus, 1991). Typical reliabilities are 0.80, for internal consistency, and 0.76 for 4 month test-retest reliability. The Marlowe-Crowne scale and various lie-scales also fall into this category.

...