Principal Investigator: dr Ewa Szumowska

Research project objectivesPrevious studies show that people tend to prefer and solicit feedback and interaction partners which view them in the same way they view themselves – a striving referred to as the self-verification motive (Swann, 1983, 2012). Its assumes that people strive to confirm their self-view, even if it is negative, and it is necessary in order to achieve a valid and reliable understanding of the world and navigate through everyday social life with a sense of predictability and subjective efficacy. This motive, next to a persons’ striving for a positive evaluation, has been regarded as one of the fundamental social motives.In this project, we propose to look at self-verifying behaviors as means to an end which is possessing and sustaining certain knowledge, and self-knowledge especially. As mentioned above, the notion that self- verifying behaviors are driven by an epistemic need for certainty is not new and is embedded in the self- verification theory itself (e.g., Swann, 1983, 2012). We, however, emphasize the difference between the goal and the means and argue that self-verifying behaviors are means – used because they are often perceived as most accurate and diagnostic, and hence instrumental to the epistemic goal of possessing certainty.This implies that when there are other, more instrumental means to attain the epistemic goal of certainty available, these means should be preferred and the self-verification effect should not appear. Also, if this is striving for certainty that underlies the self-verification effect, it should be pronounced when attaining certainty is of high importance (either due to individual differences in the desire for certainty, that is, need for cognitive closure, Kruglanski, 1898, or due to situational demands). Furthermore, the self- verification effects should also be pronounced in areas one finds highly important, or central to one’s self- conception; for certainty in such areas is especially functional in epistemic terms.Research methodologyWe plan to test these assumptions in a series of ten experiments broken down into three lines of studies. In all of them we plan to adopt a paradigm typically used in self-verification studies wherein a persons’ self-views are first measured; then, based on questionnaires or a task performed at the beginning of the study, a participant is evaluated, and feedback is provided. Participants’ preference for a feedback or an interaction partner (positive or negative) serve as dependent variables. The self-verification effect appears when people with positive self-views prefer positive feedback/partner and people with negative self-views prefer negative feedback/ partner.In the first line of the studies, apart from the feedback manipulation, we plan to introduce a manipulation of feedback source credibility. Specifically, we will tell one group of participants that evaluations are made by other students (as in other self-verification studies) or by an experienced psychologist who is highly competent to draw conclusions from personality tests (or one’s behavior, depending on a study). Alternatively, we will manipulate information on the evaluators’ accuracy in past trials. We predict that typical self-verification effects will appear when feedback is provided by other students or participants, but not when it comes from a certain or accurate source (as such feedback might more effectively satisfy the need for certainty than self-verifying one). In the latter case, there should not be a preference for self-verifying feedback and people might even prefer a positive feedback, even if it is self- discrepant. The effect should be explained by differences in perceived feedback accuracy (instrumentality).In the second line of the studies, we plan to show that the self-verification effects will be pronounced when need for certainty is of high importance. In two studies, this importance will be operationalized as the differences in the need for cognitive closure levels and in one study it will be manipulated. This will allow to show that this is in fact striving for certainty that underlines the self-verification effect (Spencer et al., 2005).In the third line of the studies, we want to show that self-verification effects should also be pronounced for participants for whom certain self-views are highly important, e.g., views on one’s artistic skills for art students (compared to other students). Moreover, we want to show that when other (than one’s self-views) source of certainty is provided (e.g., an expert’s opinion), self-verification effects should not appear and self-enhancement strivings might be dominant.Expected impact of the research project on the development of scienceThe project undertakes a very important issue of how self-knowledge is formed and how people seek information about themselves. It proposes a new theoretical perspective on the self-verification effect and proposes to look at self-verifying behaviors as a means to an epistemic goal, which is possessing firm and reliable knowledge. It thushelps understand why self-verification effects appear in some situations but notothers (when they are the most instrumental means to the end) and identifies the underlying mechanism aswell as potential moderators of this effect. It also sheds some light on the status of the self-verificationmotive (whether is it a basic motive or a means to a goal). It can thus significantly advance the understandingand research in the area of self-knowledge formation. The results of the studies might also bearconsequences for understanding why people with highly negative self-views (e.g., people in depression)strive for self-confirmatory feedback and can help identify conditions in which this striving is weaker. Itmight thus be a starting point for further, more clinically and practically oriented studies.