The Integrated Self-Discrepancy Index: A Reliable and Valid Measure of Self-Discrepancies

Abstract

In this article, we present the Integrated Self-Discrepancy Index (ISDI), a new method for measuring self-discrepancies (Higgins, 1987) that integrates idiographic and nomothetic methods to address important theoretical and methodological concerns in existing measures. In Study 1, 284 undergraduate participants completed the ISDI to measure ideal-own and ought-own self-discrepancies along with measures of dejection, agitation, cheerfulness, and quiescence. In Study 2, we used the ISDI to measure ideal and ought self-discrepancies from both own and other standpoints; 169 undergraduate participants completed measures of depressive symptoms and social anxiety approximately 1 week later. Data from both studies fully support the fundamental predictions of self-discrepancy theory: Ought self-discrepancies were uniquely related to agitation but not dejection, whereas ideal self-discrepancies were uniquely related to dejection but not agitation. In addition, comparisons to previously published data demonstrate that correlations between the ideal and ought self-discrepancies are significantly lower using the ISDI than using other measures of self-discrepancies, suggesting that the ISDI is better able to measure ideal and ought selves as distinct constructs. This measure may provide researchers with a simpler and more valid method to measure self-discrepancies, contributing to our understanding of the importance of self-discrepancies in many applied literatures.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Jeff T. Larsen for helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript and to Geoffrey Leonardelli for help with the data collection in Study 1.

Notes

¹In addition to the ideal and ought domains of the self, discrepancies from the undesired self may also be assessed. Information about using the ISDI to assess the undesired self may be found in Hardin and Leong (2005) and at http://webpages.acs.ttu.edu/erhardin/ISDI.html.

²A copy of the paper-and-pencil measure may be obtained at http://webpages.acs.ttu.edu/erhardin/ISDI.html. The computerized version is described in Hardin and Leong (2005).

³It is possible that providing a specific word (rich) as an example in the instructions influenced participants' responses. Although we were not able to compare how many participants used the word rich to describe one of their self-states with and without this example, other data suggest that this word did not appear any more often than other common words. Analysis of participants' responses to a computerized version of the ISDI (Hardin & Leong, 2005) showed that rich was listed 229 times by 155 different participants, happy or happiness was listed 230 times by 167 participants, honest or honesty was listed 233 times by 117 participants, and success or successful was listed 227 times by 120 participants.

∗p < .05.

^a Indicates variable entered in Step 2.

∗p < .05.

∗p < .05.

^a Indicates variables entered in Step 2.

∗p < .01.

^a Indicates variables entered in Step 2.

∗p < .05.