Cited by 144Personality Traits and PsychologySport Psychology and PerformanceEmotions and Moral Behavior

The relationship between self-esteem level, self-esteem stability, and cardiovascular reactions to performance feedback

Seery, Mark D., Blascovich, Jim, Weisbuch, Max, Vick, S. Brooke·2004·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

The authors examined the notion that individuals with unstable high self-esteem possess implicit self-doubt. They adopted the framework of the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat and assessed spontaneous cardiovascular reactions in the face of success versus failure performance feedback. Study 1 revealed predicted interactions between feedback condition, self-esteem level, and self-esteem stability, such that participants with unstable high self-esteem exhibited relative threat (a negative reaction) in the failure condition, whereas those with stable high self-esteem exhibited relative challenge (a positive reaction). Study 2 replicated these results and provided additional evidence against plausible alternative explanations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.133

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People who believe more strongly in a just world, individuals with high, stable self-esteem, and socially connected individuals typically exhibit cardiovascular reactivity consistent with challenge states during acute stressful tasks more than individuals who score lower on these constructs.

    “People who believe more strongly in a just world, individuals with high, stable self-esteem (Seery et al., 2004), and socially connected individuals (Cacioppo et al., 2002) typically exhibit cardiovascular reactivity consistent with challenge states during acute stressful tasks more than individuals who score lower on these constructs.”

    From More than a feeling: A unified view of stress measurement for population science (2018) · cites this paper as Seery et al., 2004

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Seery, M. D., Blascovich, J., Weisbuch, M., & Vick, S. B.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2004
Volume
87
Issue
1
Pages
133-145
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2148984495
Cited by
144
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 16
FWCI
6.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
Keywords
self-esteem, self-esteem stability, cardiovascular reactivity, performance feedback, challenge and threat, self-doubt, success and failure feedback, biopsychosocial model, autonomic arousal
MeSH terms
Achievement, Adult, Blood Pressure, Cardiography, Impedance, Electrocardiography, Feedback, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Concept

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review