Cited by 178Social and Intergroup PsychologyDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionPersonality Traits and Psychology

Implicit self-esteem compensation: Automatic threat defense

Rudman, Laurie A., Dohn, Matthew C., Fairchild, Kimberly·2007·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

Four experiments demonstrated implicit self-esteem compensation (ISEC) in response to threats involving gender identity (Experiment 1), implicit racism (Experiment 2), and social rejection (Experiments 3-4). Under conditions in which people might be expected to suffer a blow to self-worth, they instead showed high scores on 2 implicit self-esteem measures. There was no comparable effect on explicit self-esteem. However, ISEC was eliminated following self-affirmation (Experiment 3). Furthermore, threat manipulations increased automatic intergroup bias, but ISEC mediated these relationships (Experiments 2-3). Thus, a process that serves as damage control for the self may have negative social consequences. Finally, pretest anxiety mediated the relationship between threat and ISEC (Experiment 3), whereas ISEC negatively predicted anxiety among high-threat participants (Experiment 4), suggesting that ISEC may function to regulate anxiety. The implications of these findings for automatic emotion regulation, intergroup bias, and implicit self-esteem measures are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.798

Cites

113 of 113 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?

  • The main effect of ISE might suggest that the size of signature is a valid measure of ISE.

    “The main effect of ISE is interesting as it might suggest that the size of signature is indeed a valid measure of ISE (Rudman et al., 2007; Stapel & Blanton, 2004; Zweigenhaft, 1977; Zweigenhaft & Marlowe, 1973)”
  • Theoretical accounts describe adult self-enhancing processes as complex regulation strategies deployed to mitigate the negative affect experienced following a threat to self-positivity.

    “Indeed, theoretical accounts describe adult self-enhancing processes as complex regulation strategies deployed to mitigate the negative affect experienced following a threat to self-positivity (35).”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rudman, L. A., Dohn, M. C., & Fairchild, K.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2007
Volume
93
Issue
5
Pages
798-813
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2162259929
Cited by
178
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 12
FWCI
31.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (BCS-0109997; BCS-0417335)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
self-esteem, threats, self-affirmation, intergroup bias, implicit racism, gender identity, social rejection, anxiety, emotion regulation
MeSH terms
Defense Mechanisms, Female, Humans, Male, Prejudice, Self Concept, Sex Factors, Social Change, United States

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