Self-Esteem Research, Theory, and Practice Toward a Positive ...

A Two-Factor Self-Esteem Enhancement Program 199I do not want to reinforce that behavior. It is important to try to limitparts I and II to the first half of the session, so the best guideline toremember is to keep one’s explanations clear, short, and to the point.Step 3: Interpreting the MSEI. We know that a good self-esteemenhancement program involves assessing self-esteem and that this processcan be complex. Fortunately, the MSEI is easy to administer and interpretin a group setting, providing one has the proper credentials and is familiarwith the manual. However, scoring the results and writing profilesdoes take time and should be done by the clinician between the first andsecond sessions. The MSEI provides percentage and t-scores on the 11scales for each gender, and the test manual shows how to interpret them.Remember, the normative samples are limited, and age and various culturalfactors might affect scores (Sue & Sue, 1990), so I recommend asimple scoring and interpretive procedure when working in the groupformation. The handout that I have designed for this purpose is labeledWeek 2—Handout 2: Applying the Multidimensional Self-EsteemInventory Scales. The handout is constructed so that it presents the 11scales at the top of the page and then presents only 4 for a given individual:the two highest scores and the two lowest scores. This streamlinedpresentation of results allows me to individualize the scores in a way thatis meaningful for the participant, without having to either explain t-scoreconversions or go over the complete profile for each person, either ofwhich would be unwieldy in a group setting.To save time, I begin the interpretive process by going over the 11scales and by grouping them into three clusters: general self-esteemindices, those that are related to competence, and those that are connectedto worthiness. One may even develop a brief handout thatexplains all the scales if that seems desirable for a particular group. Then,I ask participants to look at their two highest and their two lowest scoresand to make sure they understand what those scores mean. I answerquestions to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to clarify whatthe results are suggesting for them and then ask if they can identify withthe findings. Usually most people say “Yes,” which makes the test seemmore credible to the group. The individual practitioner is free to presentthe results in other ways or to use other forms, but I caution againstbecoming overly technical with the reports and against getting boggeddown with too many details.The MSEI provides several kinds of information about an individual’sself-esteem that can be useful in the program. The Global Self-Esteem scale, for instance, is a composite figure that tells us somethingabout the individual’s general level of self-esteem. Another general scale,the Identity Integration score, is less useful because identity is such a