Decades varied of 18–twenty seven (Yards = , SD = step 1

Decades varied of 18–twenty seven (Yards = , SD = step 1


100 and you will fifty-five college students (77 lady, 78 people) subscribed to often an introductory mindset course or introductory personality way at the University from Missouri participated getting limited pleasure regarding a good course requisite or additional borrowing from the bank. 23). Illustrated ethnicities included 87% European Western, 6% African-Western, 2% Hispanic American, 3% Far eastern American, and you may dos% most other.

True/Real Self Definitions and you may Meaning in daily life Strategies

Participants first completed a number of measures online. Embedded within these measures was an “identity task.” For this task, participants were asked to generate 10 traits which described their true and actual selves. Participants were further instructed that for each of these selves, five of the traits should be ones that they considered positive and five of the traits should be ones that they considered negative. This task was prefaced with the following statement: “People often have a variety of traits that they (or others) like about themselves as well as traits that they (or others) dislike. Next, we would like you to think about the traits that best describe you and are traits that might be seen as positive or negative.” The true and actual self were defined the same as they were in Study 4 and participants were again allowed to list overlapping traits. Participants listed traits for each combination of valence and self-type (positive/true, negative/true, positive/actual, negative/actual) on separate screens. After each trait, participants rated 1 item assessing how much they liked that particular trait: “How much do you like this part of your self?” on a 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much) scale. These ratings were then averaged over the five traits listed for each combination of positive/negative and true/actual (M = 6.30, SD = .64 for positive/true; M = 2.44, SD = .83 for negative/true; M = 5.97, SD = .83 for positive/actual; M = 2.41, SD = .96 for negative/actual). A repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between valence and self-concept type in mean liking ratings (F (1,148) = 6.751; p < .01). Post hoc comparisons revealed that participants reported the highest liking for the positive true self-concept (p's < .01) Additionally, participants reported liking the positive actual self-concept more than both the negative self-concepts (p's < .01). Liking ratings did not differ between the negative true and negative actual self-concepts (p > .10). Finally, participants also completed meaning in life items from the PIL as a Time 1 measure of meaning in life (M = 5.07, SD = 1.32, ? = .86).

Priming Activity

Members accomplished a research class and that taken place everything 14 days following the web survey. People were told they’d end up being completing multiple opportunities to own separate studies. To your priming activity, professionals was basically informed which they could be finishing an excellent “periphery decision task”. Users had been informed that the scientists was indeed in search of how other particular random stimulus carry out apply to its efficiency toward task. The new advice for the task stated that an effective + would appear in the center of the system display which this could be followed closely by a stimulus which may feel demonstrated on the often the right or kept area of the display. People was basically told you to definitely their task is always to imply towards the hence section of the display screen the newest stimulus searched because of the clicking an effective red system, found on the “;” secret if the stimulus checked on the right, or an eco-friendly network, found on the “a” secret, in the event your stimulus seemed towards kept. These people were coached to be hired simply to the + on time of activity.