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

22 SELF-ESTEEM RESEARCH, THEORY, AND PRACTICEself-esteem over the other, namely the one that is most characteristic of thegeneral social orientation of the culture. Americans, of course, tend to stressthe role of competence in self-esteem because it emphasizes the individualand success. Asians, however, are more apt to emphasize worth and worthinessbecause these cultures are more group oriented and make greater useof interpersonal relationships to hold the social fabric together.Other areas of research that characterize this school include investigatingsuch things as how self-competence and self-liking affect successand failure over time (Tafarodi & Vu, 1997); how such a dual modelaccounts for types of self-esteem (Mruk, 1999; Tafarodi & Milne, 2001);and how to use a two-factor definition of self-esteem to effect change inthe clinical setting (Hakim-Larson & Mruk, 1997). Finally, it is helpful torealize that much of the work that is based on understanding self-esteemin terms of competence and worthiness does not use the phrase “twofactor”or “dual.” Although still reflecting these two factors as crucial,the term “multidimensional” is sometimes used to distinguish the workfrom that which is based on only one of the other two unidimensionaldefinitions. For example, although Susan Harter (1999) uses the terms“self-esteem” and “self-worth” interchangeably, her multidimensionalapproach to self-esteem clearly includes competence and worth as two primarycomponents. Similarly, modern methods of measuring self-esteemeschew the unidimensional approach in favor of a multidimensional one.For instance, the Multidimensional Self-Esteem Inventory developed byO’Brien and Epstein (1983, 1988) assesses several dimensions of affectand behavior that are related to self-esteem. Later we see that most, if notall, of the various dimensions or domains used in “multidimensional”work can be grouped into those that emphasize competence and thosethat focus primarily on worthiness (Mruk, 1999).In sum, the two-factor approach to defining self-esteem is more complexthan unidimensional approaches because it involves always keepingin mind that there are variables to consider when researching or measuringself-esteem. Competence, for instance, is based in part on the degreeto which an individual is capable of initiating action and carrying itthrough to a successful conclusion, especially in regard to dealing withproblems effectively and in terms of reaching significant personal goals.Competence thereby includes such things as motivation, self-efficacy, andother aspects of cognitive style, as well as actual abilities, all of which arelargely intrapersonal psychological processes. In contrast, worthiness, orsimply “worth” as it is more commonly termed in the literature, is moreof a feeling than a behavior, more of an evaluation than an outcome, andit always involves subjective appraisals of value. Such concepts as “right”or “wrong,” “good” or “bad,” or “healthy” or “unhealthy,” and so forthimply more interpersonal and social foundations.