Predicting psychological well-being from self-discrepancies: A comparison of idiographic and nomothetic measures

Abstract

This study examined the associations between self-discrepancies, assessed both idiographically and nomothetically, and measures of depression, anxiety, and self-esteem. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that actual – ideal and actual – ought self-discrepancies were significant predictors of the three measures of psychological well-being, even while controlling for individual variability in ratings of the actual self. Further analysis indicated these effects were primarily attributable to the nomothetic, rather than the idiographic, measures of self-discrepancies. Lastly, the results failed to support the central predictions of Higgins' (1987) self-discrepancy theory. Specifically, for both the idiographic and nomothetic measures the actual – ideal discrepancies were not found to be uniquely predictive of depression and the actual – ought discrepancies were not found to be uniquely predictive of anxiety. The results were discussed with regard to the general self-discrepancy literature as well as self-discrepancy theory in particular.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Kristian Alton, James Barraclaugh, Laura Kemp, Clint Martin, Heather Orr, Nicole Rosell, Ashley Ryder, and Tiffany Truitt for their help collecting the data for this study.