Cited by 35Personality Traits and PsychologyIdentity, Memory, and TherapyMemory Processes and Influences

Inclusion-exclusion of positive and negative past selves: Mood congruence as information.

Gebauer, Jochen E., Broemer, Philip, Haddock, Geoffrey, von Hecker, Ulrich·2008·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

The current research challenges the widespread truism that recalling a positive self necessarily increases self-esteem, whereas recalling a negative self necessarily decreases self-esteem. Four experiments demonstrate that chronically happy people show a relative increase in self-esteem by recalling either a positive or a negative self. Chronically sad people, however, show a relative decrease in self-esteem by recalling either a positive or a negative self. These effects are due to divergent perceptions of mood congruence between the recalled self and the current self. Specifically, happy people perceive high mood congruence between a recalled positive self and the current self but low mood congruence between a recalled negative self and the current self. In contrast, sad people perceive high mood congruence between a recalled negative self and the current self but low mood congruence between a recalled positive self and the current self. Independent of chronic mood, mood congruence leads to perceptions of temporal recency, whereas mood incongruence leads to perceptions of temporal distance. In line with the inclusion-exclusion model of social judgment, perceived temporal recency elicits assimilation effects on self-esteem, whereas perceived temporal distance elicits contrast effects on self-esteem.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0012543

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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 psychometric properties of single-item measures typically fall behind those of multi-item measures, but a large body of evidence suggests the SISES may be an exception.

    “The On the Function of Self-Esteem 27 psychometric properties of single-item measures typically fall behind those of multi-item measures; however a large body of evidence suggests that the SISES may be an exception (Gebauer, Broemer, Haddock, & von Hecker, 2008;Robins, Trzesniewski, Tracy, Gosling, & Potter, 2002;Ross & Wilson, 2002).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 75 · Cited by 35

Authors
Gebauer, J. E., Broemer, P., Haddock, G., & von Hecker, U.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2008
Volume
95
Issue
2
Pages
470-487
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2050109757
Cited by
35
References
75
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
self-esteem, mood congruence, self-referential memory, temporal distance, self-concept
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Affect, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Development, Mental Recall, Self Concept, Case-Control Studies

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