self-monitoring

Definition. n. Self-monitoring refers to a person's typical level of being sensitive to, and behaving in line with, signals provided in any given situation. For example, people are expected to behave quite differently during a church service than at the ice cream social following the service. Most people are aware of the expected behavior in each of these situations and adjust their behavior accordingly. In other words, they understand that they should sit still and remain silent through the majority of the church ceremony but become animated and talkative at the social. This suggests that most people possess some basic level of the ability to self-monitor.

However, people differ in the likelihood they will respond to more subtle clues. Some individuals (known as high self-monitors) are extremely sensitive to signals provided in a situation and consistently change their behavior to make the best possible impression on others. Conversely, some individuals (known as low self-monitors) rarely adjust their behavior to fit such sensitive cues provided in a situation, choosing to use their own preferences to guide the way they behave across situations. High self-monitors can be thought of as “social chameleons” while low self-monitors can be thought of as consistent individuals.

Development and details. The idea that individuals vary in the extent to which they monitor their social behavior was introduced in 1974 by the social psychologist Mark Snyder. At this time, Snyder introduced a 25-item true/false personality test to determine whether individuals tended to be high or low self-monitors. In the course of determining whether the test was measuring a real personality characteristic, it was administered to different groups of people who would be believed to possess traits expected of high versus low self-monitors. In particular, it was administered to actors and patients in mental health institutions. As expected, actors received scores identifying them as extremely high self-monitors, because they are skilled in adopting various personas and changing their behavior in front of audiences. Also as expected, individuals in mental health institutions received scores identifying them as extremely low self-monitors, as they were likely to have been institutionalized because of their failure to behave in line with social expectations over many situations.

Although the original self-monitoring test was administered to individuals at the extremes of the self-monitoring spectrum, most people in more typical populations can be identified as high or low self-monitors to a lesser extent. For example, items on the self-monitoring scale to which a high selfmonitoring person is likely to agree include “I would probably make a good actor” and “I may deceive people by being friendly when I really dislike them,” while a low self-monitoring individual is likely to agree with statements such as “I can only argue for ideas which I already believe” and “I would not change my opinions (or the way I do things) in order to please someone or win his or her favor.” It is important to note that although in the presented examples being a low self-monitor may appear to be better (more honest, etc.) than being a high self-monitor, self-monitoring is neither a particularly good nor bad attribute. Having either high or low self-monitoring tendencies can be beneficial in different situations. So, for example, high self-monitors tend to be socially sensitive (which tends to be a good attribute), whereas low self-monitors can be somewhat rigid.

The self-monitoring concept has been a useful tool for psychologists who try to predict behavior. Social psychologists have long believed that attitudes predict behavior, and some research has supported this notion. However, in actuality, it is not always possible to predict behavior just by knowing a person's attitudes. Consider the behavior of volunteering to help a community organization. If asked, most people would indicate a positive attitude toward volunteering (for example, they believe it is important to volunteer some free time for charitable causes). However, only a small percentage of those expressing this attitude are likely to sign up for volunteer work.

Not surprisingly, researchers who have asked participants to complete the self-monitoring instrument have found that attitudes of low self-monitors (which tend to be stable because they are driven by internal factors) are more likely to predict behavior than are attitudes of high self-monitors (which tend to change as a function of the social situation). Therefore, a low self-monitoring individual may be more likely to volunteer if he or she indicates a positive attitude toward volunteering than a high self-monitor, whose attitude may be more subject to change. One possible reason for this may be that low self-monitors are simply more aware of their attitudes because they refer to them more frequently than do high self-monitors, who are more likely to refer to the social cues surrounding them when describing their preferences.

This does not mean that high self-monitors are not capable of behaving in a manner consistent with their attitudes. For example, if they are told that attitudes should predict behavior, then they are more likely to behave in line with a previously stated attitude. However, this demonstrates the fact that high self-monitoring individuals tend to look to a social situation to determine their behavior, in that they realize they would not be perceived positively by others if their behavior did not reflect their attitude.

Examples. The self-monitoring personality characteristic is important in a variety of real-world situations, including advertising and interpersonal relationships. For example, advertisers aim to interest different types of individuals in purchasing a product. Not surprisingly, low self-monitors are interested in products that are advertised to be of high quality and to perform reliably well according to their purpose. On the other hand, high self-monitors tend to respond more favorably to advertisements suggesting that owning a particular product will improve their image. For example, low selfmonitoring consumers are likely to respond well to an advertisement touting a particular brand of car as being the most reliable form of transportation, while high self-monitoring consumers are likely to respond well to an advertisement claiming that owning a particular car will make others “take notice” of them when they are driving it.

In addition, individuals exhibiting different levels of self-monitoring differ in the type of information they use when selecting individuals to work with, become friends with, and date. High self-monitors place a greater emphasis on the physical appearance of a potential job applicant when deciding whom to hire than do low self-monitors. Further, they are more likely to believe they can pretend to be interested in a potential romantic partner, and they are more skilled at recognizing when another individual is merely trying to flatter them through praise. Alternatively, individuals scoring low on the self-monitoring scale tend to select potential workers on the basis of how they perceive their personalities. Further, they select friends and romantic partners on the basis of common values and experience deeper, longer-lasting relationships. – AEC, LAB