Psychology

The primary goal of those who doubt themselves is to lower their ability as a plausible excuse for performing poorly. When a great percentage of what we usually do is analyzed  both by ourselves and others  there is always that self desire to appear smart. We want to exhibit that we are professionals in whatever responsibility we undertake intellectual, athletic, social or artistic. If we happen to fail in any given area, this lowers our feeling of proficiency and affects our self-esteem in a negative manner. However, what will happen when the person who failed was handicapped in a way  defective equipment, a sleepless night, the flu or inefficient assistance The paper gives an analysis of the article in comparison to the activity discussion statement. Other theories are also discussed in relation to the statement giving an example on each theory. At the end is a summary of what has been covered in the paper.

Introduction
Self esteem is that feeling at the inner core of ones being of self-confidence, self worth, and self respect. It is a crucial parameter for success and love in life. It makes an individual to have an intellect of self-worth and attach appropriate value to oneself. The tragedy of self worth is that one cannot embrace it however it is present each and every time one considers ones ideal self. It is important since it assists human beings to feel proud of who they are and the much they can accomplish in life (Kruger and Dunning, 2009). It gives one the courage to explore new dimensions in life, hence enabling one to attain greater heights in life. It allows one to respect oneself, especially when one is in the wrong. The people around a person are likely to respect the person, if he too respects himself. Psychological researches indicate that it is better for one to have self-esteem than to be popular (Kruger and Dunning, 2009). The argument here is that self-worth comes from what one feel about himself and what one has achieved. This is exclusive of what others have accomplished. Failure to compare one to others implies that one have the potential to lead a good and happier life (Wickland and Brehm, 1976).  People who seem to embrace all the self worth in the world are comfortable and composed in any given peril, respond with grace and poise to challenges with confidence and they express themselves with ease. If one desires to possess such self-assurance, it needs a far fetched sense of self-confidence and self-esteem. It puts one to task and needs inner strength. Equipped with this two, ones ability to interact with high profiled people with authenticity and assurance will be enhanced. It can also improve ones way of facing confrontational and difficult situations.

The argument in this paper is that individuals are motivated to maintain a sense of consistency among their beliefs and perceptions about themselves. When there is a discrepancy between the actual self and the ideal self, an individual experience distress. As human beings we have a need for positive self-esteem to feel good about ourselves. Can this need be so strong that it overpower our logic and lead us to act in ways that are not to our own benefits In this paper analysis and evaluation of the magnitude and repercussions of this need will be considered in comparison to other related theories.

To be able to maintain our self-confidence, we are forced to constantly try to defend our self-esteem. Consequently, some people go overboard all in the name of maintaining positive self-esteem.
The main aim of those who doubt themselves is to lower their ability as a plausible excuse for performing poorly. When a great percentage of what we usually do is analyzed  both by ourselves and others  there is always that self desire to appear smart. We want to exhibit that we are professionals in whatever responsibility we undertake intellectual, athletic, social or artistic. If we happen to fail in any given area, this lowers our feeling of proficiency and affects our self-esteem in a negative manner.

However, what will happen when the person who failed was handicapped in a way  defective equipment, a sleepless night, the flu or inefficient assistance Then failure cannot be admitted as a likeness of ones self-esteem, can it A self-handicapper makes use of this logic to his or her own advantage. The person places a blockade to successful achievement on the way to completion of that duty. The above and many other illustrations in psychology indicate that a person can do anything-be it lies, forgery and sweet talking to sustain their status (Kruger and Dunning, 2009).

Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
This is the discernment of incongruity between two specific cognitions, which may be explained as any facet of knowledge, consisting of emotion, attitude, behavior or belief. This theory holds that contrasting cognitions act as a force that compel the mind of an individual to invent or acquire new beliefs and thoughts, or to manipulate existing one, so as to decrease the anticipated conflict (dissonance) between cognitions. Several experiments have been attempted to prove this hypothetical driving force. Cognitive dissonance theory was proposed first by Festinger Leon, a psychologist in 1956 after keenly observing the belief of counterintuitive persistence of a doomsday  HYPERLINK httppsychology.wikia.comwikiCult o Cult cult members and the increased tension after the prophecy of their leader failed. The theory can be applied in various life situations (Kruger and Dunning, 2009). So long as the magnitude of conflict is enough to warrant a menace to the attitude of status quo, the tension of cognitive conflict or dissonance should be alleviated. This can be done by altering our beliefs or behavior.

People in one way or the other find themselves in a situation, whereby they make a decision only to realize later that the decision they made some years back is likely to affect their self-esteem in a negative way. For example when a lady accepts a marriage proposal from a man based on his current financial position. Later everything collapses and the mans financial status is crippled.  The immediate action in this case is to revoke the decision regardless of whether the other party to the decision will suffer. It is not the wish of the lady to see the man suffer due to her action that went overboard but all this is done blindly to secure her self-esteem (Wickland and Brehm, 1976).

Self-Evaluation Maintenance Theory
Taking a look at a day in the life of Mary, a student at university, we see she has earned a grade better than her classmate who sits beside her in statistics class, lost to her best friend in a causal card game, and finally beat her best friend for the number one spot one the universitys tennis team. It is easy to imagine that each of these three events affected Mary in a positive or negative way. Some of the events might have affected Mary to a large degree, while others did not mean too much to her. One reason why Mary might think or feel differently about herself in each of these situations is that she was comparing herself to others. Social comparison is simply the act of comparing oneself to another person or group in order to gain information about the self. In other words, Mary is comparing herself to her best friend or classmate and basing her self opinion on that comparison. The social comparison process is just one of many areas of research focused on social thinking it is one specific way that individuals think about themselves and others.

Self-evaluation maintenance is one particular theory that has been proposed to explain how self-opinion (i.e., self-evaluation) is affected by the social comparison process. Self-evaluation maintenance states that when we compare ourselves to another, our reactions are based on three important pieces of information (Tesser, 1988). According to Tesser (1988), it is important to note the outcome of an interaction with another, the importance of the activity to our self-concept, and the type of relationship we share with the other. The first of these factors, the outcome of our interaction with another, determines the type of our reaction (positive or negative). Simply put, when we outperform another, we feel better about ourselves. When we are outperformed, we feel worse.

Self-Affirmation Theory
The theory asserts that the overall goal of the self-system is to protect an image of its self-integrity, of its moral Self-Affirmation and adaptive adequacy (Tesser, 1988). When this image of self-integrity is threatened, people respond in such a way as to restore self-worth. One way that this is accomplished is through defensive responses that directly reduce the threat. But another way is through the affirmation of alternative sources of self-integrity. For example, in major league baseball, a hitter could have a long and productive career by maintaining an average scorethat is, by getting a base hit 30 of the time. A great deal of money could be earned and fame accrued. Yet the other 70 of the time, this player would have failed. The vast majority of attempts to hit the ball would result in making an out and thus pose a potential threat to the players sense of personal worth and social regard. People may tend to over do themselves to protect their self-worth (Tesser, 1988). Sometimes this can be so great to an extent of doing something which is contrary to ones will.

Rationalization Trap
Rationalization trap occurs when one strives to decrease dissonance. This may end up in a complete set of rationalizations and justifications that lead to immoral and even ridiculous actions (Kruger and Dunning, 2009). In this theory, one defense results to another. This continues until all those involved gets out of scene. For example, when Richard Nixon was caught up in a Watergate scandal, the denials and arguments developed finally resulted to demise. Bill Clinton on the other end fell down the slope with a woman but eventually he managed to survive, though through embarrassing moments which involved even public confessions. The defense mechanism can go past what is expected of human beings only to avoid conflicts which can harm your integrity in the eyes of public. While seeking justification people usually get desperate and anything to console them is welcome.

Self-Discrepancy Theory
The theory assets that if we are pushed to sustain consistency among various self-perceptions and beliefs that we cling to, it tends to cause conflicts due to invariable differences between our real behaviors and our aspirations. If actual experience is less compared to what we thought we can achieve, there is a tendency to have feelings of sadness and dissatisfaction. If the experience is low such that we feel we must accomplish, we tend to have worry, fear and other related anxiety (Kruger and Dunning, 2009). As it happens with other conflict effects, people will tend to act to lower this conflict by use of various means. For example, if someone has an accident that harms someone else, the fact that they are to be blamed could make them have uncomfortable feelings. To some extent this may lead to all the excuses on earth to cover the imperfections.

Conclusion
The psychological theories provide a framework to comprehend and overcome the many biases of life. At both collective and individual levels, significant domains of functioning-health, conflict, political decision-making, academic performance, and relationships-call forth the motivation to protect the self-esteem. People defensively deny, distort, and integrate reality in a way that shields self-confidence (Dunning, 1999). The associated cost of doing so, of course, is that they miss potential opportunities for growth and learning that, if acted upon, might otherwise amplify their ability to adjust in the long run. Coversely, in the face of daily threats, people can also shield self-integrity through the affirmation of alternative sources of self-confidence. Doing so assists them to admit information and experiences that, although threatening, hold significant lessons for self-improvement (Dunning, 1999). Illuminating the psychology of self-defense, it offers practitioners, teachers, clinicians, mediators, and interventionists more generally theory driven strategies for overcoming self-defense and encouraging self-esteem. The examples discussed under each theory above reflect how someones need for self-esteem might be so great that it overpowers logic and leads them to act against their own best interests.