Michelangelo phenomenon

Last updated
The Michelangelo phenomenon Michelangelophenomenon.jpg
The Michelangelo phenomenon

The Michelangelo phenomenon is an interpersonal process observed by psychologists in which close, romantic partners influence or 'sculpt' each other. [1] Over time, the Michelangelo effect causes individuals to develop towards what they consider their "ideal selves". This happens because their partner sees them and acts around them in ways that promote this ideal.

Contents

The phenomenon is referred to in contemporary marital therapy. Recent popular work in couples therapy and conflict resolution points to the importance of the Michelangelo phenomenon. Diana Kirschner [2] reported that the phenomenon was common among couples reporting high levels of marital satisfaction.

It is the opposite of the Blueberry phenomenon "in which interdependent individuals bring out the worst in each other." [3] The Michelangelo phenomenon is related to the looking-glass self concept introduced by Charles Horton Cooley in his 1902 work Human Nature and the Social Order. [4]

This phenomenon has various positive effects for both the individual and the couple. Various factors impact components and processes involved in the phenomenon.

Description of the model

Overview

The Michelangelo phenomenon describes a three step process where close partners shape each other so as to bring forth one another's ideal selves. [1] This ideal self is conceptualized as a collection of an individual's "dreams and aspirations" or "the constellation of skills, traits, and resources that an individual ideally wishes to acquire." [5] These span different domains, such as one's profession, relationship, health, personality. [1] An example of an ideal self is one that includes "completing medical school, becoming more sociable, or learning to speak fluent Dutch." [6] This is different from the actual self, which consists of attributes the self currently possesses [7] and the ought self, which consists of attributes the self feels obligated to possess. [7] Note that in this article, the "self" refers to a specific, target individual.

This phenomenon is significant given that the self does not experience growth in complete isolation of the influence of others. [8] Yet, prior to 1999, much research on self growth consisted of examining individual processes. [6] Research into the influence of others was neglected, even though those with whom the self interacts most regularly can lead to more constant, stable changes in disposition and behavior. [6] [9] [10] The general topic of growth is itself worth studying given that people are motivated to work toward it. [11]

The three core parts of the phenomenon are as follows: partner perceptual affirmation, partner behavioral affirmation, and self-movement toward the ideal self. [1]

Components of the model

Partner affirmation appears in the model as two different parts. Partner affirmation names how partners bring about aspects of the ideal self from the self. [12] Partner perceptual affirmation describes how a partner's views of the self aligns with the self's view of their ideal self. [1] A partner will show greater partner perceptual affirmation if they believe the self to be, or to be capable of being, the ideal self. [1] In other words, Jay will show more perceptual affirmation if he sees his partner Kaylee, whose ideal self includes being competent as piano, as actually competent at piano or as capable of being competent at piano. Partner behavioral affirmation describes how a partner acts in a way that aligns with the ideal self. [1] A partner, such as Jay, will show more partner behavioural affirmation if they act in a way such that Kaylee's ideal self can come forward, [1] such as if he drives Kaylee to piano lessons. Self-movement toward the ideal self describes how the distance between the self and ideal self closes. [1] Kaylee will experience self-movement toward the ideal self when she becomes more competent at piano.

Note that both perceptual and behavioural aspects of partner affirmation can take place consciously or unconsciously. [6] For example, someone with a partner who wants to be more sociable may consciously encourage them to spend more time with their friends, in an effort to help them meet this goal. This is conscious behavioural affirmation. On the other hand, knowing that sociability is a goal of their partner, someone may feel less apprehension when organising a social gathering in their space. This would inadvertently give the partner an opportunity to socialise and is an example of unconscious behavioural affirmation.

These three components come together under two hypotheses which are part of the Michelangelo phenomenon. The partner affirmation hypothesis says that the more a partner's view of the self aligns with the ideal self, the more that partner will act in a way to bring out that ideal self. [1] For example, the more Jay views Kaylee as being competent at piano, the more he will do things to elicit that view by way of positively enforcing her piano achievements or supporting her piano lessons. The movement toward ideal hypothesis says that the more the partner behaves in a way aligned with the ideal self, the more the self will become more like their ideal self. [1] The more Jay acts in a way that aligns with Kaylee's ideal self of being competent at piano, the more Kaylee will increasingly become competent at piano.

An affirming partner may shape someone through a series of selection mechanisms: [1]

To add to these three types, other more specific examples of ideal-self-affirming behaviors a partner can enact includes expressing approval of the self's efforts toward goals and offering support such as strategy improvement tips. [6]

Atlas Slave, a sculpture by Michelangelo 'Atlas Slave' by Michelangelo - JBU 02.jpg
Atlas Slave , a sculpture by Michelangelo

Note that not all of a partner's acts to reinforce certain qualities counts as affirming or, to be more specific, ideal-self-affirming. [1] Exploring related phenomena can further clarify what partner affirmation is not. Partner enhancement is when a partner acts in a way that is more so positive than reflective of objective reality. [13] For example, Jay acts toward Kaylee as if she is the best piano player, even if the average piano instructor would rate her as simply decent at piano. There is partner verification, which involves the partner reinforcement of qualities that the target, or self, believes to be true already. [14] An example would be if Jay laughs at Kaylee's jokes and, subtly, reinforces the conception she has of herself as a funny person.

Note that on another part of this spectrum, a partner may not affirm the self's ideal and may instead reinforce an ideal that does not belong to the self or that is the opposite of the self's ideal. [1]

There is, for example, the Pygmalion phenomenon, where the partner attempts to sculpt the target to align with their ideals rather than the target's ideals. [6] For example, this would occur if Jay, who differently from Kaylee seeks to be a regular voter, behaves in a way to draw out that quality of consistent voting behavior in Kaylee.

Movement away from the ideal self may occur for Kaylee if Jay supported, for example, Kaylee's rare endeavors in binge drinking, a high-risk behavior antithetical to her ideal self as a healthy person. Other ways an individual may disaffirm their partner is "by communicating indifference, pessimism, or disapproval, by undermining [their] ideal pursuits, or by affirming qualities that are antithetical to [their] ideal self." [6] This disaffirmation may occur passively, in the failure to affirm, or actively, in disaffirmation. [1]

The metaphor

The phenomenon is named after the Italian Renaissance painter, sculptor, architect, poet and engineer Michelangelo (1475-1564). Michelangelo "described sculpting as a process whereby the artist released a hidden figure from the block of stone in which it slumbered." [1] The metaphor of chipping away at a block of stone to reveal the 'ideal form', which extends to close relationships. According to the Michelangelo phenomenon, a person will be 'sculpted' into their self-conceived ideal form by their partner. The metaphor and term was first introduced by the US psychologist Stephen Michael Drigotas (et al.) in 1999.

Michelangelo phenomenon effects

Couple well being

Drigotas et al. (1999) found support for their couple well being hypothesis, which states that greater self movement toward the ideal self is linked to greater functioning and health within the couple. [1] Partner affirmation is generally beneficial to relationships as it increases perceived responsiveness, which increases the self's trust in their partner and the self's commitment. [15]

There is also a benefit Drigotas et al. (1999) found where, across four studies, individuals who helped sculpt their partners to resemble the partner's ideal selves experienced movement towards their own ideal self as well. [1] With Jay and Kaylee, this might look like Jay experiencing becoming more like his ideal of being a supportive teammate the more he helps Kaylee attain her ideal self.

Individual well being

Drigotas found support that the Michelangelo phenomenon is strongly linked to personal well-being across varied dimensions such as life satisfaction, self esteem, and loneliness. [16] The distance between our actual self, or current attributes, and ideal self impacts emotions such that a smaller distance engenders joy and a larger distance engenders emotions like sadness. [16] Further, it is the specific aspect of partner behavioral affirmation that predicts personal well being, and not the general relationship satisfaction that comes about as an effect of processes in the Michelangelo phenomenon. [16]

Factors impacting the Michelangelo phenomenon

Several different factors relating to attributes of either the individual (the self) and the individual's partner (the partner) contribute varying effects on various components of the phenomenon.

Ideal similarity

Ideal similarity can be defined as the alignment of a partner to the self's ideal self. [12] Higher ideal similarity means there is a greater match between the partner's attributes and the ideal self's attributes. [12] Higher ideal similarity is linked to higher partner affirmation, self movement toward the ideal self, and couple well being, vitality, adjustment. [12]

The effects of ideal similarity go beyond the realm of close partners as well. [12] When individuals, or targets, were exposed to an experimental partner who was manipulated to resemble the targets' ideal selves, their perceptions of themselves and their partners increased such that targets thought themselves to be more capable of moving toward their ideal self and that partners were not only more affirming in the targets' minds, but were more attractive and generally more desirable interaction partners. [12]

Locomotion vs assessment orientations

These two traits revolve around multiple parts of goal pursuit, including selection of the goal, evaluation of the goal, and pursuit of the goal. [17]  Locomotion orientation describes the inclination of an individual to take action to reach their goals. [18] Those more inclined toward locomotion tend to focus on quickly accomplishing realistic goals and tend to have more positive affect. [18] Assessment orientation describes the inclination of an individual to focus more so on evaluation in their goal pursuit, rather than action. [18] Those more inclined toward assessment tend to focus on dissecting goals, analyzing how to obtain those goals and tend to have more negative affect as well as more sensitive to how far they have to go to reach their goals. [18]

An individual's orientation impacts processes in the Michelangelo phenomenon. [18] The orientation not only impacts the target's goal selection and pursuit, but how their partner affirms the target in their efforts and how the target affirms their own partner in their efforts. [18] Specifically, individuals with locomotion orientations, as opposed to assessment orientations, seem more receptive to being sculpted; those with assessment orientations seem less receptive to being sculpted. [18] As the partners who are sculpting, partners with locomotion as opposed to assessment orientations reported being more affirming of their partners' goal pursuits such that the targets were perceived to experience greater movement toward their ideal self. [18]

Other individual attributes

Rusbult et al. (2005) speculate that there are three individual attributes which lead to increased self-movement toward the ideal self. These include insight or a solid construction of one's ideal and actual self, ability which includes skills and attributes like goal-relevant planning that are relevant to pursuit of the goal, and motivation to reach the goal, which includes commitment toward achieving the goal. [7]

Growth-as-hell model

In contrast, it has been posited by Guggenbühl-Craig that it is precisely through disaffirmation that we grow and move towards our ideal-selves. This is because it is through disaffirmation that we are made aware of our flaws and can overcome them. [1] Much like the Michelangelo phenomenon, this growth-as-hell model of self-growth and movement towards the ideal self is understood to occur most potently in close, romantic relationships.

See also

Related Research Articles

Self-esteem is confidence in one's own worth, abilities, or morals. Self-esteem encompasses beliefs about oneself as well as emotional states, such as triumph, despair, pride, and shame. Smith and Mackie define it by saying "The self-concept is what we think about the self; self-esteem, is the positive or negative evaluations of the self, as in how we feel about it ."

In-group favoritism, sometimes known as in-group–out-group bias, in-group bias, intergroup bias, or in-group preference, is a pattern of favoring members of one's in-group over out-group members. This can be expressed in evaluation of others, in allocation of resources, and in many other ways.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intimate relationship</span> Physical or emotional intimacy

An intimate relationship is an interpersonal relationship that involves emotional or physical closeness between people and may include sexual intimacy and feelings of romance or love. Intimate relationships are interdependent, and the members of the relationship mutually influence each other. The quality and nature of the relationship depends on the interactions between individuals, and is derived from the unique context and history that builds between people over time. Social and legal institutions such as marriage acknowledge and uphold intimate relationships between people. However, intimate relationships are not necessarily monogamous or sexual, and there is wide social and cultural variability in the norms and practices of intimacy between people.

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a macro theory of human motivation and personality that concerns people's innate growth tendencies and innate psychological needs. It pertains to the motivation behind people's choices in the absence of external influences and distractions. SDT focuses on the degree to which human behavior is self-motivated and self-determined.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Confidence</span> State of trusting that a belief or course of action is correct

Confidence is the state of being clear-headed: either that a hypothesis or prediction is correct, or that a chosen course of action is the best or most effective. Confidence comes from the Latin word fidere which means "to trust". In contrast, arrogance or hubris is a state of unmerited confidence—belief lacking evidence and/or a reason. Overconfidence or presumptuousness is excessive belief in success without regard for potential failure. Confidence can be a self-fulfilling prophecy, as those without it may fail because they lack it, and those with it may succeed because they have it rather than because of an innate ability or skill. We develop a tractable method for augmenting macroeconomic models with autonomous variation in higher -order beliefs

Self-monitoring, a concept introduced in the 1970s by Mark Snyder, describes the extent to which people monitor their self-presentations, expressive behavior, and nonverbal affective displays. Snyder held that human beings generally differ in substantial ways in their abilities and desires to engage in expressive controls. Self-monitoring is defined as a personality trait that refers to an ability to regulate behavior to accommodate social situations. People concerned with their expressive self-presentation tend to closely monitor their audience in order to ensure appropriate or desired public appearances. Self-monitors try to understand how individuals and groups will perceive their actions. Some personality types commonly act spontaneously and others are more apt to purposely control and consciously adjust their behavior. Recent studies suggest that a distinction should be made between acquisitive and protective self-monitoring due to their different interactions with metatraits. This differentiates the motive behind self-monitoring behaviours: for the purpose of acquiring appraisal from others (acquisitive) or protecting oneself from social disapproval (protective).

Caring in intimate relationships is the practice of providing care and support to an intimate relationship partner. Caregiving behaviours are aimed at reducing the partner's distress and supporting their coping efforts in situations of either threat or challenge. Caregiving may include emotional support and/or instrumental support. Effective caregiving behaviour enhances the care-recipient's psychological well-being, as well as the quality of the relationship between the caregiver and the care-recipient. However, certain suboptimal caregiving strategies may be either ineffective or even detrimental to coping.

Behavioral confirmation is a type of self-fulfilling prophecy whereby people's social expectations lead them to behave in ways that cause others to confirm their expectations. The phenomenon of belief creating reality is known by several names in literature: self-fulfilling prophecy, expectancy confirmation, and behavioral confirmation, which was first coined by social psychologist Mark Snyder in 1984. Snyder preferred this term because it emphasizes that it is the target's actual behavior that confirms the perceiver's beliefs.

Ingratiating is a psychological technique in which an individual attempts to influence another person by becoming more likeable to their target. This term was coined by social psychologist Edward E. Jones, who further defined ingratiating as "a class of strategic behaviors illicitly designed to influence a particular other person concerning the attractiveness of one's personal qualities." Ingratiation research has identified some specific tactics of employing ingratiation:

Regulatory focus theory (RFT) is a theory of goal pursuit formulated by Columbia University psychology professor and researcher E. Tory Higgins regarding people's motivations and perceptions in judgment and decision making processes. RFT examines the relationship between the motivation of a person and the way in which they go about achieving their goal. RFT posits two separate and independent self-regulatory orientations: prevention and promotion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Self-image</span> Mental picture of self that comes from different sources

Self-image is the mental picture, generally of a kind that is quite resistant to change, that depicts not only details that are potentially available to an objective investigation by others, but also items that have been learned by persons about themselves, either from personal experiences or by internalizing the judgments of others. In some formulations, it is a component of self-concept.

Goal orientation, or achievement orientation, is an "individual disposition towards developing or validating one's ability in achievement settings". In general, an individual can be said to be mastery or performance oriented, based on whether one's goal is to develop one's ability or to demonstrate one's ability, respectively. A mastery orientation is also sometimes referred to as a learning orientation.

Stigma management is the process of concealing or disclosing aspects of one's identity to minimize social stigma.

Interdependence theory is a social exchange theory that states that interpersonal relationships are defined through interpersonal interdependence, which is "the process by which interacting people influence one another's experiences"(Van Lange & Balliet, 2014, p. 65). The most basic principle of the theory is encapsulated in the equation I = ƒ[A, B, S], which says that all interpersonal interactions (I) are a function (ƒ) of the given situation (S), plus the actions and characteristics of the individuals in the interaction. The theory's four basic assumptions are 1) The Principle of Structure, 2) The Principle of Transformation, 3) The Principle of Interaction, and 4) The Principle of Adaption.

Personality judgment is the process by which people perceive each other's personalities through acquisition of certain information about others, or meeting others in person. The purpose of studying personality judgment is to understand past behavior exhibited by individuals and predict future behavior. Theories concerning personality judgment focus on the accuracy of personality judgments and the effects of personality judgments on various aspects of social interactions. Determining how people judge personality is important because personality judgments often influence individuals' behaviors.

Dr. Jennifer Crocker is a professor and Ohio Eminent Scholar in Social Psychology at Ohio State University. She is also a former president of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Her publications are on the subject of self-esteem and the contingencies and interpersonal goals that individuals have that are a clear reflection of their level of self-esteem.

The six-factor model of psychological well-being is a theory developed by Carol Ryff that determines six factors that contribute to an individual's psychological well-being, contentment, and happiness. Psychological well-being consists of self-acceptance, positive relationships with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, a feeling of purpose and meaning in life, and personal growth and development. Psychological well-being is attained by achieving a state of balance affected by both challenging and rewarding life events.

Regulatory mode theory, along with regulatory focus theory was developed by E. Tory Higgins and Arie Kruglanski who are interested in the development of goal-pursuit as well as motivation. The theory depicts two main approaches to situations using locomotion and assessment.

In psychology and related fields, future orientation is broadly defined as the extent to which an individual thinks about the future, anticipates future consequences, and plans ahead before acting. Across development, future orientation is particularly important during periods of major changes, for example during the transition from adolescence to adulthood, when youth must make choices about social groups, academic paths, as well as risky behaviors like drug and alcohol use, and sexual activity. Several models have been developed to describe the various factors that combine to impact future orientation.

In social psychology, social projection is the psychological process through which an individual expects behaviors or attitudes of others to be similar to their own. Social projection occurs between individuals as well as across ingroup and outgroup contexts in a variety of domains. Research has shown that aspects of social categorization affect the extent to which social projection occurs. Cognitive and motivational approaches have been used to understand the psychological underpinnings of social projection as a phenomenon. Cognitive approaches emphasize social projection as a heuristic, while motivational approaches contextualize social projection as a means to feel connected to others. In contemporary research on social projection, researchers work to further distinguish between the effects of social projection and self-stereotyping on the individual’s perception of others.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Drigotas, Stephen M.; Rusbult, Caryl E.; Wieselquist, Jennifer; Whitton, Sarah W. (1999). "Close partner as sculptor of the ideal self: Behavioral affirmation and the Michelangelo phenomenon". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 77 (2): 293–323. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.293. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   10474210.
  2. ↑ Kirschner, Diana Adile (2014-07-02). Sealing the deal: the love mentor's guide to lasting love. Center Street. ISBN   978-1-60941-695-9. OCLC   860833193.
  3. ↑ Anghel, Teodora C. (September 2016). "Emotional Intelligence and Marital Satisfaction". Journal of Experimential Psychotherapy. 19: 75.
  4. ↑ Charles Horton Cooley (2018). Human Nature And The Social Order. 开放图书馆. ISBN   978-960-00-4000-5. OCLC   1078575196.
  5. ↑ Higgins, E.T. (1987). "Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect". Psychological Review. 94 (3): 319–340. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319. PMID   3615707.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rusbult, Caryl E.; Finkel, Eli J.; Kumashiro, Madoka (December 2009). "The Michelangelo Phenomenon" (PDF). Current Directions in Psychological Science. 18 (6): 305–309. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01657.x. ISSN   0963-7214. S2CID   14417940.
  7. 1 2 3 Rusbult, Caryl E.; Kumashiro, Madoka; Stocker, Shevaun L.; Kirchner, Jeffrey L.; Finkel, Eli J.; Coolsen, Michael K. (2005). Interaction Studies. John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 375–391.
  8. ↑ Kelley, H.H.; Holmes, J.G.; Kerr, N.L.; Reis, H.T.; Rusbult, C.E.; Van Lange, P.A.M. (2003). An atlas of interpersonal situations. Cambridge University Press.
  9. ↑ Kelley, H.H. (1983). "The situational origins of human tendencies: A further reason for the formal analysis of structures". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 9: 8–30. doi:10.1177/0146167283091003. S2CID   143306646.
  10. ↑ Kelley, H.H.; Thibaut, J.W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.
  11. ↑ Deci, E.L.; Ryan, R.M. (2000). "The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior". Psychological Inquiry. 11 (4): 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01. S2CID   15542489.
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rusbult, Caryl; Kumashiro, Madoka; Kubacka, Kaska E.; Finkel, Eli J. (2009). "The part of me that you bring out: Ideal similarity and the Michelangelo phenomenon" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 96 (1): 61–82. doi:10.1037/a0014016. PMID   19210065. S2CID   16103394.
  13. ↑ Murray, S.L.; Holmes, J.G.; Griffin, D.W. (1996). "The self-fulfilling nature of positive illusions in romantic relationships: Love is not blind, but prescient". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 71 (6): 1155–1180. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.590.473 . doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1155. PMID   8979384.
  14. ↑ Swann, W.B. Jr.; DeLaRonde, C.; Hixon, J.G. (1994). "Authenticity and positivity strivings in marriage and courtship". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 66 (5): 857–869. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.857. PMID   8014831.
  15. ↑ Rusbult, C.E.; Reis, H.T.; Kumashiro, M. (2009). "On the regulation of ongoing relationships: Partner affirmation, perceived responsiveness, and mutual cyclical growth". Unpublished Manuscript.
  16. 1 2 3 Drigotas, Stephen M. (February 2002). "The Michelangelo Phenomenon and Personal Well-Being". Journal of Personality. 70 (1): 59–77. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00178. ISSN   0022-3506. PMID   11908536.
  17. ↑ Kruglanski, A.W.; Thompson, E.P.; Higgins, E.T.; Atash, M.N.; Pierro, A.; Shah, J.Y.; Spiegel, S. (2000). "To 'do the right thing' or to 'just do it': Locomotion and assessment as distinct self-regulatory imperatives". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 79 (5): 793–815. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.793. PMID   11079242.
  18. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kumashiro, Madoka; Rusbult, Caryl E.; Finkenauer, Catrin; Stocker, Shavaun L. (2007). "To think or to do: The impact of assessment and locomotion orientation on the Michelangelo phenomenon". Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 24 (4): 591–611. doi:10.1177/0265407507079261. S2CID   144161757.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.