THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SIGNIFICANT OTHERS'
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE STATEMENTS
AND SELF-TALK, SELF-CONCEPTS AND SELF-ESTEEM.
Dr Paul C Burnett and Andrea R McCrindle
Centre for Cognitive Processes in Learning
School of Learning and Development
Queensland University of Technology
Brisbane, Australia
ABSTRACT
This study reports on a study conducted with 269 primary
school children in Grades 3 to 7. These children completed
self-report questionnaires measuring (1) the frequency of
positive and negative statements made by mother, father,
teacher, and peers; (2) positive and negative self-talk; (3)
academic self-concepts; (4) social relations self-concept; and
(5) self-esteem. Class teachers also completed the Behavioural
Indicators of Self-Esteem (BIOS) scale for each child.
Structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to describe the
relationships between these variables. Three models which
tested the mediating effect of self-talk between significant
others' statements and self-concepts and self-esteem were
initially tested and then modified.
INTRODUCTION
Studies which have investigated the relationships between
statements made by significant others and self-perceptions
(Burnett, 1996a; Blake & Slate, 1993; Campbell, 1989; Elgin,
1980; Goodman & Ritini, 1991; Joubert, 1991) have found that
positive interactions and statements made by significant
others were related to high self-esteem and that negative
interactions were associated with low self-esteem.
Additionally, statements by significant others have also been
found to be related to children's self-talk (Burnett, 1996b).
Further, a number of studies (Burnett, 1994a; Kent & Gibbons,
1987; Lamke, Lujan & Showalter, 1988; Philpot, Holliman &
Madonna, 1995) have reported associations between self-talk
and self-perceptions. Collectively the results of these
studies suggest that self-talk may play a mediating role
between statements made by significant others and self-concepts and
self-esteem. Therefore, the aim of this paper is
to investigate the mediating effect of self-talk using
Structural Equation Modelling.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Defining Self-Talk, Self-Concepts and Self-Esteem
Burnett (1996b) noted that confusion exists in the
literature as to what terminology should be used to describe
the self-talk phenomena and how it should be defined.
Synonymous terms used in the literature include self-statements, inner
speech, private speech, inner dialogue,
internal dialogue, positive self-referent verbal statements,
verbal self-regulation, speech-to-self, self-directed speech,
destructive dialogue, self-cognition, private self-talk,
adaptive self-talk, positive self-talk and negative self-talk.
Self-talk is defined as what people say to themselves with
particular emphasis on the words used to express thoughts and
beliefs about oneself and the world to oneself. Self-talk can
be positive, indicating a positive self-enhancing disposition
or negative, indicating a critical self-defeating outlook.
Some definitional confusion also surrounds the use of
self-concept and self-esteem despite the huge amount of
research that has been undertaken using these constructs.
Burnett (1993) investigated the definitional issues associated
with the two constructs and found little empirical support for
the traditional definition of self-concept in descriptive
terms and self-esteem in evaluative terms. However, empirical
support for an alternative conceptualisation was found
(Burnett, 1994b) and formed the basis for the following
definitions used in this study. Self-concept was defined as
the descriptive and evaluative beliefs that a person holds
about multidimensional characteristics of the self, while
self-esteem is believed to be synonymous with global or
general self-concept and is defined as the thoughts and
feelings that a person has about him or herself as a person.
Statements by Significant Others and Self-Perceptions
Four sources of significant others have been identified
by Harter (1985) as being parents, teachers, classmates and
close friends. Juhasz (1989) examined the importance of the
type of significant other, using self-report to open questions
and found that 5th and 6th graders rank order of importance
was mother, father, siblings, friends. However in the 7th and
8th grade, friends become more important and for university
freshmen, teachers were high with friends and parents equal.
There is evidence that indicates that verbal abuse
(negative statements by significant others) adversely affects
self-esteem and self-concept (Campbell, 1989) often resulting
in the victim's self-degradation and blame (Elgin, 1980).
Joubert (1991) investigated self-esteem and mother and father
treatment of self when younger and found that men with high
self-esteem tended to have fair mothers, who were interested
in their activities and less likely to engage in verbal abuse,
whilst high self-esteem in women correlated with parental
praise, interest, and less verbal put-downs. Verbal abuse was
the only parental category influencing self-esteem for men and
women, indicating the influence of positive and negative
statements by significant others. The effect of negative
statements on self-perceptions is illustrated in the Goodman
and Ritini (1991) study of the self-esteem of 8-10 year old
children whose mothers were diagnosed with depression. They
classified the mothers' descriptions of their child with
regards to school, peer relations, family relations, and
sports using a positive/negative/neutral response format.
Negative descriptions were classified as being
critical/hostile, maternal over-involvement, self-blaming, or
negative other statements. The results showed that the
depressed mothers gave more negative emotional statements
overall (specifically more critical/hostile and self-blame)
and had children with lower self-esteem.
Blake and Slate (1993) developed the Verbal Interaction
Questionnaire (VIQ) in response to lack of studies
investigating the effects of parental verbal interaction on
adolescents. They described 4 areas of verbal abuse:
belittling or berating; non-support; non-communication; and
rejection and hostility. The results of this study showed that
perceived parental verbal interaction was related to
adolescent self-esteem (r=.65, p<.01) so that the greater the
perceived parental verbal abuse, the lower the self-esteem of
the adolescent. More recently, Burnett (1996a) investigated
the relationship between childrens' self-reported perceptions
of statements made by significant others and self-concept and
self-esteem. The results suggested that positive statements
correlated positively with self-esteem and non-academic self-concepts,
while negative statements correlated negatively with
reading self-concept and with relations with mother and father
self-concepts. Interestingly, positive statements were more
highly related to self-esteem suggesting that their presence
or absence appeared to have a stronger influence on self-esteem when
compared to negative statements.
Teachers and peers create expectancies, relationships and
positive and negative experiences which affect children's
self-concept (Scher, 1990). The perception of teacher's
feelings, as reported by students, correlated with favourable
self-image, academic achievement and desirable classroom
behaviour (Davidson & Lang, 1960), whilst Kinney (1993)
reported that "nerd" adolescents developed more positive
self-perceptions through developing positive peer relations.
Statements Made by Significant Others and Self-Talk
Little research has investigated the relationship between
statements made by significant others and self-talk. In one of
the few studies conducted in this area, Burnett (1996b) found
that positive self-talk positively correlated with the
perceived frequency of positive statements made by significant
others. Specifically, boys' positive self-talk correlated with
positive statements made by parents whilst girls' positive
self-talk correlated with positive teacher statements. Both
boys' and girls' negative self-talk was related to negative
statements made by other children (peers and siblings). Thus,
adults appear to have more influence on positive self-talk
while other children have more influence on negative self-talk.
Self-Talk and Self-Perceptions
A number of studies have found more positive self-talk
and less negative self-talk in subjects with high self-esteem
(Burnett, 1994a; Kent & Gibbons, 1987; Lamke et al, 1988;
Philpot et al, 1995). Burnett (1994a) examined the
relationship between self-talk, assessed using interviews, and
self-esteem. Positive self-talk was positively correlated with
self-esteem whereas negative self-talk was not. It was
concluded that positive self-talk was more influential in the
development of self-esteem than the presence of negative self-talk.
However, these findings are in contrast to some research
which found that the frequency of negative self-statements
rather than positive self-statements was more influential on
psychological well-being (Kendall, 1984; Kendall & Hollon,
1981; Philpot et al, 1995; Philpot & McDonald, 1995). For
example, Philpot & Bamburg (1996) used an intervention to
increase positive self-statements and restructure negative
self-statements and found subjects increased in scores for
self-esteem. Negative self-statements had a greater effect
than positive self-statements.
AIM OF THE STUDY
This study investigated the mediating effect of self-talk
between positive and negative statements made by significant
others and self-perceptions (self-concepts and self-esteem)
using Structural Equation Modelling.
METHOD
SUBJECTS
A sample of 269 students in grades 3 to 7 at a middle
class, metropolitan primary school agreed to participate in
the study. There were 144 boys and 125 girls involved in the
study with a mean age of 9 years 8 months.
INSTRUMENTATION
Significant Others Statements Inventory (SOSI): Burnett
(1996b) outlined the development of the SOSI which has eight
subscales measuring children's perceived frequency of positive
and negative statements made by parents, teachers, siblings
and peers. In this study the siblings scale was not
administered. Some slight modifications to the scales were
made in light of the results obtained from a Confirmatory
Factor Analysis conducted on the data collected in this study.
The reliability coefficients for the six scales ranged from
0.70 to 0.83 with a mean of 0.77
Self-Talk Inventory (STI): Burnett (1996b) described the
development process for the STI which resulted in the
emergence of two scales: a positive self-talk scale (e.g.,
Just stay calm, Everything will be OK, It'll work out, I'll do
well) and a negative self-talk scale (Everyone will think I'm
hopeless, This is going to be awful, I'm going to muck this
up, I'm hopeless). The reliability coefficients for the 17-item
Positive Self-Talk Scale (PSTS) and the 16-item Negative
Self-Talk Scale (NSTS) were 0.89 and 0.86 respectively.
Self-Esteem and Self-Concepts: Self-Esteem and Self-Concept
scales were developed and used by Burnett (1994b, 1996a).
Sound construct validity determined by factor analysis and
moderate to high reliability (Self-Esteem 0.91, Physical
Appearance Self-Concept 0.78, Physical Ability Self-Concept
0.79, Peer Relations Self-Concept 0.67, Parent Relations Self-Concept
0.88, Reading Self-Concept 0.87, Mathematics Self-Concept 0.84, and
School Self-Concept 0.81) were reported by
Burnett (1994b). In this study modifications were made to
three of the Self-Concept scales described by Burnett (1994b,
1996a), specifically Parent Relations Self-Concept has been
split into Relations with Mother Self-Concept and Relations
with Father Self-Concept and School Self-Concept was been
replaced by a Learner Self-Concept scale. The three new self-concept
scales, Relations with Mother Self-Concept, Relations
with Father Self-Concept and Learner Self-Concept, were found
to have internal consistency coefficients of 0.83, 0.95, and
0.82.
Behavioural Indicators of Self-Esteem (BIOS): Burnett (in
press) reported that this 13-item unidimensional scale has an
alpha reliability coefficient of 0.95 and test-retest
reliabilities of 0.81 over a 10 week period and 0.70 over a
20-22 week period. The 13 behaviours to be rated by teachers
using the following response format, 1=Never, 2=Seldom,
3=Sometimes, 4=Often, and 5=Always were:
1. Is confident in what s/he does.
2. Is withdrawn from others. (negative item)
3. Appears proud of him/herself.
4. Gives limited responses. (negative item)
5. Appears happy with him/herself.
6. Displays good communication skills.
7. Is alone and isolated. (negative item)
8. Is interactive with others.
9. Appears satisfied with him/herself.
10. Lacks satisfaction with own performance. (negative
item)
11. Gets on well with other children.
12. Needs constant reassurance. (negative item)
13. Displays leadership qualities.
PROCEDURES
The instruments described above were administered in
class time by an experienced research assistant. If children
experienced any problems with reading an item they were
assisted. Teachers completed a BIOS form for each child in the
same week that the children completed the instrument.
MODELS
Three models were tested. The first model tested
hypothesised the following: positive statements by parents,
teachers and peers going to positive self-talk; negative
statements made by parents, teachers, and peers going to
negative self-talk; negative self-talk going to positive self-talk;
positive self-talk going to self-esteem; negative self-talk going to
self-esteem; and self-esteem going to the
behavioural indicators of self-esteem. The second model tested
hypothesised links between positive statements made by parents
and peers going to positive self-talk; negative statements
made by parents and peers going to negative self-talk;
negative self-talk going to positive self-talk; positive self-talk
going to mother, father and peer relations self-concepts;
and negative self-concept going to mother, father and peer
relations self-concept. The third model hypothesised positive
statements by teacher going to positive self-talk; negative
statements going to negative self-talk; negative self-talk
going to positive self-talk; positive self-talk going to
reading, maths and learning self-concept; and negative self-talk going
to reading, maths, and learning self-concepts. All
items were paired or aggregated to form two indices for each
of the dependent variables in each of the three models.
RESULTS
MODEL 1: The following results obtained for model 1 were GFI=
0.93, AGFI=0.91, RMSR=.05, ChiSQ=185.4; df=145 indicating a
good fit between the data and the hypothesised model. However
a number of hypothesised paths were not significant. These
paths were removed from the model one by one until all paths
in the model were significant. The results for the modified
model were GFI=0.94, AGFI=0.92, RMSR=0.04, ChiSQ=145.7; df=116
with the following paths significant.
Significant Paths t-value
Positive Statements by Parents to Positive Self-Talk 3.82
Positive Statements by Teachers to Positive Self-Talk 4.81
Negative Statements by Peers to Negative Self-Talk 2.66
Negative Self-Talk to Positive Self-Talk -3.07
Positive Self-Talk to Self-Esteem 5.49
Negative Self-Talk to Self-Esteem -4.84
Positive Statements by Peers to Self-Esteem 2.86
Self-Esteem to BIOS 4.83
Negative Statements by Teachers to BIOS -2.35
Variable Percentage of Variance Accounted
Positive Self-Talk 40
Negative Self-Talk 12
Self-Esteem 40
BIOS 23
MODEL 2: The following results obtained for model 2 were GFI=
0.87, AGFI=0.81, RMSR=.11, ChiSQ=357.4; df=118 indicating a
moderate fit between the data and the hypothesised model.
However a number of hypothesised paths were not significant.
These paths were removed from the model one by one until all
paths in the model were significant. The results for the
modified model were GFI=0.93, AGFI=0.89, RMSR=0.05, ChiSQ=180;
df=90 with the following paths significant.
Significant Paths t-value
Positive Statements by Parents to Positive Self-Talk 2.92
Positive Statements by Peers to Positive Self-Talk 3.59
Negative Statements by Peers to Negative Self-Talk 5.05
Negative Self-Talk to Positive Self-Talk -3.07
Negative Self-Talk to Peer Relations Self-Concept -2.68
Positive Statements by Parents to Mother Relations S-C 3.15
Positive Statements by Parents to Father Relations S-C 7.03
Positive Statements by Peers to Peer Relations S-C 5.09
Father Relations S-C to Mother Relations S-C 6.32
Father Relations S-C to Peer Relations S-C 2.68
Mother Relations S-C to Peer Relations S-C 2.94
Variable Percentage of Variance Accounted
Positive Self-Talk 33
Negative Self-Talk 13
Mother Relations Self-Concept 35
Father Relations Self-Concept 21
Peer Relations Self-Concept 40
MODEL 3: The following results obtained for model 3 were GFI=
0.91, AGFI=0.86, RMSR=.09, ChiSQ=175.7; df=67 indicating a
moderate fit between the data and the hypothesised model.
However a number of hypothesised paths were not significant.
These paths were removed from the model one by one until all
paths in the model were significant. The results for the
modified model were GFI=0.97, AGFI=0.95, RMSR=0.05, ChiSQ=
53.1; df=45 with the following paths significant.
Significant Paths t-value
Positive Statements by Teacher to Positive Self-Talk 6.32
Negative Self-Talk to Positive Self-Talk -3.68
Positive Self-Talk to Reading Self-Concept 4.16
Negative Self-Talk to Maths Self-Concept -3.99
Positive Statements by Teacher to Maths Self-Concept 4.75
Positive Statements by Teacher to Learning Self-Concept 4.51
Maths Self-Concept to Reading Self-Concept 3.76
Maths Self-Concept to Learning Self-Concept 5.70
Reading Self-Concept to Learning Self-Concept 5.70
Variable Percentage of Variance Accounted
Positive Self-Talk 33
Negative Self-Talk 0
Maths Self-Concept 19
Reading Self-Concept 16
Learning Self-Concept 48
DISCUSSION
The results of this study suggest that positive and
negative self-talk do play a mediating effect between positive
and negative statements made by significant others and
childrens' self-esteem and self-concepts. The results for
Model 1 suggest that positive self-talk plays a mediating role
between parents' and teachers' positive statements and self-esteem but
not between peer relations self-concept and self-esteem. Positive
statements by peers was not related to
positive self-talk but instead had a direct path to self-esteem.
Interestingly, negative self-talk seemed to play a
mediating role between negative statements made by peers and
self-esteem. Additionally, self-esteem was related to
behavioural indicators of self-esteem as was negative
statements made by teachers. In terms of self-esteem
development these results highlight the importance of (a)
parents, teachers and peers saying positive things to children
and (b) reducing the number of negative statements made to
children by peers. These results support previous findings
which found that positive statements have more impact on self-talk and
self-esteem than negative statements. Interestingly,
negative statements were not related to self-esteem at all. It
seems that children have developed effective protective
mechanisms to deal with negative statements made by adults
(parents and teachers). However, negative statements made by
peers seem to have the power to hurt.
The results of model 2 do not provide support for the
mediation hypothesis tested using the social relations self-concept
variables. In keeping with the results found in model
1, support for the influence of positive and negative
statements on positive and negative self-talk was found with
the exception that negative statements by parents was not
related to self-talk. The significant finding for this model
was the direct effect of positive statements on social
relations self-concepts. Positive statements made by parents
were related to mother and father relations self-concept
whilst positive statements by peers related to peer relations
self-concept. The impact of negative statements made by peers
on negative self-talk was noted with high negative self-talk
associated with low peer relations self-concept.
Finally the results of model 3 provide only minimal
support for the mediation hypothesis tested. The results
suggest that positive statements made by teachers are related
to positive self-talk which in turn is predictive of reading
self-concept but this was the only mediation effect noted.
Again the insignificant influence of negative statements was
found. Significant direct effects were found which related
positive statements made by teachers to maths and learning
self-concept. Negative self-talk was found to be related to
maths self-concept with high negative self-talk associated
with maths self-concept. Both reading and maths self-concepts
were related to learning self-concept.
In summary, the mediating effect of self-talk between
positive and negative statements was confirmed for self-esteem
but not for social or academic self-concepts where direct
effects were mostly noted. Also the results of this study
confirm that the presence or absence of positive statements
made by significant others is more predictive of self-esteem
and self-concepts than negative statements. Negative
statements by significant others seem to have little effect on
self-esteem and self-concept with the exception of negative
statements made by peers.
REFERENCES
Burnett, P.C. (1993). Self-concept or self-esteem. Australian
Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 3, 1-8.
Burnett, P.C. (1994a). Self-talk in upper elementary school
children: Its relationship with irrational beliefs, self-esteem, and
depression. Journal of Rational-Emotive &
Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 12, 181-188.
Burnett, P.C. (1994b). Self-concept and self-esteem in
elementary school children. Psychology in the Schools, 31,
164-171.
Burnett, P.C. (1996a). An investigation of the social learning
and symbolic interaction models for the development of self-concepts
and self-esteem. Journal of Family Studies, 2, 57-64.
Burnett, P.C. (1996b). Children's self-talk and significant
others' positive and negative statements. Educational
Psychology, 16, 57-67.
Burnett, P.C. (In press). Measuring Behavioral Indicators of
Self-Esteem in the Classroom. Journal of Humanistic Education
and Development.
Blake, P.C. & Slate, J.R. (1993). A preliminary investigation
into the relationship between adolescent self-esteem and
parental verbal interaction. The School Counselor, 41, 81-85.
Campbell, B. (1989). When words hurt: Beware of the dangers of
verbal abuse. Essence, 20, 86.
Davidson, H.H. & Lang, G. (1960). Children's perceptions of
their teacher's feelings toward them related to self-perception, school
achievement and behavior. Journal of
Experimental Education, 29, 107-118.
Elgin, S. (1980). The gentle art of verbal self-defense.
Boston, MA: Prentice Hall.
Goodman, S. & Ritini, J. (1991). Depressed mothers' expressed
emotion and their children's self-esteem and mood disorders.
Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for
Research in Child Development, Seattle, WA, April 18-21.
Harter, S. (1985). Manual for the social support scale for
children. University of Denver.
Joubert, C.E. (1991). Self-esteem and social desirability in
relation to college students' retrospective perceptions of
parental fairness and disciplinary practices. Psychological
Reports, 69, 115-120.
Juhasz, A.M. (1989). Significant others and self-esteem:
Methods for determining who and why. Adolescence, 24, 581-594.
Kendall, P.C. (1984). Cognitive processes and procedures in
behavior therapy. In G.T. Wilson, C.M. Franks, K.D. Brownwell,
& P.C. Kendall (Eds.), Annual review of behavior therapy:
Theory and practice. Vol. 9, pp. 132-179. New York: Guilford.
Kendall, P.C. & Hollon, S.D. (1981). Assessing self-referent
speech: Methods in the measurement of self-statements. In P.C.
Kendall & S.D. Hollon (Eds.), Assessment strategies for
cognitive-behavioral interventions, pp. 85-118. New York:
Academic Press.
Kent, G. & Gibbons, R. (1987). Self-efficacy and the control
of anxious conditions. Journal of Behavior Therapy and
Experimental Psychology, 1, 33-40.
Kinney, D.A. (1993). From nerds to normals: The recovery of
identity among adolescents from middle school to high school.
Sociology of Education, 66, 21-40.
Lamke, L.K., Lujan, B.M., & Showalter, J.M. (1988). The case
for modifying adolescents' cognitive self-statements.
Adolescence, 23, 967-974.
Philpot, V.D. & Bamburg, J.W. (1996). Rehearsal of positive
and negative self-statements and restructured negative self-statements
to increase self-esteem and decrease depression.
Psychological Reports, 79, 83-91.
Philpot, V.D., Holliman, W.B., & Madonna, S. (1995). Self-statements,
locus of control, and depression in predicting
self-esteem. Psychological Reports, 76, 1007-1010.
Philpot, V.D. & McDonald, K.L. (1995). The validation of the
Daily Thought Questionnaire measuring the frequency of
positive and negative self-statements in college students.
Unpublished master's thesis, Northwestern State University,
Natchitoches, LA.
Scher, M.E. (1990). Self concept: Reaching the affective
child. (Report No. CG 023 587). South Bend, IN: Indiana
University South Bend. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED 335 594)