Popular in Social Sciences

Books

City Time: On Being Sentenced to Rikers Island

Independent Scholar David A. Campbell

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Economics

Gender and Economics

University of California Santa Barbara Shelly Lundberg

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

Banks and Policy Organisations

Greening the financial sector

European Investment Bank Matteo Ferrazzi

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Culture and Society

Carceral Entrapments: Views from the Prison/Street Interface in India

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Mahuya Bandyopadhya

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video discusses the concepts of self-esteem and social esteem, highlighting their meanings and interconnections. The speaker explains that to "esteem" something means to evaluate it positively, and one can have positive or negative esteem for both objects and people. Social esteem refers to how others perceive an individual's worth, while self-esteem is about an individual's perception of their own worth.

This video introduces two theories related to esteem: Dominance Theory, which posits that the human impulse to dominate has evolved into a desire for social prestige and thus contributes to self-esteem, and Harter Theory, which suggests that self-esteem reflects social esteem and influences individuals' assertiveness in seeking respect and admiration from others.

Harter Theory further asserts that self-esteem serves both an indicative function (reflecting one's social esteem) and an imperative function (governing assertiveness). This video also emphasizes the importance of empirical evidence, including correlational and experimental studies, supporting the claims regarding the relationship between self-esteem and social esteem.

Finally, the speaker acknowledges that social esteem is not the only determinant of self-esteem, with exceptions existing where individuals may experience high self-esteem despite low social status, and vice versa. The discussion wraps up by suggesting future research directions that could explore these theories further, including their interaction with other theories of esteem and emotional responses such as pride, shame, depression, and anxiety.

Language:

Export as PDF

Export as PDF
Here are some articles that discuss similar themes related to self-esteem, social esteem, and the theories surrounding them:

1. **"Self-Esteem and Social Identity: The Role of Group Membership"**
This article examines how individual self-esteem is influenced by group identity and social reputation. It explores the interplay between personal self-worth and social perceptions.

2. **"The Impact of Social Comparison on Self-Esteem"**
This research focuses on how individuals' self-esteem is shaped by their comparisons with others, connecting to the idea of social esteem and the desire for social validation.

3. **"Dominance and Prestige: The Dual Pathways to Social Status"**
This article discusses Dominance Theory in detail and how individuals navigate social hierarchies, influencing both their self-esteem and their standing in the eyes of others.

4. **"Understanding Self-Esteem: The Role of Personal Achievement and Social Approval"**
This piece delves into factors that contribute to self-esteem, including personal accomplishments and the validation received from society, linking back to the concepts of self and social esteem.

5. **"The Effects of Low Self-Esteem on Mental Health"**
Here, the relationship between low self-esteem and various emotional health issues like depression and anxiety is explored, reflecting the implications of self-esteem in broader psychological convideos.

6. **"Exploring the Connection Between Self-Esteem and Assertiveness"**
This article analyzes how self-esteem influences assertiveness in social interactions, relevant to Harter Theory's assertion of self-esteem governing assertiveness.

7. **"Pride and Shame: Emotional Correlates of Self-Esteem"**
This article connects emotional responses such as pride and shame to one's perception of self-worth and social esteem, suggesting avenues for further research.

8. **"Cultural Differences in Conceptualizing Self-Esteem"**
This article examines how different cultures affect the understanding and importance of self-esteem and social esteem, providing a comparative perspective that could enrich future research.

These articles should help in further exploring the concepts of self-esteem and social esteem, as well as the various theories connected to them.

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.295 --> 00:01.835
The word esteem is common

00:02.015 --> 00:04.915
to both the terms self-esteem and social esteem.

00:05.095 --> 00:06.475
So let's start with finding that

00:07.255 --> 00:08.995
to esteem something simply means to,

00:09.095 --> 00:10.555
to evaluate it positively.

00:11.215 --> 00:13.075
So why are things typically esteems?

00:13.255 --> 00:15.715
Um, well, the reason is they have some value

00:15.775 --> 00:17.115
or worth to somebody.

00:17.895 --> 00:18.955
For example, we esteem

00:18.975 --> 00:23.395
or we like, a, a new car

00:23.395 --> 00:25.915
because it gets us from A to B or because it looks cool

00:26.335 --> 00:27.475
or for several other reasons.

00:28.365 --> 00:29.465
Um, now, importantly,

00:29.525 --> 00:32.105
one can also have positive or negative esteem.

00:32.165 --> 00:33.465
One can like something or dislike.

00:33.525 --> 00:36.345
So if an old car breaks down, for example,

00:36.345 --> 00:38.465
or looks battered, then we use it negatively.

00:39.735 --> 00:41.075
Now we're accustomed to thinking

00:41.075 --> 00:44.515
of physical objects like cars as having a value or worth.

00:44.625 --> 00:47.795
However, people can also have a value

00:47.855 --> 00:49.595
or worth, to other people.

00:50.575 --> 00:52.875
So suppose person A is competent, kind,

00:52.875 --> 00:56.435
and attractive, whereas person B is an apt, mean

00:56.435 --> 00:59.745
or ugly, now might be a bit rude to say so,

00:59.765 --> 01:02.945
but person A generally has more value socially speaking

01:03.055 --> 01:04.105
than person B does.

01:04.965 --> 01:06.625
So one might say that that person A,

01:06.625 --> 01:09.465
enjoys more social esteem than person B.

01:10.855 --> 01:12.825
Okay, so that's social esteem. What about self-esteem?

01:13.375 --> 01:15.135
Well, human beings have big brains

01:15.155 --> 01:18.495
and fancy minds, so they're aware of their own existence

01:18.755 --> 01:20.975
and they can form conceptions of themselves.

01:21.675 --> 01:23.695
Uh, and this includes having con conception

01:23.695 --> 01:25.535
of their own worth, or value.

01:26.235 --> 01:28.455
So just as other people can like

01:28.475 --> 01:29.895
or dislike a person,

01:29.955 --> 01:31.775
so a person can like or dislike themselves.

01:32.875 --> 01:36.135
So self-esteem, is the personal counterpart

01:36.195 --> 01:39.855
of social esteem liking, or disliking oneself.

01:41.235 --> 01:44.855
So with that distinction, then we can ask several questions.

01:45.275 --> 01:46.455
So what is the relation

01:46.455 --> 01:48.855
between social esteem and self-esteem?

01:49.595 --> 01:53.135
And what function or functions might self-esteem serve in a

01:53.135 --> 01:55.095
social context, context?

01:55.095 --> 01:56.535
And what are the causes,

01:56.595 --> 01:59.535
or consequences of having high or low self-esteem?

01:59.665 --> 02:02.935
There are two theories, dominance theory and harter theory.

02:03.435 --> 02:05.295
The dominance theory is an older theory.

02:05.445 --> 02:07.015
It's developed by Jerome Barco.

02:07.015 --> 02:10.515
An anthropologist Harter theory is a more recent theory

02:10.515 --> 02:13.355
developed by myself and my psychologist, colleagues,

02:13.355 --> 02:16.355
professor Constantine and Dr.

02:16.635 --> 02:19.955
Nikila Ma Devan. So both the start from the premise

02:19.985 --> 02:23.355
that human psychology is shaped by our evolutionary past,

02:23.735 --> 02:25.915
and the aspects of our minds can be understood

02:25.935 --> 02:29.515
as adaptations that aid survival and reproduction.

02:29.945 --> 02:32.675
This includes self-esteem and things related to it.

02:33.675 --> 02:35.015
So let's start with dominance theory.

02:35.835 --> 02:38.535
So it begins by noting that animal societies like,

02:38.535 --> 02:40.215
like human ones are stratified.

02:40.675 --> 02:41.975
So that's to say that humans

02:42.075 --> 02:44.735
and other animals occupy ranks in a hierarchy.

02:45.405 --> 02:47.335
Some are on top, others on the bottom,

02:47.365 --> 02:51.455
most in the middle, in terms of, say their access

02:51.475 --> 02:54.415
to valued resources, mates or territory.

02:54.555 --> 02:56.135
Now, in non-human animals,

02:56.215 --> 02:58.575
disputes over goods like those,

02:58.605 --> 03:01.005
They're handled not always to open combat,

03:01.265 --> 03:03.725
but sometimes by ritualized dominance

03:03.745 --> 03:05.085
and submission displays.

03:05.785 --> 03:07.605
And as a result, you have the formation of

03:07.605 --> 03:10.605
what are called pecking orders that are well regulated

03:10.605 --> 03:12.005
where animals seem to know their place.

03:12.465 --> 03:15.005
And these arguably evolve

03:15.005 --> 03:18.165
because they serve to keep overall levels of conflict down,

03:18.665 --> 03:19.685
or all concerned

03:19.685 --> 03:21.805
where wherever they are in the, in the hierarchy.

03:22.225 --> 03:24.325
Now, nonetheless, in non-human animals,

03:24.325 --> 03:27.685
except maybe some of our nearest relatives, those at the top

03:27.685 --> 03:30.525
of the hierarchy, they get there by having

03:30.625 --> 03:32.605
or by projecting greater physical power.

03:33.145 --> 03:36.475
So the top dog is always the, the most powerful dog.

03:37.015 --> 03:39.315
Um, and so it would make sense to have, for all animals

03:39.335 --> 03:42.315
to have a drive to acquire and maintain the power.

03:43.175 --> 03:46.675
Now, what dominance theory says is that in human beings,

03:47.815 --> 03:51.035
the impulse to physically dominate others has been largely

03:51.305 --> 03:53.515
transformed into an impulse

03:54.095 --> 03:57.035
to symbolically evaluate oneself as superior.

03:57.255 --> 03:58.915
So in a way, it's a misnomer.

03:58.915 --> 04:00.075
It's not really dominance theory,

04:00.345 --> 04:01.995
it's it's saying dominance has

04:02.055 --> 04:03.235
has been turned to something else.

04:03.415 --> 04:06.595
And dominance theory says that this, impulse

04:07.135 --> 04:10.235
to see oneself as superior, it calls that self-esteem.

04:10.375 --> 04:12.515
And you can see this transformation as being the result

04:12.515 --> 04:15.635
of animal instincts colliding with a bigger human brain

04:16.185 --> 04:17.435
over the course of evolution.

04:17.535 --> 04:19.355
So now, how do you succeed at

04:19.405 --> 04:20.955
evaluating yourself as superior?

04:21.255 --> 04:24.755
So Dom's theory suggests that the way to do

04:24.755 --> 04:27.195
that is gain prestige in the eyes of others.

04:27.455 --> 04:28.995
So loosely speaking, it says that

04:29.965 --> 04:32.195
human beings no longer seek to impose

04:32.785 --> 04:35.475
only tyrannical rule like most other animals,

04:35.935 --> 04:37.995
but they also try to get the democratic vote

04:37.995 --> 04:39.155
of their fellow human beings.

04:40.055 --> 04:42.395
So, essentially the end dom's theory says

04:42.395 --> 04:44.955
that self-esteem can come about

04:44.955 --> 04:46.435
through achieving social esteem.

04:47.505 --> 04:50.685
That's Dom's theory i's theory.

04:50.685 --> 04:53.685
Then, there are several points of agreement,

04:53.865 --> 04:55.925
but also some points of disagreement.

04:56.895 --> 04:59.835
So RA theory agrees about prestige.

05:00.095 --> 05:01.795
It says that being respected

05:01.795 --> 05:05.235
and admired by others is one primary source of self-esteem.

05:06.365 --> 05:09.585
And indeed, nowadays the world's status is used in the

05:09.585 --> 05:10.705
psychological literature

05:11.125 --> 05:13.465
to denote being respected and admired.

05:13.805 --> 05:15.945
And in contrast, the word rank is used

05:15.945 --> 05:18.505
to denote higher positions that are hierarchy

05:18.505 --> 05:21.825
that are not necessarily attended, by respect

05:21.825 --> 05:23.905
to admiration, but also by power struggles.

05:25.845 --> 05:27.905
So, that's a point of agreement.

05:27.925 --> 05:29.425
But the point of disagreement is that

05:30.205 --> 05:32.825
arm theory disagrees about the definition of self-esteem.

05:34.035 --> 05:36.735
So dominant theory says it's a type of thriving,

05:36.955 --> 05:39.815
but self-esteem, I think, is best characterized as a type

05:39.815 --> 05:43.305
of perception of your value and the describe.

05:43.365 --> 05:44.625
To see yourself positively

05:44.625 --> 05:47.585
or not see yourself negatively nowadays, that's referred to

05:47.645 --> 05:50.505
as the motive to self enhance or to self protect.

05:52.225 --> 05:55.325
And secondly, self-esteem isn't only about seeing yourself

05:55.325 --> 05:56.445
as superior to others.

05:56.745 --> 05:59.765
Uh, you can like or dislike yourself, without liking

05:59.785 --> 06:02.285
or disliking yourself more or less than others.

06:03.465 --> 06:06.565
Now, in addition, Dom, harary, pardon me.

06:06.945 --> 06:08.845
In addition, har theory goes further than

06:08.845 --> 06:10.085
dominance theory predictably.

06:11.035 --> 06:13.055
So it accepts that people strive for status

06:13.155 --> 06:14.175
and compete for it,

06:14.965 --> 06:18.385
but crucially, it acknowledges that it can be a mistake

06:18.645 --> 06:20.185
to strive and compete too much.

06:20.845 --> 06:22.705
And the reason is people can lose contest

06:23.365 --> 06:25.065
per status as well as win them.

06:26.475 --> 06:28.255
So if your initial status is high,

06:29.255 --> 06:30.855
contests are more likely to be won.

06:31.075 --> 06:32.615
But if your initial status is low,

06:33.285 --> 06:34.855
they're more likely to be lost.

06:35.955 --> 06:37.895
So the thrive in human society, people need

06:37.895 --> 06:40.695
to regulate their status seeking, judiciously

06:40.695 --> 06:42.535
and not just engage in it unconditionally.

06:42.555 --> 06:43.655
So it's like playing poker.

06:44.235 --> 06:47.175
Uh, you tend to bit more when you already hold a good hand.

06:47.325 --> 06:49.415
It's not fair, but that's, that's probably how it works.

06:50.725 --> 06:53.735
Okay, so how does self-esteem come into all this?

06:53.845 --> 06:57.575
Well, theory claims self-esteem is a crucial gear in the

06:57.575 --> 06:58.735
psychological mechanism.

06:59.485 --> 07:01.625
But first, your self-esteem will reflect your status.

07:02.505 --> 07:04.925
If people respect and admire, your self-esteem will rise.

07:05.145 --> 07:06.405
And if they don't, it'll fall.

07:06.745 --> 07:10.205
And that's what we call self esteem's indicative function.

07:10.205 --> 07:12.285
It indicates your social esteem

07:13.155 --> 07:15.935
and second, self-esteem will govern your assertiveness.

07:15.995 --> 07:18.295
If your self-esteem is high, you'll compete.

07:18.595 --> 07:19.895
And if it's low, you won't.

07:20.035 --> 07:23.135
So that's called self esteem's imperative function.

07:23.475 --> 07:25.215
So it makes you compete when the odds are good,

07:25.215 --> 07:26.935
but it stops you from com competing,

07:27.115 --> 07:28.175
when the odds are poor.

07:29.235 --> 07:32.525
So harm theories not only says that,

07:32.555 --> 07:34.765
self-esteem mirrors social esteem.

07:34.785 --> 07:38.895
It also says that self-esteem can make you strive for social

07:39.855 --> 07:43.615
esteem more or less, at least the type of social esteem

07:43.615 --> 07:45.815
that involves being, respected and admired.

07:45.815 --> 07:46.895
These are interesting theories,

07:46.895 --> 07:49.815
but, theories are always answerable to, to evidence.

07:51.045 --> 07:54.625
Um, so there is sort of circumstantial evidence,

07:54.625 --> 07:57.385
and then we're telling evidence for ter theory, I would say.

07:57.385 --> 07:59.065
So first, you've got the correlational evidence.

07:59.645 --> 08:00.745
You measure people's status

08:00.745 --> 08:02.065
through esteem and assertiveness.

08:02.375 --> 08:03.465
They tend to go together.

08:04.195 --> 08:05.975
So the same people who are objectively popular

08:06.355 --> 08:07.495
who report being popular,

08:08.235 --> 08:10.095
and they also report liking themselves.

08:10.715 --> 08:12.495
And the same people report liking themselves.

08:13.125 --> 08:15.415
They report being more confident at standing up

08:15.415 --> 08:16.895
for themselves or taking the initiative.

08:18.015 --> 08:20.755
Um, so we've all, we've established this, you know,

08:20.755 --> 08:25.635
at the level of traits and, and people's ongoing situations,

08:25.975 --> 08:27.395
but also we find that,

08:27.455 --> 08:31.555
in day-to-day fluctuations in people's status, self-esteem,

08:32.515 --> 08:34.175
and assertiveness.

08:34.715 --> 08:36.455
Uh, they, these go up and down from day to day.

08:36.455 --> 08:37.775
They're not constant, but they,

08:37.805 --> 08:39.815
they also fluctuate, together.

08:40.675 --> 08:43.135
So, there's sort of good correlational evidence,

08:43.395 --> 08:45.535
but I think, I think the best evidence is experimental.

08:45.715 --> 08:48.935
So we've done studies in lab, we bring participants in

08:49.155 --> 08:51.695
and we have them complete a bogus test on the basis

08:51.755 --> 08:53.935
of which we give them false feedback,

08:54.115 --> 08:56.995
and we tell them your future status is likely

08:57.055 --> 08:58.315
to be higher or lower.

08:58.465 --> 09:00.155
This is a valid and reliable test,

09:00.255 --> 09:01.675
and most of them believe that.

09:01.775 --> 09:04.955
Um, and then they fill out a seemingly unrelated

09:04.955 --> 09:06.075
self-esteem afterwards.

09:06.415 --> 09:08.595
Uh, and what you find is that that goes up and down too.

09:08.815 --> 09:12.195
So experiments like this in the lab, they're important

09:12.195 --> 09:13.715
because they isolate the

09:14.275 --> 09:16.955
hypothesized causal mechanism In correlational studies,

09:17.375 --> 09:19.755
you know, we could show a link between status,

09:19.935 --> 09:23.075
and self-esteem, but we could never be sure some other

09:23.075 --> 09:24.955
factor wasn't accounting for the relationship.

09:25.135 --> 09:27.115
So, we need to conduct more research,

09:27.335 --> 09:28.435
along these lines.

09:28.695 --> 09:32.115
Um, and in particular, we need to do more work on the link

09:32.275 --> 09:34.475
between self esteem and behavior certainly.

09:35.225 --> 09:38.805
But so far, at least to my knowledge, no,

09:39.245 --> 09:43.345
findings have emerged that contradict, higher theory.

09:43.345 --> 09:45.065
They're all consistent, with it.

09:45.565 --> 09:47.545
Um, but I will say this, so,

09:47.865 --> 09:49.785
I should acknowledge a, a limitation.

09:50.445 --> 09:53.345
So social esteem isn't the only determinant of self-esteem.

09:53.845 --> 09:55.345
So they cope very statistically

09:55.445 --> 09:57.105
and experimentally, but not perfect.

09:57.405 --> 09:59.865
So you always find cases where social esteem is high,

09:59.865 --> 10:00.945
and self-esteem is low.

10:01.365 --> 10:03.825
Uh, so for example, your productive people who are

10:03.825 --> 10:04.865
nonetheless depressed.

10:05.165 --> 10:08.835
Um, and you have the opposite too, ca cases

10:08.885 --> 10:10.435
where social esteem is low,

10:10.435 --> 10:12.875
but self-esteem is high criminals, for example,

10:12.935 --> 10:14.435
who remain fond of themselves.

10:15.135 --> 10:17.115
So Haram rat theory is meant to apply in general,

10:17.255 --> 10:19.235
but not, not to explain every single case.

10:19.425 --> 10:21.235
Okay? So I think I would say that our,

10:21.235 --> 10:24.395
our empirical work on haram rat theory helps us to classify

10:24.395 --> 10:26.515
what functions self-esteem might serve,

10:26.895 --> 10:30.395
and the link between social esteem and self-esteem.

10:31.315 --> 10:32.975
Now, in summary, I would say,

10:32.975 --> 10:36.535
self-esteem may have evolved partly to, to reflect

10:36.835 --> 10:39.815
how much people are respected and admired,

10:39.915 --> 10:43.375
and to control how keen they are to seek additional status.

10:44.275 --> 10:46.535
So future work, I think, is likely

10:46.535 --> 10:49.055
to focus on evaluating the significance

10:49.115 --> 10:53.035
of arm theory in the context of other modern theories.

10:53.375 --> 10:55.475
So I'll mention three such theories.

10:55.685 --> 10:58.195
First is socio ter theory developed

10:58.195 --> 10:59.795
by Mark Leary and Roy Boy Meister.

11:00.095 --> 11:03.645
Second might be called Mating Theory, as pursued

11:03.645 --> 11:05.245
by researchers such as Baylor Archer.

11:05.265 --> 11:07.245
And a third is social rank theory,

11:07.975 --> 11:11.245
which focuses more on emotions like, depression,

11:11.245 --> 11:12.365
anxiety, shame, or pride.

11:13.225 --> 11:17.855
So, first socio theory in its original form,

11:17.955 --> 11:20.335
it emphasized being accepted

11:20.395 --> 11:22.735
and cherished as opposed to respected

11:22.735 --> 11:24.815
and admired as a source of self-esteem.

11:25.875 --> 11:28.175
So that is a focus on people being included

11:28.895 --> 11:30.315
rather than having status

11:30.935 --> 11:33.595
and research, including our own shows.

11:33.825 --> 11:36.955
This is as important a determinant of self-esteem

11:37.135 --> 11:38.275
as as status.

11:39.295 --> 11:40.435
So, communion

11:40.435 --> 11:43.475
and relationships matter as much as agency and success.

11:44.535 --> 11:45.555
Um, what's less there,

11:45.555 --> 11:49.075
however, is whether drops in self-esteem make people strive

11:49.135 --> 11:50.195
to recl themselves.

11:50.295 --> 11:52.555
That's what predicts.

11:53.045 --> 11:55.865
But some evidence suggests, the opposite is true,

11:55.865 --> 11:59.665
that people are friendlier when their self-esteem is

11:59.665 --> 12:00.945
higher rather than lower.

12:02.595 --> 12:06.655
Now, mating theory has found that, people's appeal

12:06.655 --> 12:08.335
to potential sexual partners is

12:08.335 --> 12:09.575
also a source of self-esteem.

12:09.595 --> 12:13.835
So being fancied and desired as opposed to respected

12:13.835 --> 12:15.355
and admired or accepted

12:15.415 --> 12:18.115
and cherished also make us like ourselves.

12:19.165 --> 12:21.945
And exactly how this integrates with our theory

12:21.945 --> 12:24.865
and socio theory, needs to be worked out.

12:25.165 --> 12:26.785
But here's one possible idea.

12:28.415 --> 12:30.435
So, the idea is

12:30.435 --> 12:34.315
that people produce social value in three, in three ways.

12:35.675 --> 12:39.335
So first way is by being competent, by producing the goods,

12:40.155 --> 12:41.375
and that way you gain status.

12:42.565 --> 12:45.625
The other is by being kind, by distributing the goods,

12:46.625 --> 12:49.205
and that, generates inclusion.

12:49.625 --> 12:51.805
And the third might be just by being attractive,

12:52.585 --> 12:53.885
by being the goods yourself.

12:54.505 --> 12:57.685
So, that might be called, celebrity.

12:57.905 --> 13:01.005
So these are three ways, three sources of self-esteem.

13:01.305 --> 13:03.885
Our Amal theory deals primarily,

13:03.905 --> 13:05.525
and down theory, primarily with the first

13:05.635 --> 13:07.645
through getting satisfied, producing the goods.

13:08.025 --> 13:10.245
And then finally, there's social rank theory.

13:10.425 --> 13:13.445
And that, focuses on the emotions

13:14.115 --> 13:16.485
that often go together with self-esteem.

13:16.785 --> 13:20.165
So these include depression, anxiety when self-esteem is low

13:20.165 --> 13:22.085
and shame, but pride when it's high.

13:23.335 --> 13:24.395
So people have theorized

13:24.395 --> 13:27.875
that these emotions also serve, a function.

13:28.535 --> 13:31.115
The question is how, how does self-esteem

13:31.115 --> 13:33.795
and how do these emotions relate to each other?

13:35.055 --> 13:36.675
So I think a very plausible suggestion

13:36.675 --> 13:39.675
that self-esteem is the trigger for these emotions.

13:40.825 --> 13:43.805
Um, but that's difficult to demonstrate empirically

13:43.805 --> 13:46.725
because, well, they're very closely connected.

13:47.065 --> 13:50.815
Um, so sorting that out is will, will be a challenge.

13:51.195 --> 13:53.215
So those would be some future directions.

13:53.435 --> 13:54.375
The research might take.

00:00 - The word esteem is common to both the terms self-esteem and social esteem. So let's start with finding that to esteem something simply means to, to evaluate it positively. So why are things typically esteems?

00:13 - well, the reason is they have some value or worth to somebody. For example, we esteem or we like, a, a new car because it gets us from A to B or because it looks cool or for several other reasons. now, importantly, one can also have positive or negative esteem. One can like something or dislike. So if an old car breaks down, for example,

00:36 - or looks battered, then we use it negatively. Now we're accustomed to thinking of physical objects like cars as having a value or worth. However, people can also have a value or worth, to other people. So suppose person A is competent, kind, and attractive, whereas person B is an apt, mean or ugly, now might be a bit rude to say so, but person A generally has more value socially speaking than person B does.

01:04 - So one might say that that person A, enjoys more social esteem than person B. Okay, so that's social esteem. What about self-esteem? Well, human beings have big brains and fancy minds, so they're aware of their own existence and they can form conceptions of themselves. and this includes having con conception of their own worth, or value. So just as other people can like or dislike a person,

01:29 - so a person can like or dislike themselves. So self-esteem, is the personal counterpart of social esteem liking, or disliking oneself. So with that distinction, then we can ask several questions. So what is the relation between social esteem and self-esteem? And what function or functions might self-esteem serve in a social context, context? And what are the causes, or consequences of having high or low self-esteem?

01:59 - There are two theories, dominance theory and harter theory. The dominance theory is an older theory. It's developed by Jerome Barco. An anthropologist Harter theory is a more recent theory developed by myself and my psychologist, colleagues, professor Constantine and Dr. Nikila Ma Devan. So both the start from the premise that human psychology is shaped by our evolutionary past, and the aspects of our minds can be understood as adaptations that aid survival and reproduction.

02:29 - This includes self-esteem and things related to it. So let's start with dominance theory. So it begins by noting that animal societies like, like human ones are stratified. So that's to say that humans and other animals occupy ranks in a hierarchy. Some are on top, others on the bottom, most in the middle, in terms of, say their access to valued resources, mates or territory. Now, in non-human animals,

02:56 - disputes over goods like those, They're handled not always to open combat, but sometimes by ritualized dominance and submission displays. And as a result, you have the formation of what are called pecking orders that are well regulated where animals seem to know their place. And these arguably evolve because they serve to keep overall levels of conflict down, or all concerned

03:19 - where wherever they are in the, in the hierarchy. Now, nonetheless, in non-human animals, except maybe some of our nearest relatives, those at the top of the hierarchy, they get there by having or by projecting greater physical power. So the top dog is always the, the most powerful dog. and so it would make sense to have, for all animals to have a drive to acquire and maintain the power. Now, what dominance theory says is that in human beings, the impulse to physically dominate others has been largely

03:51 - transformed into an impulse to symbolically evaluate oneself as superior. So in a way, it's a misnomer. It's not really dominance theory, it's it's saying dominance has has been turned to something else. And dominance theory says that this, impulse to see oneself as superior, it calls that self-esteem. And you can see this transformation as being the result of animal instincts colliding with a bigger human brain

04:16 - over the course of evolution. So now, how do you succeed at evaluating yourself as superior? So Dom's theory suggests that the way to do that is gain prestige in the eyes of others. So loosely speaking, it says that human beings no longer seek to impose only tyrannical rule like most other animals, but they also try to get the democratic vote of their fellow human beings.

04:40 - So, essentially the end dom's theory says that self-esteem can come about through achieving social esteem. That's Dom's theory i's theory. Then, there are several points of agreement, but also some points of disagreement. So RA theory agrees about prestige. It says that being respected and admired by others is one primary source of self-esteem. And indeed, nowadays the world's status is used in the

05:09 - psychological literature to denote being respected and admired. And in contrast, the word rank is used to denote higher positions that are hierarchy that are not necessarily attended, by respect to admiration, but also by power struggles. So, that's a point of agreement. But the point of disagreement is that arm theory disagrees about the definition of self-esteem. So dominant theory says it's a type of thriving,

05:36 - but self-esteem, I think, is best characterized as a type of perception of your value and the describe. To see yourself positively or not see yourself negatively nowadays, that's referred to as the motive to self enhance or to self protect. And secondly, self-esteem isn't only about seeing yourself as superior to others. you can like or dislike yourself, without liking or disliking yourself more or less than others. Now, in addition, Dom, harary, pardon me.

06:06 - In addition, har theory goes further than dominance theory predictably. So it accepts that people strive for status and compete for it, but crucially, it acknowledges that it can be a mistake to strive and compete too much. And the reason is people can lose contest per status as well as win them. So if your initial status is high, contests are more likely to be won.

06:31 - But if your initial status is low, they're more likely to be lost. So the thrive in human society, people need to regulate their status seeking, judiciously and not just engage in it unconditionally. So it's like playing poker. you tend to bit more when you already hold a good hand. It's not fair, but that's, that's probably how it works. Okay, so how does self-esteem come into all this? Well, theory claims self-esteem is a crucial gear in the

06:57 - psychological mechanism. But first, your self-esteem will reflect your status. If people respect and admire, your self-esteem will rise. And if they don't, it'll fall. And that's what we call self esteem's indicative function. It indicates your social esteem and second, self-esteem will govern your assertiveness. If your self-esteem is high, you'll compete. And if it's low, you won't. So that's called self esteem's imperative function.

07:23 - So it makes you compete when the odds are good, but it stops you from com competing, when the odds are poor. So harm theories not only says that, self-esteem mirrors social esteem. It also says that self-esteem can make you strive for social esteem more or less, at least the type of social esteem that involves being, respected and admired. These are interesting theories, but, theories are always answerable to, to evidence.

07:51 - so there is sort of circumstantial evidence, and then we're telling evidence for ter theory, I would say. So first, you've got the correlational evidence. You measure people's status through esteem and assertiveness. They tend to go together. So the same people who are objectively popular who report being popular, and they also report liking themselves. And the same people report liking themselves.

08:13 - They report being more confident at standing up for themselves or taking the initiative. so we've all, we've established this, you know, at the level of traits and, and people's ongoing situations, but also we find that, in day-to-day fluctuations in people's status, self-esteem, and assertiveness. they, these go up and down from day to day. They're not constant, but they, they also fluctuate, together.

08:40 - So, there's sort of good correlational evidence, but I think, I think the best evidence is experimental. So we've done studies in lab, we bring participants in and we have them complete a bogus test on the basis of which we give them false feedback, and we tell them your future status is likely to be higher or lower. This is a valid and reliable test, and most of them believe that. and then they fill out a seemingly unrelated

09:04 - self-esteem afterwards. and what you find is that that goes up and down too. So experiments like this in the lab, they're important because they isolate the hypothesized causal mechanism In correlational studies, you know, we could show a link between status, and self-esteem, but we could never be sure some other factor wasn't accounting for the relationship. So, we need to conduct more research, along these lines.

09:28 - and in particular, we need to do more work on the link between self esteem and behavior certainly. But so far, at least to my knowledge, no, findings have emerged that contradict, higher theory. They're all consistent, with it. but I will say this, so, I should acknowledge a, a limitation. So social esteem isn't the only determinant of self-esteem. So they cope very statistically and experimentally, but not perfect.

09:57 - So you always find cases where social esteem is high, and self-esteem is low. so for example, your productive people who are nonetheless depressed. and you have the opposite too, ca cases where social esteem is low, but self-esteem is high criminals, for example, who remain fond of themselves. So Haram rat theory is meant to apply in general, but not, not to explain every single case.

10:19 - Okay? So I think I would say that our, our empirical work on haram rat theory helps us to classify what functions self-esteem might serve, and the link between social esteem and self-esteem. Now, in summary, I would say, self-esteem may have evolved partly to, to reflect how much people are respected and admired, and to control how keen they are to seek additional status. So future work, I think, is likely to focus on evaluating the significance

10:49 - of arm theory in the context of other modern theories. So I'll mention three such theories. First is socio ter theory developed by Mark Leary and Roy Boy Meister. Second might be called Mating Theory, as pursued by researchers such as Baylor Archer. And a third is social rank theory, which focuses more on emotions like, depression, anxiety, shame, or pride. So, first socio theory in its original form,

11:17 - it emphasized being accepted and cherished as opposed to respected and admired as a source of self-esteem. So that is a focus on people being included rather than having status and research, including our own shows. This is as important a determinant of self-esteem as as status. So, communion and relationships matter as much as agency and success.

11:44 - what's less there, however, is whether drops in self-esteem make people strive to recl themselves. That's what predicts. But some evidence suggests, the opposite is true, that people are friendlier when their self-esteem is higher rather than lower. Now, mating theory has found that, people's appeal to potential sexual partners is also a source of self-esteem.

12:09 - So being fancied and desired as opposed to respected and admired or accepted and cherished also make us like ourselves. And exactly how this integrates with our theory and socio theory, needs to be worked out. But here's one possible idea. So, the idea is that people produce social value in three, in three ways. So first way is by being competent, by producing the goods, and that way you gain status.

12:42 - The other is by being kind, by distributing the goods, and that, generates inclusion. And the third might be just by being attractive, by being the goods yourself. So, that might be called, celebrity. So these are three ways, three sources of self-esteem. Our Amal theory deals primarily, and down theory, primarily with the first through getting satisfied, producing the goods. And then finally, there's social rank theory.

13:10 - And that, focuses on the emotions that often go together with self-esteem. So these include depression, anxiety when self-esteem is low and shame, but pride when it's high. So people have theorized that these emotions also serve, a function. The question is how, how does self-esteem and how do these emotions relate to each other? So I think a very plausible suggestion that self-esteem is the trigger for these emotions.

13:40 - but that's difficult to demonstrate empirically because, well, they're very closely connected. so sorting that out is will, will be a challenge. So those would be some future directions. The research might take.

Faculti AI can make mistakes