Impression management

Last updated

Impression management is a conscious or subconscious process in which people attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event by regulating and controlling information in social interaction. [1] It was first conceptualized by Erving Goffman in 1959 in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, and then was expanded upon in 1967. [2]

In psychology, the subconscious is the part of the mind that is not currently in focal awareness.

Social influence refers to the way in which individuals change their behavior to meet the demands of a social environment. It takes many forms and can be seen in conformity, socialization, peer pressure, obedience, leadership, persuasion, sales, and marketing. Typically social influence results from a specific action, command, or request, but people also alter their attitudes and behaviors in response to what they perceive others might do or think. In 1958, Harvard psychologist Herbert Kelman identified three broad varieties of social influence.

  1. Compliance is when people appear to agree with others but actually keep their dissenting opinions private.
  2. Identification is when people are influenced by someone who is liked and respected, such as a famous celebrity.
  3. Internalization is when people accept a belief or behavior and agree both publicly and privately.
Perception Organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information in order to represent and understand the environment

Perception is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information in order to represent and understand the presented information, or the environment.

Contents

An example of impression management theory in play is in sports such as soccer. At an important game, a player would want to showcase themselves in the best light possible, because there are college recruiters watching. This person would have the flashiest pair of cleats and try and perform their best to show off their skills. Their main goal may be to impress the college recruiters in a way that maximizes their chances of being chosen for a college team rather than winning the game. [3]

Impression management is usually used synonymously with self-presentation, in which a person tries to influence the perception of their image. The notion of impression management was first applied to face-to-face communication, but then was expanded to apply to computer-mediated communication. The concept of impression management is applicable to academic fields of study such as psychology and sociology as well as practical fields such as corporate communication and media.

Self-concept ones internal description of oneself

One's self-concept is a collection of beliefs about oneself. Generally, self-concept embodies the answer to "Who am I?".

Computer-mediated communication (CMC) is defined as any human communication that occurs through the use of two or more electronic devices. While the term has traditionally referred to those communications that occur via computer-mediated formats, it has also been applied to other forms of text-based interaction such as text messaging. Research on CMC focuses largely on the social effects of different computer-supported communication technologies. Many recent studies involve Internet-based social networking supported by social software.

Background

The foundation and the defining principles of impression management were created by Erving Goffman in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . Impression management theory states that one tries to alter one's perception according to one's goals. In other words, the theory is about how individuals wish to present themselves, but in a way that satisfies their needs and goals. Goffman "proposed to focus on how people in daily work situations present themselves and, in so doing, what they are doing to others", and he was "particularly interested in how a person guides and control how others form an impression of them and what a person may or may not do while performing before them". [4]

<i>The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life</i> Book by Erving Goffman

The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life is a 1956 sociology book by Erving Goffman, in which the author uses the imagery of the theatre in order to portray the importance of human social interaction; this would become known as Goffman's dramaturgical analysis approach.

Theory

Motives

A range of factors that govern impression management can be identified. It can be stated that impression management becomes necessary whenever there exists a kind of social situation, whether real or imaginary. Logically, the awareness of being a potential subject of monitoring is also crucial. Furthermore, the characteristics of a given social situation are important. Specifically, the surrounding cultural norms determine the appropriateness of particular nonverbal behaviours. [5] The actions have to be appropriate to the targets, and within that culture, so that the kind of audience as well as the relation to the audience influences the way impression management is realized. A person's goals are another factor governing the ways and strategies of impression management. This refers to the content of an assertion, which also leads to distinct ways of presentation of aspects of the self. The degree of self-efficacy describes whether a person is convinced that it is possible to convey the intended impression. [6]

A new study finds that, all other things being equal, people are more likely to pay attention to faces that have been associated with negative gossip than those with neutral or positive associations. The study contributes to a body of work showing that far from being objective, human perceptions are shaped by unconscious brain processes that determine what they "choose" to see or ignore—even before they become aware of it. The findings also add to the idea that the brain evolved to be particularly sensitive to "bad guys" or cheaters—fellow humans who undermine social life by deception, theft or other non-cooperative behavior. [7]

There are many methods behind self-presentation, including self disclosure (identifying what makes you "you" to another person), managing appearances (trying to fit in), ingratiation, aligning actions (making one's actions seem appealing or understandable), and alter-casting (imposing identities on other people). These self-presentation methods can also be used on the corporate level as impression management. [8]

Self-presentation

Self-presentation is conveying information about oneself – or an image of oneself – to others. There are two types and motivations of self-presentation:

Self-presentation is expressive. Individuals construct an image of themselves to claim personal identity, and present themselves in a manner that is consistent with that image. [10] If they feel like it is restricted, they often exhibit reactance or become defiant – try to assert their freedom against those who would seek to curtail self-presentation expressiveness. An example of this dynamic is the "preacher's daughter", whose suppressed personal identity and emotions cause an eventual backlash at her family and community.

Self-presentation can be either defensive or assertive strategies. Whereas defensive strategies include behaviours like avoidance of threatening situations or means of self-handicapping, assertive strategies refer to more active behaviour like the verbal idealisation of the self, the use of status symbols or similar practices. [14]

These strategies play important roles in one's maintenance of self-esteem. [15] One's self-esteem is affected by their evaluation of their own performance and their perception of how others react to their performance. As a result, people actively portray impressions that will elicit self-esteem enhancing reactions from others. [16]

Social interaction

Goffman argued in his 1967 book, Interaction ritual, that people participate in social interactions by performing a "line", or "pattern of verbal and nonverbal acts", which is created and maintained by both the performer and the audience. [17] By enacting a line effectively, the person gains positive social value, which is also called "face". The success of a social interaction will depend on whether the performer has the ability to maintain face. [4] As a result, a person is required to display a kind of character by becoming "someone who can be relied upon to maintain himself as an interactant, poised for communication, and to act so that others do not endanger themselves by presenting themselves as interactants to him". [17] Goffman analyses how a human being in "ordinary work situations presents himself and his activity to others, the ways in which he guides and controls the impression they form of him, and the kinds of things he may and may not do while sustaining his performance before them”. [18]

When Goffman turned to focus on people physically presented in a social interaction, the "social dimension of impression management certainly extends beyond the specific place and time of engagement in the organization". Impression management is "a social activity that has individual and community implications". [4] We call it "pride" when a person displays a good showing from duty to himself, while we call it "honor" when he "does so because of duty to wider social units, and receives support from these duties in doing so". [17]

Another approach to moral standards that Goffman pursues is the notion of "rules of conduct", which "can be partially understood as obligations or moral constraints". These rules may be substantive (involving laws, morality, and ethics) or ceremonial (involving etiquette). [4] Rules of conduct play an important role when a relationship "is asymmetrical and the expectations of one person toward another are hierarchical." [4]

Dramaturgical analogy

Goffman presented impression management dramaturgically, explaining the motivations behind complex human performances within a social setting based on a play metaphor. [19] Goffman's work incorporates aspects of a symbolic interactionist perspective, [20] emphasizing a qualitative analysis of the interactive nature of the communication process. Impression management requires the physical presence of others. Performers who seek certain ends in their interest, must "work to adapt their behavior in such a way as to give off the correct impression to a particular audience" and "implicitly ask that the audience take their performance seriously". [4] Goffman proposed that while among other people individual would always strive to control the impression that others form of him or her so that to achieve individual or social goals. [21]

The actor, shaped by the environment and target audience, sees interaction as a performance. The objective of the performance is to provide the audience with an impression consistent with the desired goals of the actor. [22] Thus, impression management is also highly dependent on the situation. [23] In addition to these goals, individuals differ in responses from the interactive environment, some may be non-responsive to an audience's reactions while others actively respond to audience reactions in order to elicit positive results. These differences in response towards the environment and target audience are called self-monitoring. [24] Another factor in impression management is self-verification, the act of conforming the audience to the person's self-concept.

The audience can be real or imaginary. IM style norms, part of the mental programming received through socialization, are so fundamental that we usually do not notice our expectations of them. While an actor (speaker) tries to project a desired image, an audience (listener) might attribute a resonant or discordant image. An example is provided by situations in which embarrassment occurs and threatens the image of a participant. [25]

Goffman proposes that performers "can use dramaturgical discipline as a defense to ensure that the 'show' goes on without interruption." [4] Goffman contends that dramaturgical discipline includes: [4]

  1. coping with dramaturgical contingencies;
  2. demonstrating intellectual and emotional involvement;
  3. remembering one's part and not committing unmeant gestures or faux pas;
  4. not giving away secrets involuntarily;
  5. covering up inappropriate behavior on the part of teammates on the spur of the moment;
  6. offering plausible reasons or deep apologies for disruptive events;
  7. maintaining self-control (for example, speaking briefly and modestly);
  8. suppressing emotions to private problems; and
  9. suppressing spontaneous feelings.

Manipulation and ethics

In business, "managing impressions" normally "involves someone trying to control the image that a significant stakeholder has of them". The ethics of impression management has been hotly debated on whether we should see it as an effective self-revelation or as cynical manipulation. [4] Some people insist that impression management can reveal a truer version of the self by adopting the strategy of being transparent, which is a kind of openness. Because transparency "can be provided so easily and because it produces information of value to the audience, it changes the nature of impression management from being cynically manipulative to being a kind of useful adaptation".

Virtue signalling is used within groups to criticize their own members for valuing outward appearance over substantive action (having a real or permanent, rather than apparent or temporary, existence).

Psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims to change the behavior or perception of others through abusive, deceptive, or underhanded tactics. [26] By advancing the interests of the manipulator, often at another's expense, such methods could be considered exploitative, abusive, devious, and deceptive. The process of manipulation involves bringing an unknowing victim under the domination of the manipulator, often using deception, and using the victim to serve their own purposes.

Machiavellianism is a term that some social and personality psychologists use to describe a person's tendency to be unemotional, and therefore able to detach him or herself from conventional morality and hence to deceive and manipulate others. [27] (See also Machiavellianism in the workplace.)

Sophism In modern usage sophist and sophistry are redefined and used disparagingly. A sophism is a specious argument for displaying ingenuity in reasoning or for deceiving someone. A sophist is a person who reasons with clever but fallacious and deceptive arguments.

Corporate jargon Variously known as corporate speak, corporate lingo, business speak, business jargon, management speak, workplace jargon, or commercialese, is the jargon often used in large corporations, bureaucracies, and similar workplaces.[1][2] The use of corporate jargon, also known as "corporatese", is criticised for its lack of clarity as well as for its tedium, making meaning and intention opaque and understanding difficult.

Application

Face-to-face communication

Self, social identity and social interaction

The social psychologist, Edward E. Jones, brought the study of impression management to the field of psychology during the 1960s and extended it to include people's attempts to control others' impression of their personal characteristics. [28] His work sparked an increased attention towards impression management as a fundamental interpersonal process.

The concept of self is important to the theory of impression management as the images people have of themselves shape and are shaped by social interactions [29] Our self-concept develops from social experience early in life. [30] Schlenker (1980) further suggests that children anticipate the effect that their behaviours will have on others and how others will evaluate them. They control the impressions they might form on others, and in doing so they control the outcomes they obtain from social interactions.

Social identity refers to how people are defined and regarded in social interactions . [31] Individuals use impression management strategies to influence the social identity they project to others. [30] The identity that people establish influences their behaviour in front of others, others' treatment of them and the outcomes they receive. Therefore, in their attempts to influence the impressions others form of themselves, a person plays an important role in affecting his social outcomes. [32]

Social interaction is the process by which we act and react to those around us. In a nutshell, social interaction includes those acts people perform toward each other and the responses they give in return. [33] The most basic function of self-presentation is to define the nature of a social situation (Goffman, 1959). Most social interactions are very role governed. Each person has a role to play, and the interaction proceeds smoothly when these roles are enacted effectively. People also strive to create impressions of themselves in the minds of others in order to gain material and social rewards (or avoid material and social punishments). [34]

Cross-cultural communication

Understanding how one's impression management behavior might be interpreted by others can also serve as the basis for smoother interactions and as a means for solving some of the most insidious communication problems among individuals of different racial/ethnic and gender backgrounds. [35]

"People are sensitive to how they are seen by others and use many forms of impression management to compel others to react to them in the ways they wish" (Giddens, 2005, p. 142). An example of this concept is easily illustrated through cultural differences. Different cultures have diverse thoughts and opinions on what is considered beautiful or attractive. For example, Americans tend to find tan skin attractive, but in Indonesian culture, pale skin is more desirable. [36]

Another illustration of how people attempt to control how others perceive them is portrayed through the clothing they wear. A person who is in a leadership position strives to be respected and in order to control and maintain the impression. This illustration can also be adapted for a cultural scenario. The clothing people choose to wear says a great deal about the person and the culture they represent. For example, most Americans are not overly concerned with conservative clothing. Most Americans are content with tee shirts, shorts, and showing skin. The exact opposite is true on the other side of the world. "Indonesians are both modest and conservative in their attire" (Cole, 1997, p. 77). [36]

Companies use cross-cultural training (CCT) to facilitate effective cross-cultural interaction. CCT can be defined as any procedure used to increase an individual's ability to cope with and work in a foreign environment. Training employees in culturally consistent and specific impression management (IM) techniques provide the avenue for the employee to consciously switch from an automatic, home culture IM mode to an IM mode that is culturally appropriate and acceptable. Second, training in IM reduces the uncertainty of interaction with FNs and increases employee's ability to cope by reducing unexpected events. [35]

Team-working in hospital wards

Impression management theory can also be used in health communication. It can be used to explore how professionals 'present' themselves when interacting on hospital wards and also how they employ front stage and backstage settings in their collaborative work. [37]

In the hospital wards, Goffman's front stage and backstage performances are divided into 'planned' and 'ad hoc' rather than 'official' and 'unofficial' interactions. [37]

Planned front stage is the structured collaborative activities such as ward rounds and care conferences which took place in the presence of patients and/or carers.

Ad hoc front stage is the unstructured or unplanned interprofessional interactions that took place in front of patients/carers or directly involved patients/carers.

Planned backstage is the structured MDT meetings in which professionals gathered in a private area of the ward, in the absence of patients, to discuss management plans for patients under their care.

Ad hoc backstage is the use of corridors and other ward spaces for quick conversations between professionals in the absence of patients/carers.

Offstage is the social activities between and among professional groups/individuals outside of the hospital context. [37]

Results show that interprofessional interactions in this setting are often based less on planned front stage activities than on ad hoc backstage activities. While the former may, at times, help create and maintain an appearance of collaborative interprofessional 'teamwork', conveying a sense of professional togetherness in front of patients and their families, they often serve little functional practice. These findings have implications for designing ways to improve interprofessional practice on acute hospital wards where there is no clearly defined interprofessional team, but rather a loose configuration of professionals working together in a collaborative manner around a particular patient. In such settings, interventions that aim to improve both ad hoc as well as planned forms of communication may be more successful than those intended to only improve planned communication. [37]

Computer-mediated communication

The hyperpersonal model of computer-mediated communication (CMC) posits that users exploit the technological aspects of CMC in order to enhance the messages they construct to manage impressions and facilitate desired relationships. The most interesting aspect of the advent of CMC is how it reveals basic elements of interpersonal communication, bringing into focus fundamental processes that occur as people meet and develop relationships relying on typed messages as the primary mechanism of expression. "Physical features such as one's appearance and voice provide much of the information on which people base first impressions face-to-face, but such features are often unavailable in CMC. Various perspectives on CMC have suggested that the lack of nonverbal cues diminishes CMC's ability to foster impression formation and management, or argued impressions develop nevertheless, relying on language and content cues. One approach that describes the way that CMC's technical capacities work in concert with users' impression development intentions is the hyperpersonal model of CMC (Walther, 1996). As receivers, CMC users idealize partners based on the circumstances or message elements that suggest minimal similarity or desirability. As senders, CMC users selectively self-present, revealing attitudes and aspects of the self in a controlled and socially desirable fashion. The CMC channel facilitates editing, discretion, and convenience, and the ability to tune out environmental distractions and re-allocate cognitive resources in order to further enhance one's message composition. Finally, CMC may create dynamic feedback loops wherein the exaggerated expectancies are confirmed and reciprocated through mutual interaction via the bias-prone communication processes identified above." [38]

According to O'Sullivan's (2000) impression management model of communication channels, individuals will prefer to use mediated channels rather than face-to-face conversation in face-threatening situations. Within his model, this trend is due to the channel features that allow for control over exchanged social information. The present paper extends O'Sullivan's model by explicating information control as a media affordance, arising from channel features and social skills, that enables an individual to regulate and restrict the flow of social information in an interaction, and present a scale to measure it. One dimension of the information control scale, expressive information control, positively predicted channel preference for recalled face-threatening situations. This effect remained after controlling for social anxiousness and power relations in relationships. O'Sullivan's model argues that some communication channels may help individuals manage this struggle and therefore be more preferred as those situations arise. It was based on an assumption that channels with features that allow fewer social cues, such as reduced nonverbal information or slower exchange of messages, invariably afford an individual with an ability to better manage the flow of a complex, ambiguous, or potentially difficult conversations. [39] Individuals manage what information about them is known, or isn't known, to control other's impression of them. Anyone who has given the bathroom a quick cleaning when they anticipate the arrival of their mother-in-law (or date) has managed their impression. For an example from information and communication technology use, inviting someone to view a person's Webpage before a face-to-face meeting may predispose them to view the person a certain way when they actually meet. [4]

Corporate brand

The impression management perspective offers potential insight into how corporate stories could build the corporate brand, by influencing the impressions that stakeholders form of the organization. The link between themes and elements of corporate stories and IM strategies/behaviours indicates that these elements will influence audiences' perceptions of the corporate brand. [40]

Corporate storytelling

Corporate storytelling is suggested to help demonstrate the importance of the corporate brand to internal and external stakeholders, and create a position for the company against competitors, as well as help a firm to bond with its employees (Roper and Fill, 2012). The corporate reputation is defined as a stakeholder's perception of the organization (Brown et al., 2006), and Dowling (2006) suggests that if the story causes stakeholders to perceive the organization as more authentic, distinctive, expert, sincere, powerful, and likeable, then it is likely that this will enhance the overall corporate reputation.

Impression management theory is a relevant perspective to explore the use of corporate stories in building the corporate brand. The corporate branding literature notes that interactions with brand communications enable stakeholders to form an impression of the organization (Abratt and Keyn, 2012), and this indicates that IM theory could also therefore bring insight into the use of corporate stories as a form of communication to build the corporate brand. Exploring the IM strategies/behaviors evident in corporate stories can indicate the potential for corporate stories to influence the impressions that audiences form of the corporate brand. [40]

Corporate document

Firms use more subtle forms of influencing outsiders' impressions of firm performance and prospects, namely by manipulating the content and presentation of information in corporate documents with the purpose of "distort[ing] readers" perceptions of corporate achievements" [Godfrey et al., 2003, p. 96]. In the accounting literature this is referred to as impression management. The opportunity for impression management in corporate reports is increasing. Narrative disclosures have become longer and more sophisticated over the last few years. This growing importance of descriptive sections in corporate documents provides firms with the opportunity to overcome information asymmetries by presenting more detailed information and explanation, thereby increasing their decision-usefulness. However, they also offer an opportunity for presenting financial performance and prospects in the best possible light, thus having the opposite effect. In addition to the increased opportunity for opportunistic discretionary disclosure choices, impression management is also facilitated in that corporate narratives are largely unregulated. [41]

Media

The medium of communication influences the actions taken in impression management. Self-efficacy can differ according to the fact whether the trial to convince somebody is made through face-to-face-interaction or by means of an e-mail. [24] Communication via devices like telephone, e-mail or chat is governed by technical restrictions, so that the way people express personal features etc. can be changed. This often shows how far people will go.

Profiles on social networking sites

Social media usage among American adults grew from 5% in 2005 to 69% in 2018. [42] Facebook is the most popular social media platform, followed by Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter. [42]

Social networking users will employ protective self-presentations for image management. Users will use subtractive and repudiate strategies to maintain a desired image. [43] Subtractive strategy is used to untag an undesirable photo on Social Networking Sites. In addition to un-tagging their name, some users will request the photo to be removed entirely. Repudiate strategy is used when a friend posts an undesirable comment about the user. In response to an undesired post, users may add another wall post as an innocence defense. Michael Stefanone states that "self-esteem maintenance is an important motivation for strategic self-presentation online." [43] Outside evaluations of their physical appearance, competence, and approval from others determines how social media users respond to pictures and wall posts. Unsuccessful self-presentation online can lead to rejection and criticism from social groups. Social media users are motivated to actively participate in SNS from a desire to manage their online image. [44]

Online social media presence often varies with respect to users' age, gender, and body weight. While men and women tend to utilize social media in comparable degrees, both uses and capabilities vary depending on individual preferences as well perceptions of power or dominance [45] . In terms of performance, men tend to display characteristics associated with masculinity as well as more commanding language styles [46] . In much the same way, women tend to present feminine self-depictions and engage in more supportive language [47] .

With respect to usage across age variances, many children develop digital and social media literacy skills around 7 or 8 and begin to form online social relationships via virtual environments designed for their age group [48] . The years between thirteen and fifteen demonstrate high social media usage that begins to become more balanced with offline interactions as teens learn to navigate both their online and in-person identities which may often diverge from one another [49] .

Studies also suggest that adolescents body weight and their health status might influence their self-presentation practices. For example, research focusing on adolescent patients with obesity indicate that particularly girls with obesity tend to present themselves in such a way that their weight is not in focus, or avoid presenting food items that are associated with overweight/obesity [50] .

Social media platforms often provide a great degree of social capital during the college years and later [51] . College students are motivated to use Facebook for impression management, self-expression, entertainment, communication and relationship maintenance. [52] College students sometimes rely on Facebook to build a favorable online identity, which contributes to greater satisfaction with campus life. [52] In building an online persona, college students sometimes engage in identity manipulation, including altering personality and appearance, to increase their self-esteem and appear more attractive to peers. [53] Since risky behavior is frequently deemed attractive by peers, college students often use their social media profiles to gain approval by highlighting instances of risky behavior, like alcohol use and unhealthy eating. [54] Users present risky behavior as signs of achievement, fun, and sociability, participating in a form of impression management aimed at building recognition and acceptance among peers. [54] During middle adulthood, users tend to display greater levels of confidence and mastery in their social media connections while senior users tend to utilize social media for educational and supportive purposes [55] . These myriad factors influence how users will form and communicate their online personas.

According to Marwick, social profiles create implications such as "context collapse" for presenting oneself to the audience. The concept of ‘‘context collapse,’’ suggests that social technologies make it difficult to vary self-presentation based on environment or audience. "Large sites such as Facebook and Twitter group friends, family members, coworkers, and acquaintances together under the umbrella term ‘‘friends’ " [56]

Political impression management

One arena where impression management is essential is in politics. "Political impression management" was coined in 1972 by sociologist Peter M. Hall, who defined the term as the art of making a candidate look electable and capable (Hall 1972). This is due in part to the importance of "presidential" candidates—appearance, image, and narrative are a key part of a campaign and thus impression management has always been a huge part of winning an election (Katz 2016). As social media becomes more and more a part of the political process, political impression management is becoming more challenging as the online image of the candidate often now lies in the hands of the voters themselves.

Implications

Impression management can distort the results of empirical research that relies on interviews and surveys, a phenomenon commonly referred to as "social desirability bias". Impression management theory nevertheless constitutes a field of research on its own. [57] When it comes to practical questions concerning public relations and the way organizations should handle their public image, the assumptions provided by impression management theory can also provide a framework. [58]

An examination of different impression management strategies acted out by individuals who were facing criminal trials where the trial outcomes could range from a death sentence, life in prison or acquittal has been reported in the forensic literature. [59] The Perri and Lichtenwald article examined female psychopathic killers, whom as a group were highly motivated to manage the impression that attorneys, judges, mental health professions and ultimately, a jury had of the murderers and the murder they committed. It provides legal case illustrations of the murderers combining and/or switching from one impression management strategy such as ingratiation or supplication to another as they worked towards their goal of diminishing or eliminating any accountability for the murders they committed.

Since the 1990s, researchers in the area of sport and exercise psychology have studied self-presentation. Concern about how one is perceived has been found to be relevant to the study of athletic performance. For example, anxiety may be produced when an athlete is in the presence of spectators. Self-presentational concerns have also been found to be relevant to exercise. For example, the concerns may elicit motivation to exercise. [60]

More recent research investigating the effects of impression management on social behaviour showed that social behaviours (e.g. eating) can serve to convey a desired impression to others and enhance one's self-image. Research on eating has shown that people tend to eat less when they believe that they are being observed by others. [61]

See also

Footnotes

  1. Piwinger, Manfred; Ebert, Helmut (2001). "Impression Management: Wie aus Niemand Jemand wird". in: Bentele, Guenther et al. (Ed.), Kommunikationsmanagement: Strategien, Wissen, Lösungen. Luchterhand, Neuwied.
  2. Sharon Preves and Denise Stephenson (July 2009). "The Classroom as Stage: Impression Management in Collaborative Teaching". Teaching Sociology. Vol. 37, No. 3, Special Issue on the Sociology of the Classroom: 245–256 via American Sociological Association.
  3. "Impression Management in Sociology: Theory, Definition & Examples". Study.com.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Browning, Larry D.; Saetre, Alf Steinar; Stephens, Keri; Sornes, Jan-Oddvar (2010-09-28). Information and Communication Technologies in Action: Linking Theories and Narratives of Practice. Routledge. ISBN   9781135889432.
  5. Kamau, C. (2009) Strategising impression management in corporations: cultural knowledge as capital. In D. Harorimana (Ed) Cultural implications of knowledge sharing, management and transfer: identifying competitive advantage. Chapter 4. Information Science Reference. ISBN   978-1-60566-790-4
  6. Doering 1999, p. 261-2.
  7. Anderson, E; Siegel, EH; Bliss-Moreau, E; Barrett, LF (Jun 2011). "The visual impact of gossip". Science. 332 (6036): 1446–8. Bibcode:2011Sci...332.1446A. doi:10.1126/science.1201574. PMC   3141574 . PMID   21596956.
  8. "What is Impression Management?". wiseGEEK.
  9. Baumeister, Roy F. (1987). "Self-Presentation Theory: Self-Construction and Audience Pleasing". Springer Series in Social Psychology. Theories of Group Behavior.
  10. Schlenker 1980, p. 37.
  11. Millon, Theodore (2003). Handbook of Psychology, Personality and Social Psychology. John Wiley & Sons. p. 337. ISBN   978-0-471-38404-5.
  12. Schlenker 1980, p. 169.
  13. Felson 1984, p. 187.
  14. Piwinger; Ebert 2001, p. 26.
  15. Leary; Kowalski 1990.
  16. Hass 1981
  17. 1 2 3 Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Chicago: Aldine.
  18. Goffman, 1959, p.8
  19. Dillard et al., 2000
  20. Schlenker 1980, p. 34.
  21. Jacobsen, Michael; Kristiansen, Søren (2015). The Social Thought of Erving Goffman. Thousand Oaks, California. doi:10.4135/9781483381725. ISBN   9781412998031.
  22. Barnhart, 1994
  23. Goffman 2006, p. 40.
  24. 1 2 Döring 1999, p. 262.
  25. Goffman 1956
  26. Braiker, Harriet B. (2004). Who's Pulling Your Strings ? How to Break The Cycle of Manipulation. ISBN   978-0-07-144672-3.
  27. Adrian Furnham (November 18, 2016). "The Machiavellian Boss". Psychology Today.
  28. Leary; Kowalski 1990
  29. Schlenker 1980, p. 47.
  30. 1 2 Schlenker 1980, p. 85.
  31. Schlenker 1980, p. 69.
  32. Schlenker 1980, p. 90.
  33. Moffitt, Kimberly. "Social Interactions: Definition & Types".
  34. Brown, Jonathon. "CHAPTER 07 SELF-PRESENTATION" (PDF).
  35. 1 2 Rosenfeld, Paul; Giacalone, Robert A.; Riordan, Catherine A. (1994-03-01). "Impression Management Theory and Diversity Lessons for Organizational Behavior". American Behavioral Scientist. 37 (5): 601–604. doi:10.1177/0002764294037005002. ISSN   0002-7642.
  36. 1 2 Norris, Ashley (2011). "Impression Management: Considering Cultural, Social, and Spiritual Factors". Inquiries Journal. 3 (7).
  37. 1 2 3 4 Lewin, Simon; Reeves, Scott (2011-05-01). "Enacting 'team' and 'teamwork': using Goffman's theory of impression management to illuminate interprofessional practice on hospital wards". Social Science & Medicine. 72 (10): 1595–1602. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.037. ISSN   1873-5347. PMID   21549467.
  38. Walther, Joseph B. (2007-09-01). "Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition" (PDF). Computers in Human Behavior. 23 (5): 2538–2557. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.05.002.
  39. Feaster, John Christian (2010-10-01). "Expanding the Impression Management Model of Communication Channels: An Information Control Scale". Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 16 (1): 115–138. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01535.x. ISSN   1083-6101.
  40. 1 2 Sara Spear; Stuart Roper (2013-11-01). "Using corporate stories to build the corporate brand: an impression management perspective" (PDF). Journal of Product & Brand Management. 22 (7): 491–501. doi:10.1108/JPBM-09-2013-0387. ISSN   1061-0421.
  41. University, Bangor. "Dr Doris Merkl-Davies | Bangor Business School | Bangor University". www.bangor.ac.uk. Retrieved 2016-03-11.
  42. 1 2 "Social Media Fact Sheet". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2019-04-15.
  43. 1 2 Rui, J. and M. A. Stefanone (2013). Strategic Management of Other-Provided Information Online: Personality and Network Variables. System Sciences (HICSS), 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on.
  44. Krämer, Nicole C.; Winter, Stephan (2008-01-01). "Impression Management 2.0". Journal of Media Psychology. 20 (3): 106–116. doi:10.1027/1864-1105.20.3.106. ISSN   1864-1105.
  45. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  46. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  47. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  48. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  49. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  50. Holmberg, Christopher; Berg, Christina; Hillman, Thomas; Lissner, Lauren; Chaplin, John E. (2018-10-16). "Self-presentation in digital media among adolescent patients with obesity: Striving for integrity, risk-reduction, and social recognition". Digital Health. 4: 205520761880760. doi:10.1177/2055207618807603. PMC   6195003 . PMID   30349733.
  51. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  52. 1 2 Park, Namkee; Lee, Seungyoon (2014-10-02). "College Students' Motivations for Facebook Use and Psychological Outcomes". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 58 (4): 601–620. doi:10.1080/08838151.2014.966355. ISSN   0883-8151.
  53. Ekpenyong, Stephen; Ubebe, Fred (December 2015 – February 2016). "Impression Management and Identity Manipulation In A Social Network Website: A Study of the Niger Delta University Students" (PDF). American International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences: 162–177.CS1 maint: Date format (link)
  54. 1 2 Loss, J.; Lindacher, V.; Curbach, J. (2014-04-01). "Do Social Networking Sites Enhance the Attractiveness of Risky Health Behavior? Impression Management in Adolescents' Communication on Facebook and its Ethical Implications". Public Health Ethics. 7 (1): 5–16. doi:10.1093/phe/pht028. ISSN   1754-9973.
  55. Ashlee., Humphreys (2016). Social media : enduring principles. Oxford. ISBN   9780199328437. OCLC   908698924.
  56. Marwick, Alice E. (2013). Online Identity. Blackwell. pp. 355–364.
  57. Tedeschi 1984
  58. Piwinger; Ebert 2001, p. 3.
  59. Perri, Frank S. and Lichtenwald, Terrance G. (2010). "The Last Frontier: Myths & The Female Psychopathic Killer". Forensic Examiner, Summer 2010, 50-67.
  60. Martin Ginis, K.A., Lindwall, M., & Prapavessis, H. (2007). Who cares what other people think? Self-presentation in exercise and sport. In R. Eklund & G. Tenenbaum (Eds.), Handbook of Sport Psychology (pp. 136–153). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiles & Sons.
  61. Herman; Roth; Polivy 2003

Related Research Articles

Erving Goffman Sociologist, writer, academic

Erving Goffman was a Canadian-American sociologist, social psychologist, and writer, considered by some "the most influential American sociologist of the twentieth century". In 2007 he was listed by The Times Higher Education Guide as the sixth most-cited author in the humanities and social sciences, behind Anthony Giddens, Pierre Bourdieu and Michel Foucault, and ahead of Jürgen Habermas.

Labeling theory is the theory of how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. It is associated with the concepts of self-fulfilling prophecy and stereotyping. Labeling theory holds that deviance is not inherent in an act, but instead focuses on the tendency of majorities to negatively label minorities or those seen as deviant from standard cultural norms. The theory was prominent during the 1960s and 1970s, and some modified versions of the theory have developed and are still currently popular. A stigma is defined as a powerfully negative label that changes a person's self-concept and social identity.

Dramaturgy is a sociological perspective commonly used in microsociological accounts of social interaction in everyday life. The term was first adapted into sociology from the theatre by Erving Goffman, who developed most of the related terminology and ideas in his 1959 book, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Kenneth Burke, whom Goffman would later acknowledge as an influence, had earlier presented his notions of dramatism in 1945, which in turn derives from Shakespeare. However, the fundamental difference between Burke's and Goffman's view is that Burke believed that life was in fact theatre, whereas Goffman viewed theatre as a metaphor. If we imagine ourselves as directors observing what goes on in the theatre of everyday life, we are doing what Goffman called dramaturgical analysis, the study of social interaction in terms of theatrical performance.

Face is a class of behaviors and customs operating (active) in different countries and cultures, associated with the morality, honor, and authority of an individual, and its image in social groups.

In media studies, media psychology, communication theory and sociology, media influence and media effects are topics relating to mass media and media culture effects on individual or audience thought, attitudes and behavior. Whether it is written, televised, or spoken, mass media reaches a large audience. Mass media is known as being one of the most significant forces in modern culture.

Social stigma is the disapproval of, or discrimination against, a person based on perceivable social characteristics that serve to distinguish them from other members of a society. Social stigmas are commonly related to culture, gender, race, intelligence and health.

The uncertainty reduction theory, also known as initial interaction theory, developed in 1975 by Charles Berger and Richard Calabrese, is a communication theory from the post-positivist tradition. It is one of the only communication theories that specifically looks into the initial interaction between people prior to the actual communication process.The theory asserts the notion that, when interacting, people need information about the other party in order to reduce their uncertainty. In gaining this information people are able to predict the other's behavior and resulting actions, all of which according to the theory is crucial in the development of any relationship.

Personal branding is the practice of marketing people and their careers as brands. It is an ongoing process of developing and maintaining a reputation and impression of an individual, group, or organization.. Whereas some self-help practices focus on self-improvement, personal branding defines success as a form of self-packaging. The term is thought to have originated from an article written by Tom Peters in 1997. In Be Your Own Brand, first published in 1999, marketers David McNally and Karl Speak wrote: "Your brand is a perception or emotion, maintained by somebody other than you, that describes the total experience of having a relationship with you."

Social psychology (sociology) area of sociology focused on social actions

In sociology, social psychology, also known as sociological social psychology or microsociology, is an area of sociology that focuses on social actions and on interrelations of personality, values, and mind with social structure and culture. Some of the major topics in this field are social status, structural power, sociocultural change, social inequality and prejudice, leadership and intra-group behavior, social exchange, group conflict, impression formation and management, conversation structures, socialization, social constructionism, social norms and deviance, identity and roles, and emotional labor. The primary methods of data collection are sample surveys, field observations, vignette studies, field experiments, and controlled experiments.

Dramatism, an interpretive communication studies theory, was developed by Kenneth Burke as a tool for analyzing human relationships. In this theory, our lives are as if on a stage, setting us individuals as actors on that stage as a way to understand human motives and relations. Burke discusses two important ideas – that life is drama, and the ultimate motive of rhetoric is the purging of guilt. Burke recognized guilt as the base of human emotions and motivations for action. As cited in A Note on Burke on "Motive", the author recognized the importance of "motive" in Burke's work. And in Kenneth Burke's concept of motives in rhetorical theory, the authors mentioned that Burke believes that when guilty "combined with other constructs, describes the totality of the compelling force within an event which explains why the event took place."

Identity negotiation refers to the processes through which people reach agreements regarding "who is who" in their relationships. Once these agreements are reached, people are expected to remain faithful to the identities they have agreed to assume. The process of identity negotiation thus establishes what people can expect of one another. Identity negotiation thus provides the interpersonal "glue" that holds relationships together.

Social information processing (theory) theory that explains the nature of online interactions

Social information processing theory, also known as SIP, is an interpersonal communication theory and media studies theory developed in 1992 by Joseph Walther. Social information processing theory explains online interpersonal communication without nonverbal cues and how people develop and manage relationships in a computer-mediated environment. While the term has traditionally referred to those communications that occur via computer-mediated formats, it has also been applied to other forms of text-based interaction such as text messaging. In computer-mediated environments, interpersonal relationship development may require more time to develop than traditional face-to-face (FtF) relationships. Social information processing theory argues that online interpersonal relationships may demonstrate the same relational dimensions and qualities as FtF relationships. These online relationships may help facilitate interactions that would not have occurred face-to-face due to factors such as geography and intergroup anxiety.

The hyperpersonal model is a model of interpersonal communication that suggests computer-mediated communication (CMC) can become hyperpersonal because it "exceeds [face-to-face] interaction", thus affording message senders a host of communicative advantages over traditional face-to-face (FtF) interaction. The hyperpersonal model demonstrates how individuals communicate uniquely, while representing themselves to others, how others interpret them, and how the interactions create a reciprocal spiral of FtF communication. Compared to ordinary FtF situations, a hyperpersonal message sender has a greater ability to strategically develop and edit self-presentation, enabling a selective and optimized presentation of one's self to others.

Face negotiation theory theory conceived by Stella Ting-Toomey in 1985 to understand how people from different cultures manage rapport and disagreements

Face-Negotiation Theory is a theory conceived by Stella Ting-Toomey in 1985, to understand how people from different cultures manage rapport and disagreements. The theory posited "face", or self-image when communicating with others, as a universal phenomenon that pervades across cultures. In conflicts, one's face is threatened; and thus the person tends to save or restore his or her face. This set of communicative behaviors, according to the theory, is called "facework". Since people frame the situated meaning of "face" and enact "facework" differently from one culture to the next, the theory poses a cultural-general framework to examine facework negotiation. It is important to note that the definition of face varies depending on the people and their culture and the same can be said for the proficiency of facework.

Impression formation in social psychology refers to the processes by which different pieces of knowledge about another are combined into a global or summary impression. Social Psychologist Solomon Asch was a pioneer in Gestalt Psychology. He is credited with the seminal research on impression formation and conducted research on how individuals integrate information about personality traits. Two major theories have been proposed to explain how this process of integration takes place. The Gestalt approach views the formation of a general impression as the sum of several interrelated impressions. As an individual seeks to form a coherent and meaningful impression of another individual, previous impressions significantly influence the interpretation of subsequent information. In contrast to the Gestalt approach, the cognitive algebra approach asserts that individuals experiences are combined with previous evaluations to form a constantly changing impression of a person. A related area to impression formation is the study of person perception, making dispositional attributions, and then adjusting those inferences based on the information available.

Identity management theory is an intercultural communication theory from the 1990s. It was developed by William R. Cupach and Tadasu Todd Imahori on the basis of Erving Goffman's Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior (1967). Cupach and Imahori distinguish between intercultural communication and intracultural communication.

Identity performance is a concept that holds that "identity" can be a project or a conscious effort or action taken to present oneself in social interactions. This is based on the definition of identity as an ongoing process of self-definition and the definitions of the self by others, which emerge out of interaction with others. The idea is that there are identities that are performed to achieve several objectives such as assimilation and acculturation, among others. It draws from the Erving Goffman's theatrical metaphor theory where, in social situations, the others perform the role of the audience, which an individual must perform to impress.

Interpersonal communication

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of study and research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish a number of personal and relational goals. Generally, interpersonal communication research has contributed to at least six distinct categories of inquiry: 1) how humans adjust and adapt their verbal communication and nonverbal communication during face-to-face communication, 2) the processes of message production, 3) how uncertainty influences our behavior and information-management strategies, 4) deceptive communication, 5) relational dialectics, and 6) social interaction that is mediated by technology.

References