A number of other major international human rights instruments
contain provisions relating to economic, social and cultural rights. The
Convention on the Rights of the Child
recognizes and protects many of the economic, social and cultural
rights recognized in the ICESCR in relation to children. Including the right to health in Article 24, the right to social security in Article 25, the right to an adequate standard of living in Article 27, the right to education in Article 28, and the right to protection from economic exploitation (see child labour) in Article 32. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
prohibits discrimination on the basis of racial or ethnic origin in
relation to a number of economic, social and cultural rights. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women affirms a range of economic, social and cultural rights to women. The ILO Conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO) protect a range of work related economic, social and cultural rights. Common global standards were agreed by some 195 states in the
Recommendation on Science and Scientific protect and reassert scientific
freedoms, the rights of scientists, and rights of research subjects, and the right of everyone to science.
A range of secondary legal sources exist on economic, social and
cultural rights which provide guidance on their normative definition. An
important secondary legal source is the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which is overseeing the implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR). The Committee has been central in developing the normative
definition of key economic, social and cultural rights, interpreting the
role of State Parties to the ICESCR, and monitoring protection and
violation of the ICESCR rights. The Committee issues guiding
pronouncements in the form of general comments, and other human rights treaty bodies may also issue comments relevant to economic, social and cultural rights.
Other important secondary legal sources on economic, social and
cultural rights are the Limburg Principles on the Implementation of the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1987 and
the Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
1997. The Limburg Principles have been extensively used in national
legal systems as an interpretive tool for establishing violations of
economic, social and cultural rights. The Maastricht
Guidelines build on the Limburg Principles and identify the legal
implications of acts and omissions which are violations of economic,
social and cultural rights. Various United Nations Special Rapporteurs have influenced the normative development of economic, social and cultural rights. Appointed by the Commission on Human Rights
and its sub-commissions, key rapporteurs include the Special Rapporteur
on the Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Special
Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing, the Special Rapporteur on
the Right to Education, and the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women.
National constitutions
A number of national constitutions recognize economic, social and cultural rights. For example, the 1996 Constitution of South Africa includes economic, social and cultural rights and the South African Constitutional Court has heard claims under these obligations (see Grootboom and Treatment Action Campaign cases). The Supreme Court of India has interpreted Article 21 of the Constitution to contain positive social rights.
Constitutional recognition of economic, social and cultural
rights has long been thought to be counterproductive, given that courts
might be tasked to adjudicate them, and hence disrupt the democratic chains of accountability of the so-called elected branches. Nonetheless, a growing literature from the Global South has tracked very different judicial responses.
Sympathetic critics argue that socio-economic rights appear
'quite negligible' factors in terms of ensuring overall human
development. Contemporary welfare states tend to emphasize decommodification, general welfare and the common good,
not rights. Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, for example, adhere to a
comparatively robust welfare effort, built primarily through social
democratic parties and trade union mobilisation, without relying on
judicial review of socio-economic rights. Nonetheless, majoritarian political arenas such as parliaments and
trade union structures may remain unresponsive to minorities. The gains
won through litigation, modest though they may be, can nonetheless be of
value for those who benefit from them.
Civil society movements have advanced alternative institutions,
norms and practices for constitution-making and making socio-economic
rights effective. Participants in recent constitution-making experiments
in Iceland, Bolivia and Ecuador have all linked economic and social rights to new institutional arrangements such as participatory budgeting or technologically-enhanced direct democracy as well as to new norms and discourses, notably those concerning ecological stewardship and the commons as well as care and social reproduction. In Ireland, social movements such as the 'Right2Water' and 'Repeal the 8th' campaigns have demonstrated how highly networked
individuals and communities can mobilise both alongside and outside of
traditional institutions, act collectively, and advance economic, social
and cultural rights.
State parties to the ICESCR are required to take "progressive
action" towards fulfilment of the ICESR rights. While immediate
fulfilment may not be possible due to the economic situation of a
country, postponement of proactive action is not permitted. State
parties must show genuine efforts to secure the economic, social and
cultural rights enshrined in the ICESCR. The burden of proof for
progressive action is considered on be with the state party. The
prohibition on discrimination
in relation to economic, social and cultural rights is regarded as
having immediate effect. State parties must abolish laws, policies and
practices which affect the equal enjoyment of economic, social and
cultural rights and take action to prevent discrimination in public
life. All state parties, regardless of the economic situation in the
country or resource scarcity, are required to ensure respect for minimum
subsistence rights for all. State parties must also ensure that
available resources are accessed and used equitably. Therefore,
government decisions on how to allocate resources should be subject to
scrutiny. Legislative measures alone are not sufficient to ensure
compliance with the ICESCR and state parties are expected to provide
judicial remedies in addition to taking administrative, financial,
educational and social measures.
Monitoring, enforcement and implementation framework
Intergovernmental organisations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have persistently neglected economic, social and cultural rights over the past 50 years. While all human rights are said to be "equal, indivisible,
interrelated, and interdependent", the monitoring, enforcement and
implementation framework for economic, social and cultural rights is
less advanced than that for civil and political rights.
International enforcement mechanisms are strongest for civil and
political rights, and their violation is considered more serious than
that of economic, social and cultural rights. There are few
international NGOs that focus on economic, social and cultural rights
and there are few lawyers who have the knowledge or experience to defend
economic, social and cultural rights at a national or international
level. Economic, social and cultural rights are less likely than civil
and political rights to be protected in national constitutions.
In 2017, for the common global standards in the Recommendation on
Science and Scientific Researchers relating to the right to science,
states agreed at the UNESCO General Conference to adopt four-yearly
reporting on implementation, and agreed that UNESCO's Executive Board is
competent to manage monitoring, with the networks of UNESCO National
Commissions and academic partners mobilized in countries to ensure
implementation and monitoring at country level. For the other major international human rights conventions mentioned
above there are various other treaty bodies to ensure some monitoring of
implementation. And each may transmit to the Human Rights Council
reports of individual cases when a state is the subject of a Universal
Periodic Review.
The right to education places the individual at the centre of education frameworks.
Education as a human right has the following characteristics:
It is a right; Education is not a privilege or subject to
political or charitable whims. It is a human right. It places mandatory
demands on duty-bearers (particularly the state, but also parents,
children, and other actors).
It is high priority; Education is a key priority of the state. Obligations to ensure the right to education cannot be dismissed.
It is a key right; Education is instrumental in ensuring all other human rights. It has economic, social, cultural, civil, and political dimensions.
The right to education places legal obligations
on states when they make decisions regarding education and the
education system. It offers an internationally agreed normative
framework for the standards that states must not fall beneath concerning
the education of its citizens and non-citizens.
Education as a multiplier right
These standards define what states must do and avoid doing in order to ensure the dignity
of the individual. The right to education is broad and covers many
aspects of education. This means that for the specific areas related to
education, states must act within the boundaries permitted under international human rights law (IHRL).
Networking groups such as ESCR-Net
are working to create online resources and spread information about
effective cases, initiatives, and working groups promoting ideals and
celebrating victories of human rights initiatives and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Currently, human rights advocacy groups are working diligently to
fine-tune rules, regulations and implementation schemes; little news of
complaint successes or failures is available. The Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) has helped to establish the Housing and Property Directorate (HPD/HPCC) in Kosovo.
Economy for the Common Good (ECG) is a global social movement that advocates an alternative economic model, which is beneficial to people, the planet and future generations. The common good economy puts the common good, cooperation and community in the foreground. Human dignity, solidarity, ecologicalsustainability, social justice and democratic participation
are also described as values of the common good economy. The movement
behind the model started off in Austria, Germany and South Tyrol (a
German-speaking region in Italy) in 2010 and quickly spread to many
countries throughout the EU. It now has active groups in Africa, Latin
America, North America and Asia. As of 2021, the movement consists of over 11,000 supporters, 180 local chapters and 35 associations.
Christian Felber coined the term "Gemeinwohl-Ökonomie" (Economy for the Common Good) in a best-selling book, published in 2010. According to Felber, it makes much more sense for companies to create a so-called "common good balance sheet" than a financial balance sheet.
The common good balance sheet is a value-based measurement tool and
reporting method for businesses, individuals, communities, and
institutions, which shows the extent to which a company abides by values like human dignity, solidarity and economic sustainability.
More than 2,000 organizations, mainly companies, but also schools, universities, municipalities, and cities, support the
concept of the Economy for the Common Good. A few hundred have used the
Common Good Balance sheet as a means to do their “non-financial”
reporting. These include Sparda-Bank Munich, the Rhomberg Group and Vaude Outdoor. Worldwide nearly 60 municipalities are actively involved in spreading the idea.
Reuniting the economy with the fundamental values guiding society in general. Encouraging business decisions that promote human rights, justice, and sustainability.
Transitioning to an economic system that defines serving the “common good”
as its principal goal. The business community and all other economic
actors should live up to the universal values set down in constitutions
across the globe. These include dignity, social justice, sustainability, and democracy. These do not include profit maximization and market domination.
Shifting to a business system that measures success according
to the values outlined above. A business is successful and reaps the
benefits of its success not when it makes more and more profits, but
when it does its best to serve the public good.
Setting the cornerstones of the legal framework for the
economy democratically, in processes which result in concrete
recommendations for reforming and reevaluating national constitutions
and international treaties.
Closing the gaps between feeling and thinking, technology and nature, economy and ethics, science and spirituality.
The Economy for the Common Good calls for reevaluating
economic relations by, for example, putting limits on financial
speculation and encouraging companies to produce socially-responsible
products.
Common Good Balance Sheet
The common good balance sheet is an assessment procedure for private
individuals, communities, companies and institutions to check the extent
to which they serve the common good. Ecological, social and other aspects are assessed. The procedure is part of the common good economy and was developed by Christian Felber. In conventional balance sheets,
only economic value categories such as profit are taken into account,
whereas the common good balance sheet allows reporting on value to
society and environment, for example.
Common good balance sheets should be easy for everyone to understand; companies should be able to make their common good performance transparent on a single page. In doing so, companies can decide whether to prepare the balance sheet
on their own, assess each other in a "peer-group", or appoint an
independent auditor. This distinguishes the common good balance sheet from conventional
sustainability reports, which are prepared by the companies themselves. The balancing process for small companies is relatively cheap (1,000 Euros).
To date, around 250 companies in the German-speaking world prepare their balance sheets according to Gemeinwohl guidelines, in Europe there are 350–400 companies (as of early 2016). In total, there are 590 German, 631 Austrian, 67 Swiss and 70 South
Tyrolean companies that have registered as supporters of
Gemeinwohl-Bilanz. All peer-group and externally audited Gemeinwohl-Bilanzen are publicly available.
According to proponents of the movement, the success of a company
should not be determined by how much profit it makes, but rather by the
degree to which it contributes to the common good. Companies receive more points in this balance sheet when, for example,
employees are satisfied with their jobs or when the top managers do not
receive exorbitantly more than the lowest paid worker.
Self-esteem is confidence in one's own worth, abilities, or
morals. Self-esteem encompasses beliefs about oneself (for example, "I
am loved", "I am worthy") as well as emotional states, such as triumph, despair, pride, and shame. Smith and Mackie define it by saying "The self-concept
is what we think about the self; self-esteem, is the positive or
negative evaluations of the self, as in how we feel about it (see self)."
The construct of self-esteem has been shown to be a desirable one
in psychology, as it is associated with a variety of positive outcomes,
such as academic achievement, relationship satisfaction, happiness, and lower rates of criminal behavior. The benefits of high self-esteem
are thought to include improved mental and physical health, and less
anti-social behavior while drawbacks of low self-esteem have been found to be anxiety, loneliness, and increased vulnerability to substance abuse.
Self-esteem can apply to a specific attribute or globally.
Psychologists usually regard self-esteem as an enduring personality
characteristic (trait self-esteem), though normal, short-term variations (state self-esteem) also exist. Synonyms or near-synonyms of self-esteem include: self-worth, self-regard, self-respect, and self-integrity.
History
The concept of self-esteem has its origins in the 18th century, first expressed in the writings of the Scottish enlightenment thinker David Hume.
Hume posits that it is important to value and think well of oneself
because it serves a motivational function that enables people to explore
their full potential.
The identification of self-esteem as a distinct psychological
construct has its origins in the work of philosopher and psychologist, William James.
James identified multiple dimensions of the self, with two levels of
hierarchy: processes of knowing (called the "I-self") and the resulting
knowledge about the self (the "Me-self"). The observation about the self
and storage of those observations by the I-self creates three types of
knowledge, which collectively account for the Me-self, according to
James. These are the material self, social self, and spiritual self. The
social self comes closest to self-esteem, comprising all
characteristics recognized by others. The material self consists of
representations of the body and possessions and the spiritual self of
descriptive representations and evaluative dispositions regarding the
self. This view of self-esteem as the collection of an individual's
attitudes toward itself remains today.
In the mid-1960s, social psychologist Morris Rosenberg defined self-esteem as a feeling of self-worth and developed the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSES), which became the most widely used scale to measure self-esteem in the social sciences.
In the early 20th century, the behaviorist movement
shunned introspective study of mental processes, emotions, and
feelings, replacing introspection with objective study through
experiments on behaviors observed in relation with the environment.
Behaviorism viewed the human being as an animal subject to
reinforcements, and suggested making psychology an experimental science,
similar to chemistry or biology. Consequently, clinical trials on
self-esteem were overlooked, since behaviorists considered the idea less
amenable to rigorous measurement.
In the mid-20th century, the rise of phenomenology and humanistic psychology
led to a renewed interest in self-esteem as a treatment for
psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety, and personality
disorders. Psychologists started to consider the relationship between psychotherapy
and the personal satisfaction of people with high self-esteem as useful
to the field. This led to new elements being introduced to the concept
of self-esteem, including the reasons why people tend to feel less
worthy and why people become discouraged or unable to meet challenges by
themselves.
From 1997, the core self-evaluations approach included self-esteem as one of four dimensions that comprise one's fundamental appraisal of oneself—along with locus of control, neuroticism, and self-efficacy. The concept of core self-evaluations has since proven to have the ability to predict job satisfaction and job performance. Self-esteem may be essential to self-evaluation.
In public policy
The importance of self-esteem gained endorsement from some government
and non-government groups starting around the 1970s, such that one can
speak of a self-esteem movement. This movement provides evidence that psychological research can shape public policy. This has expanded to recent years, such as in 2023, when psychologists
are planning to re-invent the approach to research, treatments, and
therapy. The new approach emphasizes population health where psychological researchers have prioritized one-one therapy in
regards to analyzing social emotional conflict like low self-esteem. The underlying idea of the movement was that low self-esteem was the
root of problems for individuals, making it the root of societal
problems and dysfunctions. A leading figure of the movement,
psychologist Nathaniel Branden,
stated: "[I] cannot think of a single psychological problem (from
anxiety and depression to fear of intimacy or of success, to spouse
battery or child molestation) that is not traced back to the problem of
low self-esteem".
It was once thought that self-esteem was primarily a feature of Western individualistic societies, as it was not observed in collectivist cultures such as Japan. Concern about low self-esteem and its many presumed negative consequences led California assemblyman, John Vasconcellos
to work to set up and fund the Task Force on Self-Esteem and Personal
and Social Responsibility, in California, in 1986. Vasconcellos argued
that this task force could combat many of the state's problems – from
crime and teen pregnancy to school underachievement and pollution. He compared increasing self-esteem to giving out a vaccine for a
disease: it could help protect people from being overwhelmed by life's
challenges.
The task force set up committees in many California counties and
formed a committee of scholars to review the available literature on
self-esteem. This committee found very small associations between low
self-esteem and its assumed consequences, ultimately showing that low
self-esteem was not the root of all societal problems and not as
important as the committee had originally thought. However, the authors
of the paper that summarized the review of the literature still believed
that self-esteem is an independent variable that affects major social
problems. The task force disbanded in 1995, and the National Council for
Self-Esteem and later the National Association for Self-Esteem (NASE) was established, taking on the task force's mission. Vasconcellos and Jack Canfield were members of its advisory board in 2003, and members of its masters' coalition included Anthony Robbins, Bernie Siegel, and Gloria Steinem.
Theories
Many early theories suggested that self-esteem is a basic human need or motivation. American psychologist, Abraham Maslow included self-esteem in his hierarchy of human needs.
He described two different forms of "esteem": the need for respect from
others in the form of recognition, success, and admiration, and the
need for self-respect in the form of self-love, self-confidence, skill,
or aptitude. Respect from others was believed to be more fragile and easily lost
than inner self-esteem. According to Maslow, without the fulfillment of
the self-esteem need, individuals will be driven to seek it and unable
to grow and obtain self-actualization. Maslow also states that the
healthiest expression of self-esteem "is the one which manifests in the
respect we deserve for others, more than renown, fame, and flattery".
Modern theories of self-esteem explore the reasons humans are motivated
to maintain a high regard for themselves. Sociometer theory maintains that self-esteem evolved to check one's level of status and acceptance in one's social group. According to Terror Management Theory, self-esteem serves a protective function and reduces anxiety about life and death.
Carl Rogers (1902–1987), an advocate of humanistic psychology,
theorized the origin of many people's problems to be that they despise
themselves and consider themselves worthless and incapable of being
loved. This is why Rogers believed in the importance of giving
unconditional acceptance to a client and when this was done it could
improve the client's self-esteem. In his therapy sessions with clients, he offered positive regard no matter what. Indeed, the concept of self-esteem is approached since then in humanistic psychology as an inalienable right for every person, summarized in the following sentence:
Every human being, with no
exception, for the mere fact to be it, is worthy of unconditional
respect of everybody else; he deserves to esteem himself and to be
esteemed.
Measurement
Self-esteem is typically assessed using self-report inventories.
One of the most widely used instruments, the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSES) is a 10-item self-esteem scale score that requires participants to
indicate their level of agreement with a series of statements about
themselves. An alternative measure, the Coopersmith Inventory uses a
50-question battery over a variety of topics and asks subjects whether
they rate someone as similar or dissimilar to themselves. If a subject's answers demonstrate solid self-regard, the scale regards
them as well adjusted. If those answers reveal some inner shame, it
considers them to be prone to social deviance.
Implicit measures of self-esteem began to be used in the 1980s. These rely on indirect measures of cognitive processing thought to be linked to implicit self-esteem, including the name letter task (or initial preference task) and the Implicit Association Task.
Such indirect measures are designed to reduce awareness of the
process of assessment. When using them to assess implicit self-esteem,
psychologists apply self-relevant stimuli to the participant and then
measure how quickly a person identifies positive or negative stimuli. For example, if a woman was given the self-relevant stimuli of female
and mother, psychologists would measure how quickly she identified the
negative word, evil, or the positive word, kind.
Development across lifespan
Experiences in a person's life are a major source of how self-esteem develops. In the early years of a child's life, parents have a significant
influence on self-esteem and can be considered the main source of
positive and negative experiences a child will have. Unconditional love from parents helps a child develop a stable sense of
being cared for and respected. These feelings translate into later
effects on self-esteem as the child grows older. Students in elementary school who have high self-esteem tend to have
authoritative parents who are caring, supportive adults who set clear
standards for their child and allow them to voice their opinion in
decision making.
Although studies thus far have reported only a correlation of warm, supportive parenting styles
(mainly authoritative and permissive) with children having high
self-esteem, these parenting styles could easily be thought of as having
some causal effect in self-esteem development. Childhood experiences that contribute to healthy self-esteem include
being listened to, being spoken to respectfully, receiving appropriate
attention and affection and having accomplishments recognized and
mistakes or failures acknowledged and accepted. Experiences that
contribute to low self-esteem include being harshly criticized, being
physically, sexually or emotionally abused, being ignored, ridiculed or
teased or being expected to be "perfect" all the time.
During school-aged years, academic achievement is a significant contributor to self-esteem development. Consistently achieving success or consistently failing will have a strong effect on students' individual self-esteem. However, students can also experience low self-esteem while in school.
For example, they may not have academic achievements, or they live in a
troubled environment outside of school. Issues like the ones previously
stated, can cause adolescents to doubt themselves. Social experiences
are another important contributor to self-esteem. As children go through
school, they begin to understand and recognize differences between
themselves and their classmates. Using social comparisons, children
assess whether they did better or worse than classmates in different
activities. These comparisons play an important role in shaping the
child's self-esteem and influence the positive or negative feelings they
have about themselves. As children go through adolescence, peer influence becomes much more
important. Adolescents make appraisals of themselves based on their
relationships with close friends. Successful relationships among friends are very important to the
development of high self-esteem for children. Social acceptance brings
about confidence and produces high self-esteem, whereas rejection from
peers and loneliness brings about self-doubts and produces low
self-esteem.
Self-esteem tends to increase during adolescence and young adulthood, reaching a peak in middle age. A decrease is seen from middle age to old age with varying findings on whether it is a small or large decrease. Reasons for the variability could be because of differences in health, cognitive ability, and socioeconomic status in old age. No differences have been found between males and females in their development of self-esteem. Multiple cohort studies show that there is not a difference in the
life-span trajectory of self-esteem between generations due to societal
changes such as grade inflation in education or the presence of social media.
High levels of mastery, low risk taking, and better health are
ways to predict higher self-esteem. In terms of personality, emotionally
stable, extroverted, and conscientious individuals experience higher
self-esteem. These predictors have shown that self-esteem has trait-like qualities
by remaining stable over time like personality and intelligence. However, this does not mean it can not be changed. Hispanic adolescents have a slightly lower self-esteem than their black
and white peers, but then slightly higher levels by age 30. African Americans have a sharper increase in self-esteem in adolescence
and young adulthood compared to Whites. However, during old age, they
experience a more rapid decline in self-esteem.
Influencing factors of self-esteem in adolescence
Self-esteem during adolescence is a dynamic and critical aspect of
psychological development, influenced by a variety of biological,
psychological, and social factors. This stage of life, characterized by
rapid physical changes and increased self-awareness, leaves adolescents
particularly vulnerable to external influences. Peer relationships,
academic performance, and societal beauty standards play pivotal roles in shaping self-esteem. Gender
differences also contribute significantly to how adolescents perceive
their self-worth.
Recent research highlights how cultural and societal expectations can
shape self-esteem, especially regarding self-perceptions of physical
appearance. For instance, a 2023 study titled "Exploring Teenagers'
Perceptions of Personal Beauty: A Quantitative Survey Analysis" examined how Italian teenagers rated their own appearance. The findings
revealed notable gender disparities: male participants typically rated
themselves conservatively, while females often assigned themselves
higher scores, sometimes a perfect 10. These patterns underscore the
influence of societal beauty standards on adolescents' self-perception
and their broader self-esteem development.
The study emphasizes the critical interplay between physical
self-perception and self-esteem in adolescence, shedding light on how
societal norms and personal identity evolve during this pivotal life
stage.
Shame
Shame can be a contributor to those with problems of low self-esteem. Feelings of shame usually occur because of a situation where the social
self is devalued, such as a socially evaluated poor performance. Poor
performance leads to a decrease in social self-esteem and an increase in
shame, indicating a threat to the social self. This increase in shame can be helped with self-compassion.
Real self, ideal self, and dreaded self
There are three levels of self-evaluation development in relation to
the real self, ideal self, and the dreaded self. The real, ideal, and
dreaded selves develop in children in a sequential pattern on cognitive
levels.
Moral judgment stages: Individuals describe their real, ideal,
and dreaded selves with stereotypical labels, such as "nice" or "bad".
Individuals describe their ideal and real selves in terms of disposition
for actions or as behavioral habits. The dreaded self is often
described as being unsuccessful or as having bad habits.
Ego development stages: Individuals describe their ideal and real
selves in terms of traits that are based on attitudes as well as
actions. The dreaded self is often described as having failed to meet
social expectations or as self-centered.
Self-understanding stages: Individuals describe their ideal and real
selves as having unified identities or characters. Descriptions of the
dreaded self focus on failure to live up to one's ideals or role
expectations often because of real world problems.
This development brings with it increasingly complicated and
encompassing moral demands. This level is where individuals'
self-esteems can suffer because they do not feel as though they are
living up to certain expectations. This feeling will moderately affect
one's self-esteem with an even larger effect seen when individuals
believe they are becoming their dreaded selves.
firmly believe in certain values and principles, and are ready
to defend them even when finding opposition, feeling secure enough to
modify them in light of experience.
are able to act according to what they think to be the best choice,
trusting their own judgment, and not feeling guilty when others do not
like their choice.
do not lose time worrying excessively about what happened in the
past, nor about what could happen in the future. They learn from the
past and plan for the future, but live in the present intensely.
fully trust in their capacity to solve problems, not hesitating
after failures and difficulties. They ask others for help when they need
it.
consider themselves equal in dignity
to others, rather than inferior or superior, while accepting
differences in certain talents, personal prestige or financial standing.
understand how they are an interesting and valuable person for others, at least for those with whom they have a friendship.
resist manipulation, collaborate with others only if it seems appropriate and convenient.
admit and accept different internal feelings and drives, either
positive or negative, revealing those drives to others only when they
choose.
are able to enjoy a great variety of activities.
are sensitive to feelings and needs of others; respect generally
accepted social rules, and claim no right or desire to prosper at
others' expense.
can work toward finding solutions and voice discontent without belittling themselves or others when challenges arise.
Secure vs. defensive
Some people have a secure high self-esteem and can confidently
maintain positive self-views without relying on external reassurance.
However, others have defensive high self-esteem, and while they also
report positive self-views on the Rosenberg Scale, these views are
fragile and easily threatened by criticism. Defensive high self-esteem
individuals internalize subconscious self-doubts and insecurities,
causing them to react very negatively to any criticism they may receive.
There is a need for constant positive feedback from others for these
individuals to maintain their feelings of self-worth. The necessity of
repeated praise can be associated with boastful, arrogant behavior or
sometimes even aggressive and hostile feelings toward anyone who
questions the individual's self-worth, an example of threatened egotism.
The Journal of Educational Psychology conducted a study in which they used a sample of 383 Malaysian undergraduates participating in work integrated learning
(WIL) programs across five public universities to test the relationship
between self-esteem and other psychological attributes such as
self-efficacy and self-confidence.
The results demonstrated that self-esteem has a positive and
significant relationship with self-confidence and self-efficacy since
students with higher self-esteem had better performances at university
than those with lower self-esteem. It was concluded that higher
education institutions and employers should emphasize the importance of
undergraduates' self-esteem development.
Implicit and explicit
Implicit self-esteem
refers to a person's disposition to evaluate themselves positively or
negatively in a spontaneous, automatic, or unconscious manner. It
contrasts with explicit self-esteem,
which entails more conscious and reflective self-evaluation. Both
explicit self-esteem and implicit self-esteem are theoretically subtypes
of self-esteem proper.
However, the validity of implicit self-esteem as a construct is
highly questionable, given not only its weak or nonexistent correlation
with explicit self-esteem and informant ratings of self-esteem, but also the failure of multiple measures of implicit self-esteem to correlate with each other.
Currently, there is little scientific evidence that self-esteem can be reliably or validly measured through implicit means.
Narcissism and threatened egotism
Narcissism
is a disposition people may have that represents an excessive love for
one's self. It is characterized by an inflated view of self-worth.
Individuals who score high on narcissism measures, Robert Raskin's
Narcissistic Personality Inventory, would likely respond "true" to such
prompt statements as "If I ruled the world, it would be a much better
place." There is only a moderate correlation between narcissism and self-esteem; that is to say that an individual can have high self-esteem but low
narcissism or can score high self-esteem and high narcissism. However, when correlation analysis is restricted to the sense of
superiority or self-admiration aspects of narcissism, correlations
between narcissism and self-esteem become strong. Moreover, self-esteem is positively correlated with a sense of superiority even when controlling for overall narcissism.
Narcissism is not only defined by inflated self-esteem, but also
by characteristics such as entitlement, exploitativeness, and dominance.
Additionally, while positive self-image is a shared characteristic of
narcissism and self-esteem, narcissistic self-appraisals are
exaggerated, whereas in non-narcissistic self-esteem, positive views of
the self compared with others are relatively modest. Thus, while sharing
positive self-regard as a main feature, and while narcissism is defined
by high self-esteem, the two constructs are not interchangeable.
Threatened egotism
is a phenomenon in which narcissists respond to criticism with
hostility and aggression, as it threatens their sense of self-worth.
Low
Low self-esteem can result from various factors, including genetic
factors, physical appearance or weight, mental health issues,
socioeconomic status, significant emotional experiences, social stigma, peer pressure or bullying.
A person with low self-esteem may show some of the following characteristics:
Sees temporary setbacks as permanent, intolerable conditions.
Individuals with low self-esteem tend to be critical of themselves.
Some depend on the approval and praise of others when evaluating
self-worth. Others may measure their likability in terms of successes:
others will accept themselves if they succeed but will not if they fail. People with chronic low self esteem are at a higher risk for
experiencing psychotic disorders; and this behavior is closely linked to
forming psychotic symptoms as well.
This classification proposed by Martin Ross distinguishes three states of self-esteem compared to the "feats" (triumphs, honors, virtues) and the "anti-feats" (defeats, embarrassment, shame, etc.) of the individuals.
Shattered
The individual does not regard themselves as valuable or lovable.
They may be overwhelmed by defeat, or shame, or see themselves as such,
and they name their "anti-feat". For example, if they consider that
being over a certain age is an anti-feat, they define themselves with
the name of their anti-feat, and say, "I am old". They express actions
and feelings such as pity, insulting themselves, and they may become
paralyzed by their sadness.
Vulnerable
The individual has a generally positive self-image.
However, their self-esteem is also vulnerable to the perceived risk of
an imminent anti-feat (such as defeat, embarrassment, shame, discredit),
consequently, they are often nervous and regularly use defense
mechanisms. A typical protection mechanism of those with vulnerable self-esteem may
consist in avoiding decision-making. Although such individuals may
outwardly exhibit great self-confidence, the underlying reality may be
just the opposite: the apparent self-confidence is indicative of their
heightened fear of anti-feats and the fragility of their self-esteem. They may also try to blame others to protect their self-image from
situations that would threaten it. They may employ defense mechanisms,
including attempting to lose at games and other competitions in order to
protect their self-image by publicly dissociating themselves from a
need to win, and asserting an independence from social acceptance which
they may deeply desire. In this deep fear of being unaccepted by an
individual's peers, they make poor life choices by making risky
decisions.
Strong
People with strong self-esteem have a positive self-image
and enough strength so that anti-feats do not subdue their self-esteem.
They have less fear of failure. These individuals appear humble,
cheerful, and this shows a certain strength not to boast about feats and
not to be afraid of anti-feats. They are capable of fighting with all their might to achieve their goals
because, if things go wrong, their self-esteem will not be affected.
They can acknowledge their own mistakes precisely because their
self-image is strong, and this acknowledgment will not impair or affect
their self-image. They live with less fear of losing social prestige, and with more happiness and general well-being. However, no type of self-esteem is indestructible, and due to certain situations or circumstances in life, one can fall from this level into any other state of self-esteem.
Contingent vs. non-contingent
A distinction is made between contingent (or conditional) and non-contingent (or unconditional) self-esteem.
Contingent self-esteem is derived from external sources, such as what others say, one's success or failure, one's competence, or relationship-contingent self-esteem.
Therefore, contingent self-esteem is marked by instability,
unreliability, and vulnerability. Persons lacking a non-contingent
self-esteem are "predisposed to an incessant pursuit of self-value". However, because the pursuit of contingent self-esteem is based on
receiving approval, it is doomed to fail, as no one receives constant
approval, and disapproval often evokes depression. Furthermore, fear of
disapproval inhibits activities in which failure is possible.
"The courage to be is the courage to accept oneself, in spite of
being unacceptable.... This is the Pauline-Lutheran doctrine of
'justification by faith.'" Paul Tillich
Non-contingent self-esteem is described as true, stable, and solid. It springs from a belief that one is "acceptable period, acceptable before life itself, ontologically acceptable". Belief that one is "ontologically acceptable" is to believe that one's acceptability is "the way things are without contingency". In this belief, as expounded by theologian Paul Tillich,
acceptability is not based on a person's virtue. It is an acceptance
given "in spite of our guilt, not because we have no guilt".
Psychiatrist Thomas A Harris drew on Tillich for his classic I'm OK – You're OK that addresses non-contingent self-esteem. Harris translated Tillich's "acceptable" by the vernacular OK, a term that means "acceptable". The Christian message, said Harris, is not "YOU CAN BE OK, IF"; it is "YOU ARE ACCEPTED, unconditionally".
A secure non-contingent self-esteem springs from the belief that one is ontologically acceptable and accepted.
Domain-specific self-esteem
Whereas global self-esteem addresses how individuals appraise
themselves in their entirety, domain-specific self-esteem facets relate
to how they appraise themselves in various pertinent domains of life.
Such functionally distinct facets of self-esteem may comprise
self-evaluations in social, emotional, body-related, school
performance-related, and creative-artistic domains.
They have been found to be predictive of outcomes related to psychological functioning, health, education, and work. Low self-esteem in the social domain (i.e., self-perceived social
competence), for example, has been repeatedly identified as a risk
factor for bullying victimization.
Importance
Abraham Maslow
states that psychological health is not possible unless the essential
core of the person is fundamentally accepted, loved and respected by
others and by oneself. Self-esteem allows people to face life with more
confidence, benevolence, and optimism, and thus easily reach their goals
and self-actualize.
Self-esteem may make people convinced they deserve happiness. The ability to understand and develop positive self-esteem is essential
for building healthy relationships with others. When people have a
positive view of themselves, they are more likely to treat others with
respect, compassion, and kindness. This creates the foundation for
strong, positive relationships that are built on mutual respect and
understanding. For Erich Fromm,
the love of others and love of ourselves are not alternatives. On the
contrary, an attitude of love toward themselves will be found in all
those who are capable of loving others. Self-esteem allows creativity at
the workplace and is a specially critical condition for teaching
professions.
José-Vicente Bonet claims that the importance of self-esteem is
obvious as a lack of self-esteem is, he says, not a loss of esteem from
others, but self-rejection. Bonet claims that this corresponds to major depressive disorder. Freud
also claimed that the depressive has suffered "an extraordinary
diminution in his self-regard, an impoverishment of his ego on a grand
scale... He has lost his self-respect".
The Yogyakarta Principles, a document on international human rights law, addresses the discriminatory attitude toward LGBT people that makes their self-esteem low to be subject to human rights violation including human trafficking. The World Health Organization recommends in "Preventing Suicide", published in 2000, that strengthening students' self-esteem is
important to protect children and adolescents against mental distress
and despondency, enabling them to cope adequately with difficult and
stressful life situations.
Not only does higher self-esteem increase happiness, but it is
also associated with improved stress coping and increased willingness to
take on challenging tasks. In contrast, a study examined the impact of boosting self-esteem. It
found that high self-esteem does offer some benefits, but they are
limited. It is often a result, rather than a cause, of success. The
researchers also found that efforts to boost self-esteem may not
consistently lead to improved performance, and that self-esteem's
influence on life outcomes is modest, except for a temporary increase in
positive self-image awareness.
Correlations
From the late 1970s to the early 1990s many Americans assumed as a
matter of course that students' self-esteem acted as a critical factor
in the grades that they earned in school, in their relationships
with their peers, and in their later success in life. Under this
assumption, some American groups created programs which aimed to
increase the self-esteem of students. Until the 1990s, little
peer-reviewed and controlled research took place on this topic.
Peer-reviewed research undertaken since then has not validated
previous assumptions. Recent research indicates that inflating students'
self-esteems in and of itself has no positive effect on grades. Roy Baumeister has shown that inflating self-esteem by itself can actually decrease grades. The relationship involving self-esteem and academic results does not
signify that high self-esteem contributes to high academic results. It
simply means that high self-esteem may be accomplished as a result of
high academic performance due to the other variables of social
interactions and life events affecting this performance.
Attempts by pro-esteem advocates to encourage self-pride in
students solely by reason of their uniqueness as human beings are likely
to fail if feelings of well-being are not accompanied by well-doing. It
is only when students engage in personally meaningful endeavors for
which they can be justifiably proud that self-confidence grows, and it
is this growing self-assurance that in turn triggers further
achievement.
Research has found a strong correlation between high self-esteem
and self-reported happiness, but it is not yet known whether this
relationship is causal. This means that although people with high
self-esteem tend to report greater happiness, it is not certain whether
having high self-esteem directly causes increased happiness. The relationship between self-esteem and life satisfaction is stronger in individualistic cultures.
In addition, people with high self-esteem have been found to be
more forgiving than people with low self-esteem. This is because people
with high self-esteem tend to have greater self-acceptance and are more
likely to view conflict in a positive light, as an opportunity for
growth and improvement. In contrast, people with low self-esteem may
have a harder time forgiving others, due to a sense of insecurity and
self-doubt.
High self-esteem does not prevent children from smoking, drinking, taking drugs, or engaging in early sex.
China
According to a 2021 analysis by Princeton University academic Rory Truex of survey results, discontent with the Chinese Communist Party correlates with low self-esteem among Chinese citizens.
Mental health
Self-esteem has been associated with several mental health conditions, including depression, anxiety, and eating disorders. For example, low self-esteem may increase the likelihood that people
who experience dysfunctional thoughts will develop symptoms of
depression. Consequently, cognitive treatment of depression helps with low
self-esteem, and vice versa, addressing low self-esteem improves
depressive symptoms. In contrast, high self-esteem may protect against the development of
mental health conditions, with research finding that high self-esteem
reduces the chances of bulimia and anxiety.
Neuroscience
In research conducted in 2014 by Robert S. Chavez and Todd F.
Heatherton, it was found that self-esteem is related to the connectivity
of the frontostriatal circuit. The frontostriatal pathway connects the medial prefrontal cortex, which deals with self-knowledge, to the ventral striatum, which deals with feelings of motivation and reward.
Stronger anatomical pathways are correlated with higher long-term
self-esteem, while stronger functional connectivity is correlated with
higher short-term self-esteem.
Criticism and controversy
Albert Ellis, an influential American psychologist, argued that the concept of self-esteem is actually harmful and unhelpful. Although acknowledging the human propensity and tendency to ego rating
as innate, he has critiqued the philosophy of self-esteem as
unrealistic, illogical and self- and socially destructive – often doing
more harm than good. Questioning the foundations and usefulness of
generalized ego strength, he has claimed that self-esteem is based on
arbitrary definitional premises, and overgeneralized, perfectionistic and grandiose thinking. Acknowledging that rating and valuing behaviors and characteristics is
functional and even necessary, he sees rating and valuing human beings'
totality and total selves as irrational and unethical. The healthier
alternative to self-esteem according to him is unconditional self-acceptance and unconditional other-acceptance. Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy is a psychotherapy based on this approach.
"There seem to be only two clearly demonstrated benefits of high
self-esteem....First, it increases initiative, probably because it
lends confidence. People with high self-esteem are more willing to act
on their beliefs, to stand up for what they believe in, to approach
others, to risk new undertakings. (This unfortunately includes being
extra willing to do stupid or destructive things, even when everyone
else advises against them.)...It can also lead people to ignore sensible
advice as they stubbornly keep wasting time and money on hopeless
causes"
False attempts
For persons with low self-esteem, any positive stimulus will
temporarily raise self-esteem. Therefore, possessions, sex, success, or
physical appearance will produce the development of self-esteem, but the
development is ephemeral at best. Such attempts to raise one's self-esteem by positive stimulus produce a
"boom or bust" pattern. "Compliments and positive feedback" produce a
boost, but a bust follows a lack of such feedback. For a person whose
"self-esteem is contingent", success is "not extra sweet", but "failure
is extra bitter".
As narcissism
Life satisfaction, happiness, healthy behavioral practices, perceived
efficacy, and academic success and adjustment have been associated with
having high levels of self-esteem. However, a common mistake is to think that loving oneself is necessarily equivalent to narcissism, as opposed for example to what Erik Erikson speaks of as "a post-narcissistic love of the ego". People with healthy self-esteem accept and love themselves
unconditionally, acknowledging both virtues and faults in the self, and
yet, in spite of everything, are able to continue to love themselves. In
narcissists, by contrast, an "uncertainty about their own worth gives
rise to...a self-protective, but often totally spurious, aura of grandiosity" –
producing the class "of narcissists, or people with very high, but
insecure, self-esteem... fluctuating with each new episode of social
praise or rejection."
For narcissists, regulating their self-esteem is their constant
concern. They use defenses (such as denial, projection, self-inflation,
envy, arrogance, and aggression), impression management through
self-promotion, embellishment, lying, charm, and domination, and prefer
high-status, competitive, and hierarchical environments to support their
unstable, fragile, and impaired self-esteem.
Narcissism can thus be seen as a symptom of fundamentally low
self-esteem, that is, lack of love towards oneself, but often
accompanied by "an immense increase in self-esteem" based on "the defense mechanism of denial by overcompensation." "Idealized love of self...rejected the part of him" that he denigrates – "this destructive little child" within. Instead, the narcissist emphasizes their virtues in the
presence of others, just to try to convince themself that they are a
valuable person and to try to stop feeling ashamed for their faults; such "people with unrealistically inflated self-views, which may be
especially unstable and highly vulnerable to negative
information,...tend to have poor social skills."
Self-esteem in cancer patients
Cancer is one of the most significant health problems worldwide. It
is a chronic and psychosocially devastating disease that can cause pain,
evoke thoughts of death, and cause feelings of guilt, anxiety, and
confusion. Self-esteem is considered an important psychological resource that is
associated with many health behaviors and human well-being. Cancer and its treatment can cause some major negative changes that can
disrupt social self-perceptions due to "sick" status, body image as a
result from scars, alopecia, sexual problems, and self-efficacy
including fatigue and handicaps.
The study "Self at Risk: Self-Esteem and Quality of Life in
Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgical Treatment and Experiencing Bodily
Deformities" discussed that quality of life and self-esteem of patients
in both Study 1, oral cancer and Study 2, breast cancer deteriorated
after surgery. Self-esteem is an important factor in determining quality of life after
surgical procedures that lead to bodily deformities associated with
cancer treatment. The largest decreases in various dimensions of Quality
of life and explicit self-esteem were observed in women with fragile
self-esteem. This group is at risk of the greatest deterioration in Quality of life
and self-image after cancer surgery and should receive special
psycho-oncological care.
Physical damage related to cancer treatment can lead to changes
in body image, which is associated with a decrease in self-esteem. For example, breast cancer patients who had a mastectomy showed
significantly lower self-esteem than those with breast-conserving
surgery. A drop in self-esteem was observed during chemotherapy-induced
alopecia, which persisted even after hair regrowth. The impact of cancer on self-esteem is thought to be greater in younger adults.
Age-related variables like marital/employment status and
long-term consequences such as fertility problems or sexual dysfunction
can affect the sense of virility/femininity and family plans, especially
in young patients. The study suggests that considering self-esteem is necessary in
oncology care due to its association with coping and social support and
its role in preventing depression. Early identification of patients most at risk of decreased self-esteem,
particularly young adults and those with significant physical damage,
is recommended.
Interventions targeting self-perceptions could have preventive
effects by promoting psychological adjustment, adaptive coping, and
maintaining social support, ultimately reducing the risk of depressive
disorders. Cancer patients with high, fragile self-esteem require special psycho-oncological care. Therapeutic approaches aimed at strengthening implicit self-esteem and
managing neurotic mechanisms are suggested. Techniques such as focusing
on patient strengths, enhancing agency, mindfulness, and thought
diffusion are recommended as interventions to help protect self-esteem,
especially in the preoperative period.
Self-esteem in prostate cancer patients
Body image, self-esteem, and masculinity are tightly linked, and
their effects on men are often experienced together, such as the
relationship between erectile dysfunction, masculinity, and self-esteem. The most important threat was the inevitable change to sexual function
and libido. Men felt they had "lost a bit of [their] manhood" and
compared radical prostatectomy to being "gelded" or castrated. Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) side effects, like emotional changes
and gynecomastia ("gaining boobs"), made men feel "like honorary women"
or that they were "being turned into women".
Physical changes such as fatigue, urinary incontinence, and
changes to appearance led men to perceive their bodies as deficient and a
source of shame. Even without major functional changes, the removal of the prostate made
men feel their body was less than whole. Men experienced profound
embarrassment due to their inability to perform sexually and sometimes
retreated from social situations. They often felt they lacked a sick role because their illness didn't
fit the traditional "sick" model, increasing their shame to admit their
illness. Men re-asserted their masculinity through other life areas,
particularly through gaining control. Many men considered the loss of
sexual functioning acceptable as a necessary measure to preserve their
health and prolong life. Humor was used as a coping mechanism to draw
attention away from sensitive topics and minimize the emotional burden
of the disease. Ultimately, many reached acceptance, realizing that physical and sexual
changes did not change the fact that they were "still a man". Some
found a renewed sense of confidence by becoming mentors or serving as
spokespersons for PCa survivors, re-aligning with masculine ideals of
strength and leadership.
