Person schemas
Person schemas – often referred to as person prototypes – are configurations of personality traits that we use to categorize people and to make inferences about their behaviour. (The prototype is the ‘central tendency’, or average, of the category members.) In most Western cultures we tend to categorize individuals in terms of their dominant personality traits. We may infer from our observations and interactions with A that he is shy, or that B is opinionated. Most people would agree that Robin Williams is a prototypical extrovert and Woody Allen is a prototypical neurotic. Trait or person schemas enable us to answer the question: ‘what kind of person is he or she?’ (Cantor & Mischel, 1979). In so doing, they help us to anticipate the nature of our social interactions with individuals, giving us a sense of control and predictability. Self schemas Just as we represent and store information about others, we do the same about ourselves, developing complex and varied schemas that define our self-concept based on past experiences. Self schemas are cognitive representations about ourselves that organize and process all related information (Markus, 1977). They develop from self-descriptions and traits that are salient and important to our self-concept. Indeed, they can be described as components of self-concept that are central to our identity and self-definition. For example, people who value independence highly are said to be self-schematic along this dimension. People for whom dependence–independence is not centrally important are said to be aschematic on this dimension. Different self schemas become activated depending on the changing situations and contexts in which we find ourselves (Markus & Kunda, 1986; Markus & Wurf, 1987). For example, your self schema as fun-loving and frivolous when you are with your friends may be quite different from your self schema as serious and dutiful when you are with your family. You will have schemas for your real self and also for your ‘ideal’ and ‘ought’ selves (Higgins, 1987)
Person schemas – often referred to as person prototypes – are configurations of personality traits that we use to categorize people and to make inferences about their behaviour. (The prototype is the ‘central tendency’, or average, of the category members.) In most Western cultures we tend to categorize individuals in terms of their dominant personality traits. We may infer from our observations and interactions with A that he is shy, or that B is opinionated. Most people would agree that Robin Williams is a prototypical extrovert and Woody Allen is a prototypical neurotic. Trait or person schemas enable us to answer the question: ‘what kind of person is he or she?’ (Cantor & Mischel, 1979). In so doing, they help us to anticipate the nature of our social interactions with individuals, giving us a sense of control and predictability. Self schemas Just as we represent and store information about others, we do the same about ourselves, developing complex and varied schemas that define our self-concept based on past experiences. Self schemas are cognitive representations about ourselves that organize and process all related information (Markus, 1977). They develop from self-descriptions and traits that are salient and important to our self-concept. Indeed, they can be described as components of self-concept that are central to our identity and self-definition. For example, people who value independence highly are said to be self-schematic along this dimension. People for whom dependence–independence is not centrally important are said to be aschematic on this dimension. Different self schemas become activated depending on the changing situations and contexts in which we find ourselves (Markus & Kunda, 1986; Markus & Wurf, 1987). For example, your self schema as fun-loving and frivolous when you are with your friends may be quite different from your self schema as serious and dutiful when you are with your family. You will have schemas for your real self and also for your ‘ideal’ and ‘ought’ selves (Higgins, 1987)
No comments:
Post a Comment