Introduction        

The construct of private self-consciousness was developed by Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss (1975) to indicate a dispositional tendency to focus on one’s inner experience (e.g., thoughts, feelings, physical sensations). The Self-Consciousness Scale-Revised (SCSR; Scheier & Carver, 1985) and its predecessor The Self-Consciousness Scale (SCS; Fenigstein et al., 1975) have been the preferred instruments for measuring the private self-consciousness construct. Interestingly, the private self-consciousness construct as measured by the SCS does not appear to be unidimensional but rather consists of two factors that have been labeled Self-Reflectiveness (SR) and Internal State Awareness (ISA) (Piliavin & Charng, 1988). SR appears to measure a person’s tendency to think about oneself a lot and to constantly think of one’s motivations for actions. High scores on the SR factor have been associated with mild psychopathological tendencies such as excessive rumination (Trapnell & Campbell, 1999), higher trait anxiety and depression and lower self-esteem (Anderson, Bohon, & Berrigan, 1996), as well as with greater guilt, shame, and social anxiety (Watson, Morris, Ramsey, Hickman, & Waddell, 1996). However, these same studies have generally found an inverse relationship to the mild psychopathology variables for high scorers on ISA, a factor believed to represent a reported general awareness of ones inner feelings and knowledge of how one’s mind works.

The most convincing evidence for negative aspects of SR and positive aspects of ISA is found in the Creed and Funder (1998) study. These researchers confirmed the two hypothesized factors of SR and ISA using a principal-components factor analysis of a sample of 149 undergraduates and found that SR was positively related to the Big Five personality factor (Costa & McCrae, 1985) of neuroticism and negatively related to extraversion and conscientiousness whereas ISA showed a positive correlation with conscientiousness and no relationship with neuroticism . Creed and Funder also found generally negative correlates with SR and generally positive correlates with ISA using peer ratings of behavior patterns and peer assessments of personality. 

The SR and ISA factors of the Private Self-Consciousness Scale (PrSC) of the SCS and the SCSR are not without controversy. For example, Silvia (1999) has argued that there is no theoretical reason for dividing private self-consciousness into two factors and doing so does not advance our understanding of the theoretical framework of self-consciousness. In fact, according to Silvia, the discovery of two factors merely demonstrates that the PrSC is a flawed scale since the PrSC was intended to measure only one factor.  Bernstein, Teng, and Garbin (1986) found differences in means and variances between items on the two factors and contended that the clustering of items into two factors was probably due to these artifactual differences rather than to substantive differences.  However, as Anderson, Bohon, and Berrigan (1996) contend upon examining their findings, the two factors appear to be substantive and not artifactual since the PrSC-SR factor positively correlated with anxiety and depression and negatively correlated with PrSC-ISA, and self-esteem correlated negatively with PrSC-SR and positively with PrSC-ISA. They argue that the PrSC factors advance our theoretical understanding of different types of self-consciousness since SR is consistently related to psychopathology and ISA to positive mental health. 

Other criticisms of the use of the 10-item PrSC’s SR and ISA factors are psychometric and include the fact that there are multiple scoring systems, that the number of items representing each factor is small, and that SR and ISA sometimes highly correlate with each other. Thus, some researchers have constructed alternative independent scales of higher psychometric quality that purport to measure similar constructs. For example, Trapnell and Campbell (1999) have developed the 24-item Rumination and Reflection Questionnaire (RRQ) and Grant, Franklin, and Langford (2002) constructed the 20-item Self-Reflection and Insight Scale (SRIS). Trapnell and Campbell reported independent factor loadings for Reflection and Rumination and likewise Grant et al. found independent factor loadings for Self-Reflection and Insight. The authors of the first study reported a coefficient alpha for RRQ-Reflection of .91 and for RRQ-Rumination of .90 and of the second study reported a coefficient alpha for SRIS-Self Reflection of .91 and for SRIS-Insight of .87. In spite of the higher psychometric qualities of these instruments, both instruments appear to be measuring slightly different constructs than SR and ISA measure. As Trapnell and Campbell state, “Note that the rumination-reflection distinction being proposed here is clearly not equivalent to the SR-ISA distinction among PrSC items” (p. 291). The RRQ-Reflection scale seems to measure a philosophical love of exploring the inner self whereas the RRQ-Rumination scale seems to measure a general tendency to repeatedly evaluate and dwell on past actions involving the self. There is no scale equivalent to the PrSC-ISA on the RRQ. 

On the other hand Grant, Franklin, and Langford’s (2002) Self-Reflection and Insight Scale (SRIS) was written to more closely approximate the PrSC. These researchers developed two factor scales, an SRIS-Self-Reflection scale (SRIS-SR) and an SRIS-Insight scale (SRIS-IN). They found that the SRIS-SR was significantly positively correlated with measures of anxiety and stress but not depression. The lack of a significant correlation with depression is contrary to the findings for PrSC-SR and depression. SRIS-IN was however, as predicted, significantly negatively correlated with measures of anxiety, stress, and depression. Although, the authors reported a positive correlation of .59 between SRIS-SR and PrSC and a negative correlation of .26 between SRIS-IN and PrSC, they did not report any correlations between their newly developed scales and PrSC-SR or PrSC-ISA. Therefore, given the lack this information and the failure to find a predicted significant correlation between the SRIS-SR and depression, it is difficult to determine if their instrument is measuring the exact same constructs as the two factors from PrSC measure.  Although both the RRQ and the SRIS subscales represent a significant overall psychometric improvement over the PrSC two factor scales, the PrSC two factor scales still have an important role to play in advancing our understanding of self-attention phenomena.    

During most of the last century, psychology research has focused primarily on negative states such as depression and anxiety. However, beginning in the 1980's, psychological researchers began to also focus on the study of positive emotions and subjective states of psychological well-being (cf., Myers & Diener, 1995). There are a number of different perspectives on the concept of psychological well-being. However, Ryff (1989) has argued that core dimensions run through the diverse historical conceptualizations of psychological well-being. These can be summarized as six dimensions of psychological well-being. These dimensions are self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth. 

Research on the private self-consciousness factors of SR and ISA has focused almost exclusively on their correlates with psychopathological variables. In addition, studies have not examined the relationship between SR and ISA with psychological well-being (PWB). Based on previous research, it is logical to assume that SR would be a negative predictor for PWB and ISA would be a positive predictor for PWB. Interesting questions in this regard are as follows: Would a high SR level be a negative predictor of PWB regardless of the level of ISA or conversely would a high level of ISA be a positive predictor of PWB regardless of the level of SR? We know for example from previous research that positive and negative emotions have a degree of independence and as a result, low levels of negative affect do not predict high levels of positive affect and vice versa (e.g., Bradburn, 1969; Diener & Emmons, 1985). Could SR and ISA show a similar uncoupling with PWB? Alternatively, is the interaction of these factors the best predictor of PWB such that high ISA only when paired with low SR would best predict positive PWB? The purpose of the present study was to investigate the predictive relationship of the two factors of SR and ISA from the PrSC for the six dimensions of psychological well-being as measured by the Psychological Well-Being (PWB) inventory (Ryff, 1989). It was hypothesized that the SR factor would negatively correlate with the six PWB dimensions and that the ISA factor would positively correlate with the six PWB dimensions. Furthermore, the predictive pattern using ISA and SR for each of the PWB dimensions would reflect these correlational directions with an interaction between ISA and SR resulting in high PWB being most closely associated with the interaction pattern of high ISA coupled with low SR. 

Method

Participants 

Ninety-seven university students (79 females and 18 males) enrolled in psychology or education classes at the University of Houston-Victoria volunteered for the study. The mean age of the participants was 31.4 years. The sample consisted of the following race/ethnicity numbers: Caucasian = 81, Hispanic/Latino = 12 and African American = 4. All participants were treated in accordance with the American Psychological Association’s ethical standards. 

Materials 

The instruments used were the Psychological Well-Being (PWB) Inventory (Ryff, 1989) and the Self-Consciousness Scale-Revised (SCSR) (Scheier & Carver, 1985). The PWB is designed to measure psychological well-being through assessing six dimensions (Ryff, 1989). The six dimensions are self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth. The original form contains 20 items per dimension measured on a 6-point Likert-type scale. The shorter version used in this study has 14-items per dimension. Ryff reports that the correlations between the original form of the PWB and the 14-item shorter version of the PWB range from .97 to .98.

The dimension of self-acceptance refers to one’s level of self-approval and is characterized by the item “I like most aspects of my personality.” Positive relations with others measures the degree of satisfaction one has with one’s interpersonal relationships and is illustrated by the item “My friends and I sympathize with each other’s problems.” The autonomy dimension relates to the amount of self-determination perceived by the test taker. A sample item for this dimension is “People rarely talk me into things I don’t want to do.” The next dimension, environmental mastery, reflects perceived control over one’s environment as demonstrated by the item “In general, I feel I am in charge of the situation in which I live.” The dimension of purpose in life as indicated in the item, “I feel good when I think of what I’ve done in the past and what I hope to do in the future,” refers to the perception of meaning and purpose in life. Finally, the item, “For me, life has been a continuous process of learning, changing, and growth,” illustrates the personal growth dimension and how it relates to the amount of growth and development perceived by the test taker. The reliability of the PWB is high with coefficient alphas for the scales ranging from .87 to .93 (Ryff, 1989) and 6-week test-retest reliability coefficients for the six scales ranging from .81 to .88. Ryff and Keyes (1995) findings supported construct validity for the PWB when they used a confirmatory factor analysis to discover a predicted global psychological well-being factor that encompassed all six dimensions. 

The Self-Consciousness Scale Revised (SCSR) (Scheier & Carver, 1985), an updated version of the original Self-Consciousness Scale (Fenigstein et al., 1975), contains 22 items measured on a 4-point Likert-type scale.  It was created to address research findings that the SCS contains some words that are difficult for some to comprehend and also contains some items that involve respondents thinking about self-attributes that are uncharacteristic rather than characteristic. Some subjects experienced difficulties responding to the scale because of these issues. Respondents who experienced difficulties tended to be from non-college populations. The SCSR revision addressed these issues so that the scale could be used with broader populations. The three scales contained in the SCSR are Public Self-Consciousness, Private Self-Consciousness, and Social Anxiety. Public self-consciousness refers to one’s awareness of one’s public self and is illustrated by the item, “I care a lot about how I present myself to others.” On the other hand, private self-consciousness refers to one’s awareness of one’s private self. A sample item from this scale is “I’m always trying to figure myself out.” Social anxiety, as demonstrated by the item, “It takes me time to get over my shyness in new situations,” refers to feelings of apprehensiveness within a social context. Scheier and Carver (1985) found acceptable reliability for the SCSR with Cronbach alphas for the three scales ranging from .75 to .79 and 4-week test-retest correlations for the three scales ranging from .74 to .77. Construct validity was supported through a factor analysis with a Varimax rotation that showed the three predicted factors for the three scales.

Discussion 

Results of the study indicate that the 6-item SR scale derived from the SCSR is comparable in internal reliability to the private self-consciousness scale of the SCSR. However, the ISA with its 3-item scale has an understandably lower alpha. As hypothesized, the SR factor of the SCSR was generally negatively associated with PWB and the ISA factor of the SCSR was generally positively associated with PWB.  Overall these results support the Creed and Funder (1998) study that found negative personality correlates for SR and positive correlates for ISA. These results also complement the findings of other researchers who found that the SR factor was generally associated with mild psychopathology (e.g., Anderson et al., 1996; Watson et al., 1996; Trapnell et al., 1999). Stepwise regression analyses indicated that the PWB dimensions of self-acceptance, positive relations with others, environmental mastery, and purpose in life were best predicted by a combination of SR along with the SR by ISA interaction variable. SR was negatively related to PWB and the interaction variable of SR by ISA was positively related to PWB. The regression model of best fit for predicting the PWB dimension of personal growth was one that used the ISA variable alone. ISA was positively related to personal growth. 

For most dimensions of PWB, SR was the dominant factor. When ISA played a role for these dimensions, its predictive power was conditional. That is, in order for ISA to positively predict the four dimensions of PWB (self-acceptance, positive relations with others, environmental mastery, and purpose in life) that fit the predominate model, SR levels must be low. Thus, the combination of high ISA plus low SR was the most potent predictor of variables involving ISA. These findings suggest that when SR levels are high, it negatively trumps overall PWB, but when SR levels are low, ISA levels must be high for there to be a positive relationship with overall PWB. On the other hand, ISA was the dominant factor for the PWB dimension of personal growth. Such results suggest that even when SR levels are high, ISA will still predominate in its ability to predict personal growth. 

One interesting implication of these findings concerns the use of consciousness raising as a change agent in psychotherapy. Prochaska and Norcross (2003) along with many others have contended that techniques that raise the consciousness of the psychotherapy client/patient are common to most schools of psychotherapy. As they state, “Traditionally, increasing an individual’s consciousness has been one of the prime processes of change in psychotherapy” (p. 12). According to Prochaska and Norcross, psychotherapy systems that include consciousness raising as part of the change process include “psychoanalysis, psychoanalytic therapy, psychodynamic therapy, Adlerian therapy, existential therapy, logotherapy, reality therapy, person-centered therapy, motivational interviewing, gestalt therapy, rational-emotive behavior therapy, cognitive therapy, transactional analysis, communication/strategic therapy, structural therapy, Bowenian therapy, solution-focused therapy, and narrative therapy” (p. 518).  These therapies employ consciousness raising techniques to produce change by providing self information to the client/patient via feedback and education that can alter cognitive structures. Such changes in cognitive structures in the therapeutic context can then lead to adaptive changes in behavior and experiences in everyday life as the increase in information is used to make more effective responses to one’s environment.  

Consciousness raising is likely to lead to an elevation of both SR and ISA. If consciousness raising in psychotherapy ultimately leads to self-absorption and rumination instead of a “balanced self-awareness” (p. 150, Anderson et al., 1996), then the consciousness raising may be unsuccessful in facilitating treatment goals. Applebaum (1976) referred to this as the “dangerous edge of insight” and contended that it led some patients to lose gains because they were unable to cope with the increase in anxiety and other negative affect that resulted from increases in insight.  

Personal growth is a key process of successful psychotherapy and of achieving overall happiness. According to Ryff (1989), “Optimal psychological functioning requires not only that one achieve the prior characteristics, but also that one continue to develop one’s potential, to grow and expand as a person. The need to actualize oneself and realize one’s potentialities is central to the clinical perspectives on personal growth” (p. 1071).  The PWB dimension of personal growth was the one dimension that was positively predicted by ISA alone. According to these findings, to achieve personal growth, the therapist need not be as concerned with the unwanted baggage of elevated SR. Global private self-consciousness has been found to be positively correlated with Big Five personality factor of openness (Scandell, 1998). Trapnell and Campbell (1999) found that SR and ISA were both positively related to openness, but these self-consciousness factors differed in that SR was also related to neuroticism whereas ISA was related to conscientiousness. In a study by Ryff and Schmutte (1997), neuroticism was found to be strongly negatively correlated and conscientiousness strongly positively correlated with all six PWB dimensions. However, openness showed a positive correlation primarily with personal growth. Thus, as previously documented by Creed and Funder (1998), neuroticism likely accounts for much of the psychopathological variance associated with SR. However, the more interesting implications for positive psychology involve the relationship of ISA to psychological well-being. One might speculate then that consciousness raising increases both SR and ISA which in turn facilitates personality changes in openness. This opens the door to personal growth. As the therapeutic process unfolds, the ultimate goal would be to facilitate the development of high ISA while diminishing the need for the ruminative self-awareness associated with SR. Thus, within the context of serving as a catalyst for change, a key focus for therapists would be to focus on elements captured by the three ISA items of “I generally pay attention to my inner feelings; I’m quick to notice changes in my mood; and I know the way my mind works when I work through a problem.” Interestingly, these items relate to the strategies used by most psychotherapists to amplify the consciousness raising process by facilitating the client’s focus on his or her internal thoughts and feelings. Ultimately, a high ISA combined with a low SR is the formula for overall high levels of psychological well-being. 

This study found that most dimensions of PWB were best predicted by PrSC-SR combined with an interaction variable of PrSC-SR by PrSC-ISA. However, the PWB dimension of personal growth was best predicted by PrSC-ISA alone. Future researchers may want to attempt to replicate these findings using a larger sample that included more males. Although the regression findings were robust (p < .001), one could more confidently generalize these findings with a larger more gender balanced sample. Furthermore, it would be interesting to look at the relationship of the self-consciousness variables measured by Trapnell and Campell’s (1999) Reflection and Rumination Scale and Grant et al.’s (2002) Self-Reflection and Insight Scale and their relationships to PWB. Most importantly, researchers may want to conduct explanatory studies that track personality changes in psychotherapy patients as they experience the effects of consciousness raising strategies from their therapists to determine the impact on variables such as ISA, SR, openness to new experiences, conscientiousness, stages of change, personal growth, and overall psychological well-being.     

References 

Trapnell, P. D., & Campbell, J. D. (1999). Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model of personality:

Distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 284-304.

Watson, P. J., Morris, R. J., Ramsey, A., Hickman, S. E., & Waddell, M. G. (1996). Further contrasts between

self-reflectiveness and internal state awareness factors of private self-consciousness. The Journal of Psychology, 130, 183-192.