The individually importance-weighted average (IIWA) model posits that the contribution of specific areas of self-concept to global self-esteem varies systematically with the individual importance placed on each specific component. Although intuitively appealing, this model has weak empirical support; thus, within the framework of a substantive-methodological synergy, we propose a multiple-item latent approach to the IIWA model as applied to a range of self-concept domains (physical, academic, spiritual self-concepts) and subdomains (appearance, math, verbal self-concepts) in young adolescents from two countries. Tests considering simultaneously the effects of self-concept domains on trait self-esteem did not support the IIWA model. On the contrary, support for a normative group importance model was found, in which importance varied as a function of domains but not individuals. Individuals differentially weight the various components of self-concept; however, the weights are largely determined by normative processes, so that little additional information is gained from individual weightings.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
3.
BandalosD. L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modelling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 78-102. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0901_5
4.
BaumeisterR. F.CampbellJ. D.KruegerJ. I.VohsK. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles?Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 1-44.
5.
BeauducelA.HerzbergP. Y. (2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 186-203.
6.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
7.
BorsboomD. (2006). The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika, 71, 425-440.
8.
BrandenN. (2006). What needs to be done. In KernisM. H. (Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers (pp. 439-441). New York, NY: Psychological Press.
9.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness- of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255. doi:10.1207/S1532800 7SEM0902_5
10.
CialdiniR. (2007). Descriptive social norms as underappreciated sources of social control. Psychometrika, 72, 263-268.
11.
CoendersG.Batista-FoguetJ. M.SarisW. E. (2006). Simple, efficient and distribution-free approach to interaction effects in complex structural equation models. Quality & Quantity, 42, 369-396.
12.
ColemanJ.HendryL. B. (1999). The nature of adolescence (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
CrainR. (1996). The influence of age, race, and gender on child and adolescent multidimensional self-concept. In BrackenB. A. (Ed.), Handbook of self-concept: Developmental, social, and clinical considerations (pp. 395-420). New York, NY: Wiley.
14.
CrockerJ.SommersS. R.LuhtanenR. K. (2002). Hopes dashed and dreams fulfilled: Contingencies of self-worth and graduate school admissions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1275-1286. doi:10.1177/01461672022812012
15.
CrockerJ.WolfeC. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593-623. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593
16.
CronbachL. J.SnowR. E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interactions. Oxford, England: Irvington.
17.
DiStefanoC. (2002). The impact of categorization with confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 327-346.
18.
EndersC. K.BandalosD. L. (2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 430-457. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_5
19.
FarmerR. F.JarvisL. L.BerentM. K.CorbettA. (2001). Contributions to global self-esteem: The role of importance attached to self-concepts associated with the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 483-499. doi:10.1006/jrpe.2001.2325
20.
FraleyR. C.MarksM. J. (2007). The null hypothesis significance testing debate and its implications for personality research. In RobinsR. W.FraleyR. C.KruegerR. F. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 149-169). New York, NY: Guilford.
21.
GuindonM. H. (2010). Self-esteem across the lifespan: Issues and interventions. New York, NY: Routledge.
22.
HardyL.LeoneC. (2008). Real evidence for the failure of the Jamesian perspective or more evidence in support of it?Journal of Personality, 76, 1123-1136. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00515.x
23.
HardyL.MoriartyT. (2006). Shaping self-concept: The elusive importance effect. Journal of Personality, 74, 377-401. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00379.x
24.
HarterS. (1999). The construction of the self. New York, NY: Guilford.
25.
HogeD. R.McCarthyJ. D. (1984). Influence of individual and group identity salience in the global self-esteem of youth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 403-414. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.2.403
26.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
27.
JamesW. (1963). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. (Original work published 1890)
28.
KernisM. H. (Ed.). (2006). Self-esteem issues and answers. New York, NY: Psychological Press.
29.
KitayamaS.MarkusH. R.LiebermanC. (1995). The collective construction of self esteem. In RussellJ.Fernandez- DolsJ.MansteadA.WellenkampJ. (Eds.), Everyday conceptions of emotion: An introduction to the psychology, anthropology and linguistics of emotion (pp. 523-550). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
30.
LearyM. R. (2006). What are the most pressing issues facing researchers? In KernisM. H. (Ed.), Self-esteem issues and answers (pp. 424-429). New York, NY: Psychological Press.
31.
LearyM. R.DownsD. L. (1995). Interpersonal functions of the self-esteem motive: The self-esteem system as a sociometer. In KernisM. H. (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 123-144). New York, NY: Plenum.
32.
LemayE. P.AshmoreR. D. (2006). The relation of social approval contingency to trait self-esteem: Cause, consequence, or moderator?Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 121-139.
33.
LinG. C.WenZ.MarshH. W.LinH. S. (2010). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Clarification of orthogonalizing and double-mean-centering strategies. Structural Equation Modeling, 17, 374-391. doi:10.1080/10705511.2010.488999
34.
LindwallM.AşçiF. H.PalmeiraA.FoxK. R.HaggerM. S. (2011). The importance of importance in the physical self: Support for the theoretically appealing but empirically elusive model of James. Journal of Personality, 79, 303-334. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00678.x
35.
LittleT. D.BovairdJ. A.WidamanK. F. (2006). On the merits of orthogonalizing powered and product terms: Implications for modeling interactions among latent variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 497-519.
36.
LubkeG. H.MuthénB. (2005). Investigating population heterogeneity with factor mixture models. Psychological Methods, 10, 21-39. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.1.21
37.
MaccobyE. E.MartinJ. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In MussenP. H.HetheringtonE. M. (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1-101). New York, NY: Wiley.
38.
MacKinnonD. P.KrullJ. L.LockwoodC. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173-181. doi:10.1023/A:1026595011371
39.
MaïanoC.NinotG.StephanY.MorinA. J. S.FlorentJ. F.ValléeP. (2006). Geographic region effects on adolescent physical self: An exploratory study. International Journal of Psychology, 41, 73-84.
40.
MarkusH.HamillR.SentisK. P. (1987). Thinking fat: Self-schemas for body weight and the processing of weight relevant information. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 50-71.
41.
MarkusH.KitayamaS. (1991). Cultural variation in the self-concept. In StraussJ.GoethalsG. R. (Eds.), The self: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 18-48). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
42.
MarkusH.WurfE. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1987.tb00292.x
43.
MarshH. W. (1986). Global self-esteem: Its relation to specific facets of self-concept and their importance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1224-1236. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1224
44.
MarshH. W. (1989). Age and sex effects in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Preadolescence to adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 417-430. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.417
45.
MarshH. W. (1992). Self Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of adolescent self-concept. A test manual and research monograph. Macarthur, New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney, Faculty of Education.
46.
MarshH. W. (1993). Relations between global and specific domains of self: The importance of individual importance, certainty, and ideals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 975-992. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.975
47.
MarshH. W. (1994). The importance of being important: Theoretical models of relations between specific and global components of physical self-concept. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 16, 306-325.
48.
MarshH. W. (1995). A Jamesian model of self-investment and self-esteem: Comment on Pelham (1995). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1151-1160. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1151
49.
MarshH. W. (2007). Self-concept theory, measurement and research into practice: The role of self-concept in educational psychology. Leicester, UK: British Psychological Society.
50.
MarshH. W. (2008). The elusive importance effect: More failure for the Jamesian perspective on the importance of importance in shaping self-esteem. Journal of Personality, 76, 1081-1122. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00514.x
51.
MarshH. W.BallaJ. R.HauK. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A clarification of mathematical and empirical properties. In MarcoulidesG. A.SchumackerR. E. (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 315-353). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
52.
MarshH. W.CravenR. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and unidimensional perspectives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 133-163. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00010.x
53.
MarshH. W.HauK. T. (1996). Assessing goodness of fit: Is parsimony always desirable?Journal of Experimental Education, 64, 364-390.
54.
MarshH. W.HauK. -T. (2007). Applications of latent-variable models in educational psychology: The need for methodological-substantive synergies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 151-171. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.008
55.
MarshH. W.HauK. T.WenZ. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320-341. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2
56.
MarshH. W.HauK.-T.WenZ.NagengastB.MorinA. J. S. (in press). Moderation. In LittleT. D. (Ed.), Oxford handbook of quantitative methods. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57.
MarshH. W.LüdtkeO.NagengastB.MorinA. J. S.TrautweinU.Von DavierM. (in press). Why item parcels are (almost) never appropriate: Two wrongs do not make a right - camouflaging misspecification with item-parcels in CFA models. Psychological Methods.
58.
MarshH. W.LüdtkeO.TrautweinU.MorinA. J. S. (2009). Classical latent profile analysis of academic self-concept dimensions: Synergy of person- and variable-centered approaches to theoretical models of self-concept. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 191-225. doi:10.1080/10705510902751010
59.
MarshH. W.O’NeillR. (1984). Self Description Questionnaire III (SDQIII): The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 153-174. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1984.tb00227.x
60.
MarshH. W.RichardsG. E.JohnsonS.RocheL.TremayneP. (1994). Physical self-description questionnaire: Psychometric properties and a multitrait–multimethod analysis of relations to existing instruments. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 16, 270-305.
61.
MarshH. W.ScalasL. F.NagengastB. (2010). Longitudinal tests of competing factor structures for the Rosenberg self-esteem scale: Traits, ephemeral artifacts, and stable response styles. Psychological Assessment, 22, 366-381. doi:10.1037/a0019225
62.
MarshH. W.WenZ.HauK. T. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9, 275-300. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.9.3.275
63.
MarshH. W.WenZ.HauK.-T.NagengastB. (in press). Structural equation models of latent interaction and quadratic effects. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed.). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
64.
McClellandG. H.JuddC. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 376-390.
65.
MeledduM.ScalasL. F. (2003). Physical-self discrepancies, emotional discomfort and gender in adolescence. Cognitive Processing. International Quarterly of Cognitive Science, 4, 67-85.
66.
MischelW.ShodaY. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246-268.
67.
MoosbruggerH.Schermelleh-EngelK.KleinA. (1997). Methodological problems of estimating latent interaction effects. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 2, 95-111.
68.
MorinA. J. S.MaïanoC.MarshH. W.JanoszM.NagengastB. (2011). The longitudinal interplay of adolescents’ self-esteem and body image: A conditional autoregressive latent trajectory analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 157-201. doi:10.1080/00273171.2010.546731
69.
MrukC. J. (2006). Self-esteem: Research, theory, and practice: Toward a positive psychology of self-esteem. New York, NY: Springer.
70.
MuthénB. O.KaplanD. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171-189.
71.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998-2008). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
72.
NagengastB.MarshH.ScalasL. F. W.XuM.HauK.-T.TrautweinU. (2011). Who took the “×” out of expectancy-value theory? A psychological mystery, a substantive-methodological synergy, and a cross-national generalization. Psychological Science, 22, 1058-1066.
73.
PelhamB. W. (1995). Self-investment and self-esteem: Evidence for a Jamesian model of self-worth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1141-1150. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1141
74.
PelhamB. W.SwannW. B.(1989). From self-conceptions to self-worth: On the sources and structure of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 672-680. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.672
75.
PetersenA. C. (1988). Adolescent development. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 583-607. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.39.020188.003055
76.
QuiltyL. C.OakmanJ. M.RiskoE. (2006). Correlates of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale method effects. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 99-117. doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1301_5
77.
RicciardelliL.McCabeM. (2001). Self-esteem and negative affect as moderators of sociocultural influences on body dissatisfaction, strategies to decrease weight, and strategies to increase muscles among adolescent boys and girls. Sex Roles, 44, 189-207.
78.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79.
ScalasL. F.MarshH. W. (2008). A stronger latent-variable methodology to actual-ideal discrepancy. European Journal of Personality, 22, 629-654. doi:10.1002/per.694
80.
SchacterD. L.GilbertD. T.WegnerD. M. (2009). Psychology. New York, NY: Worth.
81.
ShapkaJ. D.KeatingD. P. (2005). Structure and change in self-concept during adolescence. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 37, 83-96. doi:10.1037/h0087247
82.
ShavelsonR. J.HubnerJ. J.StantonG. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441. doi:10.3102/00346543046003407
83.
SolomonS.GreenbergJ.PyszczynskiT. (1991). A terror management theory of social behavior: The psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural worldviews. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 93-159. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60328-7
84.
ThorndikeR. M.CunninghamG. K.ThorndikeR. L.HagenE. P. (1991). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology. New York, NY: Macmillan.
85.
WellsG. L.WindschitlP. D. (1999). Stimulus sampling and social psychological experimentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1115-1125.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
