Self-monitoring: appraisal and reappraisal.

By Steven W. Gangestad, Mark Snyder. Psychological bulletin, 2000

813 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3578078d7071459135d4c89f2f557d29678d6be1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

On Assessing the Political Effects of Racial Prejudice (2009, background): “…self-monitors are chronically concerned about the appropriateness of their behavior; they are highly attuned to social context and seek to adjust their beliefs, attitudes, and behavior on the basis of immediately salient norms and social expectations (Gangestad & Snyder 2000; Snyder 1974, 1987).”
Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes (2005, background): “Individual differences in characteristic tendencies to control expressive behavior through active attempts to appear appropriate across different situations are reflected in the construct of self-monitoring (e.g., Gangestad & Snyder, 2000; Snyder, 1974, 1987).”
Self-monitoring as a moderator of the relationships between personality traits and performance. (2005, positive): “Consequently, high self-monitors are motivated to engage in those behaviors that will help them be accepted and/or gain status (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000; Turnley & Bolino, 2001).”
The Influence of Friends on Consumer Spending: The Role of Agency–Communion Orientation and Self-Monitoring (2011, background): “…orientation instead of using gender as a proxy, and second, because research has found that consumers differ in their responsiveness to social and interpersonal cues of situationally appropriate behavior (Gangestad and Snyder 2000), we explore the moderating role of self-monitoring.”
Seventy-five years of motivation measures (1930–2005): A descriptive analysis (2007, background): “…et al. (2003), Cox and Klinger (2004), Klinger et al. (1980), Roberson et al. (1989), Sellen et al. (2006) The self as motivator Self-monitoring Gangestad and Snyder (2000), Snyder (1974) Motivational primacy: individual vs. collective self Gaertner et al. (1999, 2002), Sedikides et al.…”
Play hard, work hard: Fun at work and job performance (2014, background): “For example, because self-monitoring embodies the notion to engage in certain impression management techniques (Day et al., 2002; Gangestad and Snyder, 2000), perhaps high self-monitors that engage in workplace fun have greater payoffs in terms of rated performance.”
Self-Regulation of Creativity at Work: The Role of Feedback-Seeking Behavior in Creative Performance (2011, background): “Although this preference for others’ opinions has surface similarities to that held by “high self-monitors” (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000; Snyder, 1974), self-monitoring is by definition about conformity, about being chameleon-like and living up to others’ expectations (Snyder, 1974).”
Personality Strength and Situational Influences on Behavior (2015, background): “Individuals who are willing and able to project a situationally appropriate façade are referred to as high self-monitors, whereas those who are unwilling or unable to adapt their behavior to the press of the situation are referred to as low self-monitors (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000; Snyder, 1974).”
Chameleonic or Consistent? A Multilevel Investigation of Emotional Labor Variability and Self-Monitoring (2012, background): “…& Vey, 2005; Grandey, 2000), we integrate into our theorizing the personality trait selfmonitoring, which captures the extent to which individuals monitor and control their expressive behaviors and self-presentations to cultivate desired public appearances (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000; Snyder, 1974).”
Social Norms: A Review (2016, neutral): “By definition, low self-monitors tend to be inf luenced by their personal values, whereas high self-monitors tend to be inf luenced by the behavior of those around them (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000).”