Predictive validity of explicit and implicit self-esteem for subjective well-being

By U. Schimmack, E. Diener. 2003

219 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b43f6056eee322397b9c588590269efca5de6a46

How researchers see this paper

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

In Clinical Psychology

1. M. Kernis
2. E. Diener
3. Michela Schröder‐Abé
4. U. Schimmack
5. Astrid Schütz
6. A. Rudolph
7. R. E.
8. Xuqun You

In Social Psychology

1. Feng Kong
2. Jingjing Zhao
3. U. Schimmack
4. R. E.
5. E. Diener
6. M. Kernis
7. Jürgen Schupp
8. Xuqun You

In Sociology and Political Science

1. M. Kernis
2. Klaus Fiedler
3. Feng Kong
4. Jingjing Zhao
5. Xuqun You
6. U. Schimmack
7. Gert G. Wagner
8. Michela Schröder‐Abé

Citations in the corpus

• Self-Esteem as Mediator and Moderator of the Relationship Between Social Support and Subjective Well-Being Among Chinese University Students (2013, background): “Global self-esteem, which refers to an individual’s general sense of his or her value or worth (Rosenberg 1979; Mäkikangas and Kinnunen 2003), is one of the most examined predictor variables of well-being besides demographic characteristics, social relationships, and personality (Bosson et al. 2000;”
• Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) (2006, result): “Conceptually similar findings were obtained by Steffens and Plewe (2001), Govan and Williams (2004), and J.”
• High implicit self‐esteem is not necessarily advantageous: discrepancies between explicit and implicit self‐esteem and their relationship with anger expression and psychological health (2007, background): “…build on the fact that research expecting direct positive effects of implicit SE that are independent of explicit SE provided only limited support (Schimmack & Diener, 2003; Spalding & Hardin, 1999), whereas research measuring discrepancies between implicit and explicit SE produced a number of…”
• Personality and Subjective Well-Being (2009, background): “shown to correlate with well-being (e.g., Lucas et al., 1996; Schimmack & Diener, 2003 ).”
• “How much do you like your name?” An implicit measure of global self-esteem (2008, result): “Notably, previous studies were unable to support this assertion using other implicit measures (e.g., Bosson et al., 2000; Schimmack & Diener, 2003; Shimizu & Pelham, 2004).”
• Self-Esteem Issues and Answers (2013, methodology): “It is positively related to other well-being indicators such as life satisfaction and positive and negative affect, and it is negatively related to indicators of psychological distress (Schimmack & Diener, 2003).”
• A Hybrid Model for Research on Subjective Well-being: Examining Common- and Component-specific Sources of Variance in Life Satisfaction, Positive Affect, and Negative Affect (2007, background): “In other cases, researchers have examined the three components of SWB as separate criteria within the same study (Emmons and Diener, 1985; Headey and Wearing; 1989; Pavot et al., 1990; Brief et al., 1993; Lang and Heckhausen, 2001; Schimmack and Diener, 2003).”
• The Influence of Environment and Personality on the Affective and Cognitive Component of Subjective Well-being (2008, background): “Although these judgments are likely to be based on heuristics, a large body of empirical research has shown that life satisfaction judgments are highly correlated with more comprehensive assessments of satisfaction in important life domains (Andrews and Whitey 1976; Schimmack and Oishi 2005), and sh”