Cited by 238Psychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionPersonality Traits and PsychologySocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 58 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Self-esteem and subjective well-being revisited: The roles of personal, relational, and collective self-esteem

Open access

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that self-esteem is an important predictor of subjective well-being. However, the majority of research has focused on self-esteem at the individual and the collective level, but has mostly ignored self-esteem at the relational level. According to social identity theory, individuals can maintain and enhance self-esteem through personal traits (personal self-esteem, PSE), relationships with significant others (relational self-esteem, RSE), and relationships with larger groups (collective self-esteem, CSE). The current research investigated whether RSE and CSE can predict subjective well-being beyond PSE among Chinese college students. With four cross-sectional studies and one longitudinal study (N = 847), we found that, when controlling for PSE, RSE was associated with greater life satisfaction, positive affect, meaning in life, happiness, and subjective vitality (Studies 1-5), but CSE was not (Studies 2-5). Implications are discussed.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Across five studies with Chinese college students, relational self-esteem (RSE) predicted greater subjective well-being beyond personal self-esteem (PSE), whereas collective self-esteem (CSE) generally did not. The authors conclude that RSE is especially salient for well-being in this collectivist context.

Key findings

  • With four cross-sectional studies and one 1-month longitudinal study (reported total N = 847), RSE was associated with greater life satisfaction, positive affect, meaning in life, happiness, and subjective vitality when controlling for PSE (Studies 1–5); CSE was not a significant predictor in Studies 2–5, except a marginal association with meaning in life in Study 2 (β = .14, p = .08).
  • In Study 1, after entering PSE, RSE predicted life satisfaction (β = .40, p < .001), positive affect (β = .34, p < .001), and meaning in life (β = .27, p < .001); PSE was no longer significant for life satisfaction (β = .13) and acted as a suppressor for positive affect (β = −.21, p < .05).
  • In Study 2, RSE predicted subjective vitality (β = .36, p < .001) and meaning in life (β = .26, p < .01), while CSE was nonsignificant for vitality (β = .10) and marginal for meaning (β = .14, p = .08).
  • In Study 5, T2 RSE marginally predicted T2 life satisfaction after controlling for T1 life satisfaction (β = .20, p = .057), while T2 PSE (β = .03) and T2 CSE (β = .08) were not significant; T1 RSE showed a negative suppression effect (β = −.30, p ≤ .05).

Methods

  • Design: four cross-sectional surveys (Studies 1–4) and one 1-month longitudinal survey (Study 5), all with college students in Macau, China; Study 5 final Time 2 sample was 74 participants.
  • Measures: PSE via Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale; RSE via Relational Self-Esteem Scale; CSE via Collective Self-Esteem Scale adapted to Macau-resident identity (Studies 2–3, 5) or Chinese identity (Study 4); outcomes included life satisfaction, positive affect, meaning in life, subjective vitality, and happiness.
  • Analysis: hierarchical regressions testing incremental variance from RSE and CSE after PSE, with independent/interdependent self-construal as covariates in Studies 3–4; Study 5 controlled for Time 1 life satisfaction. Tolerance statistics were > .28 across all five studies, indicating no multicollinearity problem.

Limitations

  • The paper states the data are correlational and cannot establish causal relations; reverse causality remains possible, and future longitudinal and experimental work is needed.
  • The paper states reliance on college students’ self-reports of RSE and CSE; future research should gather information from close others, classmates, and teachers.
  • The paper states that multiple well-being indicators were correlated, so prediction of one indicator may partly reflect shared variance with another; future studies should control for shared variance (e.g., using structural equation modeling). Evident from the text: samples were Chinese college students in Macau, limiting generalizability, and CSE was operationalized only as Macau-resident or Chinese identity.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0183958

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 58 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 68 claims

  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 24
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 26
48 of 48
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is a lack of research on self-esteem at the relational level.

    “However, there is a lack of research on self-esteem at the relational level (relational self-esteem, RSE).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Not much is known about how the three types of self-esteem predict key outcomes especially when juxtaposed against each other.

    “By focusing mostly on PSE and to a lesser extent on CSE, not much is known about how the three types of self-esteem predict key outcomes especially when juxtaposed against each other.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Fewer studies have examined the association between RSE and subjective well-being compared to PSE and CSE.

    “Compared to the more extensive research on PSE and CSE, fewer studies examined the association between RSE and subjective well-being.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most existing evidence on RSE and subjective well-being is indirect at best.

    “Unfortunately, most of the existing evidence is indirect at best.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Chinese/Macau context is collectivist, or more collectivist than Western contexts.

    “at least in the collectivist Chinese context”
    “among more collectivist East Asians at least”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A 1-month interval is sufficient to detect prospective effects of self-esteem on life satisfaction.

    “we conducted a 1-month longitudinal study and surveyed students’ self-esteem and well-being at two time points”
    “The Time 2 survey (N = 82) was collected 1 month later.”
6 of 6

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Study 1 overstates the incremental variance explained for life satisfaction

    Major

    Using Table 1's correlations, adding relational self-esteem after personal self-esteem yields an R2 increase of about 0.12, not the 0.21 reported for Step 2. The reported Step 2 coefficients are also consistent with an increase of about 0.12.

  • General discussion attributes a life-satisfaction result to Study 2

    Minor

    The discussion includes Study 2 among studies finding that personal self-esteem was not associated with life satisfaction after controls, but Study 2 measured meaning in life and subjective vitality, not life satisfaction.

  • Study 5 cites the wrong bivariate correlation

    Minor

    Table 9 gives the correlation between T1 relational self-esteem and T2 life satisfaction as .52, not .54.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 57 references

3 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. H Tajfel, 2010, I6. Instrumentality, identity and social comparisons, Social identity and intergroup relations, 483

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–238 of 238

Metadata

Authors
Du, H., King, R. B., & Chi, P.
Affiliations
  • Guangzhou University (CN)
  • Education University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • University of Macau (MO)
Corresponding author
Du, Hongfei
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2017-08-25
Volume
12
Issue
8
Pages
e0183958
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2748362049
Cited by
238
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 5
FWCI
18.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • University of Macau (MYRG2016- 00243-FSS)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31600911)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
self-esteem, subjective well-being, collective self-esteem, social identity theory, life satisfaction, positive affect, meaning in life, happiness, subjective vitality, university students, Chinese students
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, China, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Happiness, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Self Concept, Young Adult

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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