This is true both for individual concepts such as neuroticism/emotional stability ( Butler et al., 1994), depression ( Kim and Cicchetti, 2009), and vulnerable narcissism ( Campbell et al., 2002), as well as dyadic concepts such as emotional responsiveness ( Rhodewalt et al., 1998), attachment ( Foster et al., 2007), and dysfunctional coping strategies (e.g., alcohol abuse Bentall et al., 2011). In general, research has shown that a higher degree of self-esteem stability is associated with better adjustment or functioning. Even though substantial correlations are usually found between self-esteem stability and self-esteem level (see Okada, 2010), recent studies have consistently found an incremental validity of self-esteem stability over and above self-esteem level in predicting variables relevant for psychological adjustment or functioning. Self-esteem stability has been defined as the extent to which an individual experiencesshort-termfluctuations in self-esteem (e.g., Kernis, 2005). However, a growing number of studies in recent decades have expanded the meaning of self-esteem by differentiating between the global level of self-esteem in general and self-esteem stability. This statement shows that self-esteem is conceptualized more or less as an individual trait, with day-to-day fluctuations in feelings of self-worth dismissed as measurement error. 54 this description can be assumed to be true for all sexes). The term ‘low self-esteem’ means that the individual lacks respect for himself, considers himself unworthy, inadequate, or otherwise seriously deficient as a person” (p. Appreciating his own merits, he nonetheless recognizes his faults. According to Rosenberg (1979), an individual with a high level of self-esteem can be characterized as follows: “He has self-respect, considers himself a person of worth.
The majority of self-esteem research has focused on the global level of self-esteem (i.e., “the individual's positive or negative attitudes toward the self as a totality” ( Rosenberg et al., 1995), p. We discuss this validity issue, arguing that direct and indirect assessment approaches measure relevant, yet different aspects of self-esteem stability. The results also showed that all cross-sectional measures of self-esteem stability were only moderately associated with variability in self-esteem levels assessed longitudinally with multiple administrations of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. The new SESS proved to be a stronger predictor than the existing scales and had incremental validity over and above self-esteem level. In four studies (total N = 826), we describe the development of the SESS and present evidence for its validity with respect to individual outcomes (life satisfaction, neuroticism, and vulnerable narcissism) and dyadic outcomes (relationship satisfaction in self- and partner ratings) through direct comparisons with existing measures.
In this paper, we present the Self-Esteem Stability Scale (SESS), a unidimensional and very brief scale to directly assess self-esteem stability. However, measures of self-esteem stability are few and lacking in validity. In recent decades, self-esteem stability has repeatedly been shown to be an important variable affecting psychological functioning.
Self-esteem stability describes fluctuations in the level of self-esteem experienced by individuals over a brief period of time. Institute of Psychology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.