正在加载图片...
CHUNG ET AL college o that people have at least some insight into the way The literature on perceived change in personality suggests that s at the first and last ents (first week and fourth miht not be were n and we might expect to find the stronge 05)and one historyand ntal phas (as evic hold incomes belov Tr et al.. rom fan es with household 100.00 change Present Study Measures nicity,sex and socioeconomic s (SESed their cth and ve group.Sex was coded as(male)and 1 (female).Socio about sel SES)to 5 (high SES).The ES ma diffe tlevel of education npleted.father's highest level of t is the traie of self erg.1965)scale thrce times during th are there men-eveordreasesnsf (RSE:R 80 to 01- sbetween expected and actualg ) m change?F th. and respond to actual changes GPA on30001400 Method scale)were obtained from university rco ds every semester for d Sample and Procedure (h ge.participants were This research used data from the Berkeley Longitudinal Stud ongitudinal to examine th bout the study. k you will attain at UC Berkeley "Wha first year of college and then assessed annually throughout college ermade on a GPA scale ranging(ll)to00 Perceived self-esteem change.Perce was as ssed at the end the first (N=306).second (N=260).third (N=200).and fourth yeof Rosenberg Self-Estcem Scale eek of college(N 489)end of the first er (N 05 and end of the first ().second ().third (N197). stud山y college to argue that people have at least some insight into the way their personality changes over time. The literature on perceived change in personality suggests that there might not be a strong correspondence between perceived and actual change in self-esteem. However, of all the developmental stages, we might expect to find the strongest correspondence during emerging adulthood, because young adults are actively focused on identity issues (Erikson, 1964; Harter, 1999; Pals, 1999) and engaging in a process of “open exploration” (Fleeson & Heckhausen, 1997, p. 134). Constructing one’s identity necessitates a good deal of self-reflection, which may promote insight into one’s life history and experiences. Moreover, there is a substantial amount of intraindividual variability in changes in self-esteem during this developmental phase (as evidenced by relatively low rank-order stability; Trzesniewski et al., 2003), which should increase the range of individual differences in self-esteem, making it easier to find stronger correlations between perceived and actual change. Present Study The present study examined self-esteem continuity and change in emerging adulthood using longitudinal data on a large sample of young adults followed through their college years. Participants completed the Rosenberg (1965) Self-Esteem scale six times over the course of college. These data provide a unique opportunity to learn more about self-esteem change during an important developmental transition. More specifically, the present research addresses four main questions concerning self-esteem development in emerging adulthood: First, to what extent are individual differences in self-esteem stable through the college years? Second, what is the trajectory of self-esteem over the course of college; that is, are there mean-level increases or decreases in self-esteem during this time? Third, to what extent do changes in grades and discrepancies between expected and actual grades predict selfesteem change? Fourth, to what extent do young adults think their self-esteem has changed, and how well do these perceptions correspond to actual changes in self-esteem scores? Method Sample and Procedure This research used data from the Berkeley Longitudinal Study, a longitudinal study designed to examine the development of self-esteem and personality during college (for further details about the study, see Noftle & Robins, 2007; Robins & Beer, 2001; Robins, Fraley, Roberts, & Trzesniewski, 2001; Robins et al., 2005).2 Participants were recruited during the first week of their first year of college and then assessed annually throughout college. Participants were contacted by mail and asked to complete an extensive questionnaire in exchange for financial compensation. Six assessments were conducted over a 4-year period: first week of college (N 508); end of the first semester (N 455); and end of the first (N 306), second (N 260), third (N 200), and fourth (N 303) years of college. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) was administered at every assessment: first week of college (N 489); end of the first semester (N 405); and end of the first (N 306), second (N 295), third (N 197), and fourth (N 303) years of college. Our analyses focused on a subsample of participants (N 295) who completed the relevant measures at the first and last assessments (first week and fourth year). On most variables of interest, there were no differences between participants and nonparticipants. However, participants received significantly higher grades throughout college than nonparticipants (Mdn .24 grade points across the eight assessments, ps .05) and were more likely to be women (60% vs. 50%, p .05). In light of these differences, the participants in the study may not represent an unbiased sample of the original study participants. The sample was diverse in terms of ethnicity (43% Asian, 36% Caucasian, 12% Chicano/Latino, 5% African American, 4% Missing/Other/Multiracial), sex (60% female), socioeconomic status (20% came from families with 1992 household incomes below $25,000 and 17% from families with household incomes above $100,000), and academic ability (combined verbal and math SAT scores ranged from 650 to 1,530; M 1,194, SD 173). Measures Demographic variables. Participants self-reported their ethnicity, sex, and socioeconomic status (SES; see Table 1 for correlations among demographic variables). To retain adequate sample sizes, we classified participants as Caucasian, Asian, or non-Asian minority; this variable was dummy coded with Caucasians as the reference group. Sex was coded as 0 (male) and 1 (female). Socioeconomic status (SES) ranged from 1 (low SES) to 5 (high SES). The SES variable is a composite of three items that assessed mother’s highest level of education completed, father’s highest level of education completed, and annual family income. Self-esteem. Participants completed the 10-item Rosenberg Self-Esteem (RSE; Rosenberg, 1965) scale three times during the first year of college, and then annually for the next 3 years (alpha reliability ranged from .89 to .91; see Table 1 for all estimates). Items were rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not very true of me) to 5 (very true of me). To examine change in self-esteem, we conducted a latent growth curve model (LGCM; Bollen & Curran, 2006) using all six RSE assessments. Academic achievement. Student GPAs (on a 0.00 to 4.00 scale) were obtained from university records every semester for 4 years (eight assessments total). Expected academic achievement. During the first week of college, participants were asked three questions about their expected performance in college: “What overall GPA do you think you are capable of attaining at UC Berkeley?” “Realistically, what overall GPA do you think you will attain at UC Berkeley?” “What is the lowest overall GPA you would be satisfied attaining at UC Berkeley?” (alpha reliability .87). For all three items, responses were made on a GPA scale ranging from 0.00 (all F’s) to 4.00 (all A’s). Perceived self-esteem change. Perceived self-esteem change was assessed at the end of the fourth year of college. Participants were 2 The following articles also report self-esteem findings using data from the Berkeley Longitudinal Study: Orth, Robins, and Meier (2009); Orth, Robins, and Roberts (2008); Robins and Beer (2001); Robins, Hendin, and Trzesniewski (2001); Robins and Pals (2002). However, the research questions addressed by these studies overlap only minimally with the present study. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 4 CHUNG ET AL