Wanna Talk About Number One

According to the secret hopes of every outcast high schooler, the college years will be better than the years before. Mainstream media and our parents’ infinite wisdom teach us that the years following our eighteenth birthday are some sort of period of magic, psychological growth during which we “come in to our own” and really “find ourselves.” But what does a “self” even constitute?

In the realm of social psychology, the answer to this question is complex and varied. When considering the cognitive aspects of the self, one of the topics I find most interesting is the idea of self-schemas. Self-schemas are beliefs we hold about ourselves that help guide the manner in which we process information relating to the self (Markus, 1977).  In essence, self-schemas operate like schematics for electrical equipment in that the schematics strip away all but what the engineer deems to be the most vital information concerning the functioning of the equipment. Self-schemas focus on the traits that we perceive to be most central to our cognitive conception of self. Therefore, we are said to be schematic for the traits we consider characteristic of ourselves, whereas we are considered aschematic for traits we don’t believe characterize us well or that we don’t value highly (Markus et al., 1987).

Recently, I unwittingly participated in an exercise that highlighted my own self-schemas as well as those of my classmates. I’m certain that this particular professor only intended the exercise to be a cutesy way to get to know our new classmates on the first day rather than a social psychology lesson, but I think the underlying psychology lesson is a far more interesting story.  The professor asked us to write down what we considered to be our main attributes and to share our lists with our neighbors. At the time I wasn’t able to see that we were actually writing down a list of traits for which we were schematic. In all honesty, I was too busy trying to read in between the lines of my neighbor’s list.

Ok, this guy says he is “intelligent” and “dedicated” which must be code for “gets belligerently drunk on weekends.”

Later, I had the realization that the reason I had to read in between the lines at all was that all of my neighbors described themselves in overwhelmingly positive terms. Whereas my neighbors were all schematic for the sort of traits your parents would love to have describe your current love interest, I turned out to be schematic for equal parts positive and negative traits. I still can’t help but wonder if I’m the odd man out and every other twenty-something “came in to their own” as wholesome, all-American boys and girls when I wasn’t looking.

n = 455

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality 

and Social Psychology, 35, 63–78.

Markus, H., Hamill, R., & Sentis, K. P. (1987). Thinking fat: Self-schemas for body weight and the processing of weight-relevant information. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 50–71.