Electrophysiological correlates of implicit valenced self-processing in high vs. low self-esteem individuals

Abstract

We provide the first high-temporal resolution account of the self-esteem implicit association test (IAT; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000) to highlight important similarities and differences between the cognitive processes corresponding to implicit valenced self-processing in high vs. low self-esteem individuals. We divided individuals into high and low self-esteem groups based on the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1965) and administered the self-esteem IAT while recording electroencephalographic data. We show that the P2 captured group (high vs. low self-esteem) differences, the N250 and the late parietal positivity (LPP) captured differences corresponding to category pairing (self/positive vs. self/negative pairing), and the N1, P2, and P300–400 components captured interactions between self-esteem groups and whether the self was paired with positive or negative categories in the IAT. Overall, both high and low self-esteem groups were sensitive to the distinction between positive and negative information in relation to the self (me/negative generally displayed larger event-related potential amplitudes than me/positive), but for high self-esteem individuals, this difference was generally larger, earlier, and most pronounced over left-hemisphere electrodes. These electrophysiological differences may reflect differences in attentional resources devoted to teasing apart these two oppositely valenced associations. High self-esteem individuals appear to devote more automatic (early) attentional resources to strengthen the distinction between positively or negatively valenced information in relation to the self.

Keywords:

• Self-esteem IAT
• N1
• P2
• N250
• P3/LPP complex

Notes

¹ Only female participants were used in the present study due to accessibility, but there is reason to believe that the findings presented herein generalize to male participants as well. Despite popular belief, there is very little difference in self-esteem between males and females (Hyde, 2014, 2005; Kling, Hyde, Showers, & Buswell, 1999). For example, large meta-analyses have shown small (d = 0.21, Kling et al., 1999, Analysis 1) or negligible (d = 0.04–0.16, Kling et al., 1999, Analysis 2; d = 0.14, Major, Barr, Zubek, & Babey, 1999) differences between the two genders. A recent Annual Review of Psychology article (Hyde, 2014) concluded that amongst several meta-analyses, the self-esteem literature supports the gender similarities hypothesis (Hyde, 2005).