Psychology

Although an initial reading of the conflicting views regarding whether efforts to improve self-esteem are misguided or desirable might appear to be irreconcilable, a closer examination suggests that these views can, to a certain extant, be harmonized in a manner that makes the continued study of self-esteem and worthy endeavor and which also suggests that self-esteem is related in attenuated though significant ways to certain positive outcomes.  More specifically, the positions taken by Baumeister and Swann are actually fairly nuanced and both arguments acknowledge that the real problem is that the self-esteem research has not been properly framed and that much more empirical evidence is needed in order reach legitimate types of conclusions.  Baumeister and like-minded researchers are simply demanding a more empirically-justifiable discussion of the relevance of self-esteem rather than suggesting that all self-esteem research should be abandoned indeed, their main objective would seem to be to compel policy makers and the public to analyze objective data rather than to rely on idealistic notions of self-worth and happy children when designing programs to enhance effects and outcomes.  Swann-type researchers, on the other hand, implicitly acknowledge that Baumeisters comments are partially correct to the extant that empirical studies do in fact demonstrate weak causal connections between self-esteem and very specific types of outcomes.  The problem that Swann sees, and which the author of this paper agrees with, is that research dealing with extraordinarily narrow outcomes constrains a more balanced analysis of the positive role that self-esteem can play and that researchers out to continue to refine and test new research models in order to more precisely determine how and to what extant self-esteem can positively impact development patterns and outcomes for children and adolescents (Guest, p 206).  It would therefore be too much to suggest that efforts to improve self-esteem are misguided, and it would be more accurate to say that the existing research efforts have been misdirected as scholars attempt to find out how to best quantify the manner in which self-esteem can lead to positive developmental outcomes.

As an initial matter, to the extant that Baumeister argues that attempts like Californias to design and to implement ambitious self-esteem programs are premature he has a legitimate point (Guest, p. 208).  This is not because self-esteem is an irrelevant concern, for it is certainly relevant and beneficial, but because politicians and policy makers have allowed themselves to become unduly influenced by subjective hopes rather than first engaging in a careful examination of the underlying empirical evidence.  It is therefore fair to agree that California has acted somewhat irresponsibly by acting before thinking on the other hand, Californias are admirable to the extant that they acknowledge and attempt to reinforce feelings of positive self-worth for children and adolescents.  More particularly, as noted by Swann et al, peoples self-views do matter, and the task of future researchers is to determine how, when, and with what consequences (Guest, p. 222).  Both Baumeister and Swann agree that more research is needed.  Swann argues in this respect that researchers ought to embrace a more multidimensional conceptualization of self-esteem which accounts for individual differences and variations and this seems a wise criticism of the Baumeister-type research methodologies.

Individuals are quite clearly diverse, intellectually and culturally, and attempting to reduce individual self-esteem or self-worth to a rigid methodological formula is bound to be misleading and incomplete.  One illustration in support of Swanns more expansive theoretical approach to researching self-esteem as an overarching concept with multiple constituent components is the use of sub-concepts such as self-competence and self-liking as predictors of varied types of achievements or outcomes indeed, in some studies, Bosson and Swann used the distinction between self-liking and self-competence to bolster their ability to predict the feedback preferences of participants (Guest, p. 218).  These types of studies suggest quite strongly that Baumeisters conclusions are based on research methods which are too narrowly conceived and perhaps influenced by a distaste for popular trends at the expense of empirical realities.  In the big picture, however, Swanns approach seems sounder and more realistic and there is some empirical evidence to suggest that this is where and how future self-esteem research out to be conducted.  Self-esteem matters and the main focus at present should be on creating and testing multidimensional models such as those being devised and tested by Swann.