0% found this document useful (0 votes)
11 views14 pages

SC Prac1 Final

This document assesses self-esteem using Rosenberg’s Self-esteem Scale among 60 college students aged 18-22. The study finds that the average self-esteem score is 17.35, indicating most participants have moderate self-esteem, with a bimodal distribution of scores at 17 and 23. It highlights the correlation between self-esteem and academic performance, suggesting the need for methods to enhance interpersonal communication to improve learning outcomes.

Uploaded by

lohantamanna11
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
11 views14 pages

SC Prac1 Final

This document assesses self-esteem using Rosenberg’s Self-esteem Scale among 60 college students aged 18-22. The study finds that the average self-esteem score is 17.35, indicating most participants have moderate self-esteem, with a bimodal distribution of scores at 17 and 23. It highlights the correlation between self-esteem and academic performance, suggesting the need for methods to enhance interpersonal communication to improve learning outcomes.

Uploaded by

lohantamanna11
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Assessing self-esteem using Rosenberg’s Self-esteem Scale ()

Name: Charvi

Course: BA (H) Applied Psychology

Year: 2nd Year

Semester: 3

Subject: Stats

College Roll No.: 231319


Assessing self-esteem using Rosenberg’s Self-esteem Scale ()

The degree to which we view ourselves favorably or unfavorably, or our general attitude toward

ourselves, is referred to as self-esteem. Both explicit and implicit measurements are possible.

Feelings for oneself that we are not consciously aware of are referred to as implicit self-esteem.

Dijksterhuis (2004) tested if implicit self-esteem might be raised without the subjects' conscious

knowledge by applying the logic of classical conditioning techniques. Following repeated

pairings of positive trait terms (e.g., nice, smart, warm) with representations of the self (I or me)

that were presented subliminally (too quickly for participants to consciously recognize them), it

was discovered that implicit self-esteem was significantly higher for these participants than for

those in a control group who were not exposed to such pairings. According to research, those

who have a high sense of self-worth are less likely to feel threatened after experiencing failure;

this subliminal training method seems to offer a comparable implicit kind of self-defense when

one feels threatened. Young adults with consistently caring parents showed better implicit self-

esteem than young adults with less nurturing parents, according to research by DeHart et al.

(2006). On the other hand, young adults with overprotective parents had lower implicit self-

esteem than young adults with trusting parents when they were teenagers.

When faced with failure, those who have a high sense of self-worth are tenacious and strong.

Both practically and emotionally, they are stable. They are not easily convinced. These people

have no tension between their desires and their ability to succeed and win approval. They

typically respond favorably to a prosperous and joyful life. Positive self-evaluation also has the

benefit of inspiring us to keep going when things get difficult. Indeed, it could even cause us to

overestimate our abilities and become unduly enthusiastic about the future, which would inspire

us to work even harder when we run into roadblocks (Taylor & Brown, 1988). However, low
self-esteem individuals experience extreme mood swings and are quickly swayed by ordinary

occurrences. As a result, they are easily influenced and convinced. People with poor self-esteem

are more prone to emotional highs and lows, fear failure, and concentrate on self-protection in

order to preserve their esteem. They aspire to the same things as people with strong self-esteem

—namely, achievement and acceptance from others. They are less certain, nevertheless, that they

can accomplish these objectives. Additionally, they display a confused self-concept as seen by

their inconsistent responses and varied self-descriptions. Compared to others, they are more

prone to emotional outbursts and mood fluctuations.

Many social diseases, including drug usage, poor academic performance, depression, and eating

disorders, can be caused by low self-esteem. Strong evidence, however, points to a connection

between bullying, narcissism, exhibitionism, self-aggrandizing, and interpersonal violence and

high self-esteem. When someone challenges a man's positive self-perception, he is more prone to

resort to violent behavior. This is due to the fact that having a strong sense of self-worth suggests

being better than other people, which may need to be defended periodically when one's pride is

in jeopardy. It's also possible that the strongest animosity and defensive reactions occur when

instability and high self-esteem are combined (Kernis, Cornell, Sun, Berry, & Harlow, 1993).

People with unstable high self-esteem who fail exhibit physiological reactions suggestive of

threat, which are a reflection of their underlying self-doubt (Seery, Blascovich, Weisbuch, &

Vick, 2004). For those who have a positive self-image, there seems to be a possible drawback as

well as advantages in terms of self-confidence, perseverance after failing at tasks, and readiness

to take on new challenges.

The pursuit of self-worth varies throughout people, social groups, and stages of life. Cultural

differences are one obvious distinction (Falk & Heine, 2015). For instance, research indicates
that while Japanese society emphasizes self-criticism and communality, this is merely a different

means of achieving self-esteem satisfaction; in Western nations, overt self-enhancement is a

more direct means of achieving self-esteem (Kitayama, Markus, Matsumoto, & Norasakkunkit,

1997). According to Mark Leary and his colleagues, self-esteem is a reflection of successful

social connectedness (Leary, Tambor, Terdal, & Downs, 1995), as we see in the next subsection.

The middle of a distribution, or group of scores, is referred to as the central tendency. An whole

distribution of observations' centre location is depicted in a single summary figure. The mean,

median, and mode are the three metrics used to quantify central tendency. The arithmetic average

of a collection of scores is referred to as the mean. It is calculated by dividing the total number of

scores by their sum. Since it is the most accurate and dependable measure, it is regarded as the

most practical method of central tendency. Every item is given an equal weight when calculating

the mean. On the other hand, the extreme values vary [Link], the mean doesn't indicate

the cluster's location. Conversely, the value that appears most frequently in a distribution is

referred to as the mode. Although it is an approximation of central tendency, it is the fastest.

Other frequency curves and histograms can be used to graphically obtain it. A distribution's

median is the point on the potential score scale where half of the scores are below it and half are

above it. The median is the value that splits the distribution in half. The median for raw scores

can be thought of as the centre score in a score frequency distribution. We initially rank the

scores from lowest to highest in order to determine the median. If n (or N) is odd, the median

will be the score that has an equal number of scores below and above it. However, when there is

an even number of scores, there is no middle score, so the median is the point halfway between

the two scores that are in the middle position. Median is not influenced by extreme values;

hence, it is the most representative central measure.


standard deviation refers to the square root of the variance.

Aim

To assess and analyze measures of central tendency and standard deviation using Rosenberg’s

Self-esteem Scale on college students.

Method

Participant

The present study was carried out on 60 participants. The participants lied in the age bracket of

18-22 years.

Tools and Measures

The Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSE) was used here. The purpose of this 10 item RSE scale is

to measure self-esteem. Originally the measure was designed to measure the self-esteem of high

school students. However, since its development, the scale has been used with a variety of

groups including adults, with norms available for many of those groups. The RSE demonstrates a

Guttman scale coefficient of reproducibility of .92, indicating excellent internal consistency.

Test-retest reliability over a period of 2 weeks reveals correlations of .85 and .88, indicating

excellent stability. Furthermore, it also demonstrates concurrent, predictive and construct validity

using known groups. The RSE correlates significantly with other measures of self-esteem,

including the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory. In addition, the RSE correlates in the

predicted direction with measures of depression and anxiety.

Procedure
Instructions

“Given below are 10 items which aim to understand your self-awareness. You are required to

rate the degree to which to agree or disagree with the statements. Kindly read the statements

carefully and record the appropriate answer for each item, depending on whether you Strongly

agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with it.

1 = Strongly agree

2 = Agree

3 = Disagree

4 = Strongly disagree

Feel free to ask doubts, if any.

There’s no time limit, however try responding as soon as possible.”

Administration

The participants were presented with the response sheet once the instructions had been laid out.

The scores for the items were then computed.

Method of processing data

Scoring

Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale comprises of 10 items. For items 1, 2, 4, 6, and 7, strongly agree =

3, agree = 2, disagree =1 and strongly disagree = 0. For items 3, 5, 8, 9, and 10 (which are
reversed in valence), strongly agree = 0, agree = 1, disagree = 2 and strongly disagree = 4. Once

the items scored in the before mentioned way, their aggregate was calculated and interpreted

accordingly.

Results

Data

Attached in the appendix

Results table

Mean of all the sixty responses was calculated by dividing the aggregate of all the responses by

total number of response. subsequently , the median, i.e. the middle most observation, and mode,

i.e. the observation occurring the maximum number of times, were noted. Once these measures

of central tendency were found, the standard deviation for this data was calculated. Standard

deviation is the square root of the variance. In order to calculate the variance, the square of the

aggregate of the raw scores subtracted from the mean value was divided by the total number of

items.

X X-M

2 -15.35
4 -13.35
7 -10.35
8 -9.35
9 -8.35
9 -8.35
9 -8.35
10 -7.35
11 -6.35
11 -6.35
11 -6.35
12 -5.35
12 -5.35
12 -5.35
14 -3.35
14 -3.35
15 -2.35
15 -2.35
15 -2.35
16 -1.35
16 -1.35
16 -1.35
16 -1.35
16 -1.35
17 -0.35
17 -0.35
17 -0.35
17 -0.35
17 -0.35
17 -0.35
17 -0.35
18 0.65
18 0.65
19 1.65
20 2.65
20 2.65
20 2.65
20 2.65
20 2.65
21 3.65
21 3.65
21 3.65
21 3.65
21 3.65
22 4.65
22 4.65
23 5.65
23 3.65
23 3.65
23 3.65
23 3.65
23 3.65
23 3.65
24 6.65
24 6.65
25 7.65
25 7.65
26 8.65
26 8.65
27 9.65
TOTAL 1041 -12

Here, M refers to Mean.

Mean = ∑X/n

= 1041/60

= 17.35

Mode in this case are 17 and 23 as these are the most often occuring items in the data.

Median = (30th + 31st items)/2

= (17+17)/2

= 34/2
= 17

Standard Deviation = √ {[∑(X − M)²]/n }

= √ {-12²/60}

= √{144/60}

= √2.4

= 1.54

Mean 17.35

Median 17

Mode 17, 23

SD 1.54

Discussion

The purpose of the study was to evaluate college students' self-esteem. Here, the Rosenberg Self-

esteem Scale was used for this purpose. Participants are asked to indicate how much they agree

or disagree with the statement using a ten-item Likert scale. According to the average of the data

collected from 60 participants, the majority of people have an average level of self-esteem. 17.35

was found to be the mean. Speaking one-on-one, 43 people reported moderate self-esteem,

whereas just 17 people had poor self-esteem. The value that appears most frequently in a
distribution is the mode of the data. It clarifies the value or score that the greatest amount of

individuals are receiving. In this instance, the modes were 17 and 23. This implies that, in

relation to other values, the greatest number of people score either 17 or 23. This further

emphasises the distribution's bimodality. Conversely, when all of the values in a distribution are

listed from lowest to highest, the median is the middle score. The median in this study was also

17. The average degree to which scores deviate from the mean is known as the standard

deviation (SD). First, the raw scores are deducted from the mean value to calculate SD. The raw

scores' deviation from the mean is explained by these variations. To comprehend the variance,

the average of these differences is then computed. The SD is obtained by taking the square root

of the variance. The total of the differences in this investigation came to be -12. After that, this

value was squared and divided by 60 (n). The resulting solution was 2.4, which gave us

SD=+1.54 after taking the square root. This implies that the relevant data has an average

variation of +1.54.

The scale indicates that the range of 15 to 25 represents ordinary self-esteem. The average for

this set of data was 17.35. Therefore, the majority of people have a modest level of self-esteem.

However, there are also outliers. Despite this, the results were unaffected by the outliers. College

students' academic performance and self-esteem have been demonstrated to be significantly

correlated. According to the findings of a study by Luo et al., for example, students' academic

self-efficacy generally decreased during the first three years before slightly increasing during the

graduation year. Male students also had higher academic self-efficacy than female students

during the first two years, while female students' academic self-efficacy outperformed that of

male students in the later years (Luo et. al., 2022). Face-to-face encounters have significantly

decreased as a result of the COVID-19 epidemic, which may have an effect on female college
students' communication and self-esteem. Examining students' levels of communication anxiety

and the moderating effect of self-esteem on the association between communication anxiety and

academic success were the goals of Nisreen Al Awaji and colleagues. According to a cross-

sectional survey of 287 female college students, only 9.8% of them showed low levels of

communication anxiety, whereas 28.2% had significant levels (Awaji et al., 2022). With a self-

esteem score of 24.3 ± 2.14, the pupils had a high level of self-esteem. Additionally, the study

discovered that pupils' grade point average and self-esteem were positively correlated. However,

these associations were not significantly impacted by self-esteem as a moderator. The results

point to the necessity of methods to enhance interpersonal communication and group discussions

in order to enhance learning outcomes. Nonetheless, there are other causes or elements that

might change how someone feels about themselves. Depending on other aspects influencing self-

esteem, alternative methodologies might be used to gain a better knowledge of it.


References

Al Awaji, N., Zaidi, U., Awad, S. S., Alroqaiba, N., Aldhahi, M. I., Alsaleh, H., Akil, S., &

Mortada, E. M. (2022). Moderating Effects of Self-Esteem on the Relationship between

Communication Anxiety and Academic Performance among Female Health College Students

during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public

health, 19(21), 13960. [Link]

Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., Sommers, S. R., & Akert, R. M. (2015). Social Psychology.

Baron, R. A., & Branscombe, N. R. (2012). Social Psychology. Pearson Education.

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2010). Social Psychology and Human Nature,

Comprehensive Edition. Cengage Learning.

Dhawan, M., N T, S., & Kakkar, S. (2022). Body image issues and self-concept dilemmas in

adolescents living with thalassemia. Psychology, health & medicine, 27(3), 598–612.

[Link]

Gudiya, Cecilia, M. S., Satapathy, S., & Ramam, M. (2022). Assessment of Body Image

Disturbance, Self-Esteem and Quality of Life among Adolescents and Young Adults with Acne

in a Tertiary Care Facility of India. Indian journal of dermatology, 67(1), 93.

[Link]

Hogg, M., & Vaughan, G. (2017). Social Psychology. Pearson Higher Ed.

Jose, S., Cyriac, M. C., Sebastian, S., Lidiyamol, P. V., & Dhandapani, M. (2024). Impact of

problematic mobile phone use among nursing students in India: Exploring associations with
depression, insomnia, self-esteem and satisfaction with life. International journal of nursing

practice, 30(5), e13247. [Link]

Luo, Y., Gao, W., & Liu, X. (2022). Longitudinal Relationship Between Self-Esteem and

Academic Self-Efficacy Among College Students in China: Evidence From a Cross-Lagged

Model. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 877343. [Link]

Ngo, H., VanderLaan, D. P., & Aitken, M. (2020). Self-esteem, symptom severity, and treatment

response in adolescents with internalizing problems. Journal of affective disorders, 273, 183–

191. [Link]

Srinivasan, P., Rentala, S., & Kumar, P. (2023). Self-esteem among heinous and non-heinous

male delinquent adolescents- A descriptive comparative study from East India. Industrial

psychiatry journal, 32(2), 273–281. [Link]

Szcześniak, M., Bajkowska, I., Czaprowska, A., & Sileńska, A. (2022). Adolescents' Self-

Esteem and Life Satisfaction: Communication with Peers as a Mediator. International journal of

environmental research and public health, 19(7), 3777. [Link]

You might also like