Does holding an overly positive view of oneself lead to better adjustment? There has been a long-standing debate among psychologists about whether self-enhancement is a blessing or a curse. Researchers are now proposing a theory that may reconcile previous inconsistencies in the literature. The debate stems from two different theoretical perspectives on how to conceptualize self-enhancement. One originated from Leon Festinger's social-comparison theory and compares perceived self and perceived others. According to this social-comparison perspective, self-enhancers perceive themselves more positively than they perceive others.

The other originated from Gordon Allport's notion of self-insight and compares self-perception to perception by others. According to this self-insight perspective, self-enhancers perceive themselves more positively than others perceive them.

In their paper, “Reconceptualizing Individual Differences in Self-Enhancement Bias: An Interpersonal Approach,” published in The Psychological Review (2004, Vol. 111), Princeton psychologist Virginia Kwan and others propose that the debate heretofore has neglected the differences between these two ways of defining self-enhancement. The researchers propose a new theory of self-enhancement that aims to integrate these earlier approaches. According to this theory, self-enhancers are those people with overly positive self-views, taking into account both how positively they view others and how positively others view them.

A study using this new definition showed that self-enhancement was related positively to self-esteem, but not to harmony in relationships or performance of tasks. In other words, viewing oneself as “better” brings mixed blessings.

Kwan quotes psychologist James Mark Baldwin to illustrate her approach: “My thought of self is…filled up with my thought of others…and my thoughts of others…[are] mainly filled up with myself.”

Co-authors with Kwan are psychologists Oliver John, of University of California, Berkeley, David Kenny, of University of Connecticut, Michael Bond, of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and Richard Robins, of the University of California Davis.

< Back