Looking-glass self

The t erm looking-glass self was creat ed by American sociologist Charles Hort on Cooley in
1902,[1] and int roduced int o his work Human Nature and the Social Order. It is described as our
reflect ion of how we t hink we appear t o ot hers.[2] Cooley t akes int o account t hree st eps when
using "t he looking glass self". St ep one is how one imagines one looks t o ot her people. St ep t wo
is how one imagines t he judgment of ot hers based on how one t hinks t hey view t hem. St ep t hree
is how one t hinks of how t he person views t hem based on t heir previous judgment s.[3]

This drawing depicts the looking-glass self. The

person at the front of the image is looking into four
mirrors, each of which reflects someone else's
image of him back to him.

According t o Lisa McInt yre's The Practical Skeptic: Core Concepts in Sociology, t he concept of
t he looking-glass self expresses t he t endency for one t o underst and oneself t hrough t he
percept ion which ot hers may hold of t hem.
Three main components
The looking-glass self comprises t hree main component s t hat are unique t o humans.[4]

1. We imagine how we must appear to

others in a social situation.
2. We imagine and react to what we feel
their judgment of that appearance
must be.
3. We develop our sense of self and
respond through these perceived
judgments of others.
The result is t hat individuals will change t heir behavior based on what t hey feel ot her people
t hink about t hem, even if not necessarily t rue. In t his way, social int eract ion act s as a "mirror" or a
"looking-glass", since one's sense of self and self est eem is built off of ot hers. For example, an
individual may walk int o a job int erview wit h confidence and at t empt t o display t his confidence. A
person in t his sit uat ion most oft en examines t he react ions of t he int erviewers t o see if t hey are
posit ively or negat ively react ing t o it . If t he individual not ices posit ive react ions, such as nodding
heads or smiles, t his might furt her develop t he individual's sense of self-confidence. If t he
individual not ices negat ive react ions, such as a lack of int erest , t his confidence in self oft en
becomes shaken and reformed in order t o bet t er oneself, even if t he perceived judgment s were
not necessarily t rue.
Symbolic interaction
In hypot hesizing t he framework, "t he mind is ment al" because "t he human mind is social". From
t he t ime t hey are born, humans define t hemselves wit hin t he cont ext of t heir social int eract ions.
Children learn t hat t he symbol of t heir crying will elicit a response from t heir caregivers, not only
when t hey are in need of necessit ies such as food or a diaper change, but also when t hey are in
need of at t ent ion. Cooley best explains t his int eract ion in On Self and Social Organization, not ing
t hat "a growing solidarit y bet ween mot her and child parallels t he child's increasing compet ence in
using significant symbols. This simult aneous development is it self a necessary prerequisit e for
t he child's abilit y t o adopt t he perspect ives of ot her part icipant s in social relat ionships and, t hus,
for t he child's capacit y t o develop a social self."[5]

George Herbert Mead described t he creat ion of t he self as t he out come of "t aking t he role of
t he ot her", t he premise for which t he self is act ualized. Through int eract ion wit h ot hers, we begin
t o develop an ident it y of our own as well as developing a capacit y t o empat hize wit h ot hers. As
st at ed by Cooley, "The t hing t hat moves us t o pride or shame is not t he mere mechanical
reflect ion of ourselves, but an imput ed sent iment , t he imagined effect of t his reflect ion upon
anot her's mind" (Cooley 1964).

Role in social media

The rise of social media very much reflect s t he mechanisms of t he looking-glass self, as t he
different forms of social media offer all different "mirrors" in which individuals present
t hemselves, perceive judgement s of ot hers based on likes, follows, et c., and furt her develop
t heir sense of self. Indeed, as cyberpsychologist Mary Aiken, PhD. explains, social media has
creat ed a concept named t he "cyber self", a version one wishes t o port ray online and t o t he
public t o ot hers and based on t he judgement s of ot hers. Unlike t he real self, different forms of
media allow judgement s t o be clearly post ed, so in many cases, judgement s may not even need
t o be imagined. Aiken explains t his concept best , not ing t hat "selfies ask a quest ion of t heir
audience: Like me like this?"[6]
Far different from face-t o-face int eract ions, social media is int ended t o be accessible and
public at all t imes. This means social media users are const ant ly exposed t o crit icism and
judgement from ot hers. Addit ionally, given t he nat ure of social media, being a plat form t o share
cert ain aspect s of an individual's life at any t ime and in any means possible, t he cyber self can be
very easily changed and perfect ed t o fit t he supposed accept ance of ot hers.

These aspect s of social media and it s relat ionship wit h t he looking-glass self present a whole
range of effect s on social media users. Aiken not es t hat individuals, and part icularly t eenagers,
who are increasingly involved in updat ing t heir online personas, risk damaging t he development of
t heir real-world self. She also not es t hat t his effect may be even great er among users who
display all different sort s of "cyber selves" among different plat forms wit h different purposes,
such as bet ween X (previously Twit t er), Inst agram, and LinkedIn.[6] A social media st udy also
uncovered a host of posit ive effect s of t he use of social media and in developing oneself, wit h
dozens of creat ors cit ing t hat producing cont ent gave t hem a sense of self-confidence and
self-wort h, enhanced t heir creat ivit y, increased t heir sense of professionalit y, and t heir plat forms
offered a posit ive space t o int eract wit h ot hers.[7] The negat ive effect s of t he looking-glass
self can be harmful t o t he people's ment alit y. According t o Zsolt Unoka and Gabriella Vizin's To
See In a Mirror Dimly. The Looking-Glass is Self-Shaming in Borderline Personality Disorder,
shame is a large fact or in t he development of Borderline Personalit y Disorder.[8] The feeling of
shame and insufficient self-wort h comes from t raumat ic experiences such as abuse, neglect ,
abandonment , shaming family sit uat ions, and harsh upbringing.[8] The looking-glass self can cause
feelings of insufficient self-wort h and ment al healt h issues.

According t o Susan Hart er's The Perceived Directionality of the Link Between Approval and Self-
Worth: The Liabilities of a Looking Glass Self-Orientation Among Young Adolescents, self-wort h
in adolescent s is based mainly on t heir peer's approval of t hem.[9] In a world of social media,
seeking at t ent ion and approval from ot hers is how adolescent s det ermine t heir self-wort h. They
creat e an image of t hemselves t hey t hink ot hers will approve of. This is in close relat ion t o t he
concept of t he looking glass self. Adolescent s experience anxiet y and depression based on a
low opinion of self-wort h.[10] They base t his self-wort h on ot her's opinions of t hem.[10]
Studies
The t erm "looking-glass self" was coined by Cooley aft er ext ensive psychological t est ing in
1902.

Family study
In anot her st udy[11] in t he Journal of Family Psychology in 1998, researchers Cook and Douglas
measured t he validit y of t he looking glass self and symbolic int eract ion in t he cont ext of familial
relat ionships. The st udy analyzed t he accuracy of a college st udent 's and an adolescent 's
percept ions of how t hey are perceived by t heir parent s, surveying mot hers, fat hers, college
st udent s, and adolescent s.

Three areas were invest igat ed: assert iveness, firmness, and cooperat ion. In reference t o t he
t hree areas respondent s were asked t he following: how t hey behave t oward t he t arget , how t he
t arget behaves t oward t hem, and how t hey t hink t hey are viewed by t he t arget . The st udy
ident ified t he looking glass self as a "met apercept ion" because it involves "percept ion of
percept ions". One of t he hypot heses t est ed in t he st udy was: If "met apercept ions" cause self-
percept ions t hey will necessarily be coordinat ed. The hypot hesis was t est ed at t he individual
and relat ionship levels of analysis.

Findings
The st udy det ermined t hat t he hypot hesis is st rongly support ed at t he individual level for
cooperat ion for bot h college st udent s and adolescent s, but is only part ially support ed for
assert iveness for college st udent s. Also for college st udent s, at t he relat ionship level wit h t heir
mot hers t he st udy support ed assert iveness. There was an irregular finding regarding firmness in
t he mot her-adolescent relat ionship t hat indicat ed t hat t he firmer adolescent s were perceived
by t heir mot hers, t he less firm t hey rat ed t hemselves in t he relat ionship. While t here was not
st rong support of t he hypot hesis on t he relat ionship level, on t he individual level t he findings
suggest t hat how college st udent s and adolescent s t hink about t hemselves is direct ly
correlat ed t o how t hey t hink t hey are perceived by t heir parent s.

Social media study

In 2015,[7] Julie Jones, a professor at t he Universit y of Oklahoma, asked a range of quest ions t o
46 Yout ube producers t o evaluat e how producing in media has posit ively or negat ively affect ed
t hem. As Jones explains, "digit al media can serve as a mediat ed mirror and social media sit es
provide t he space where ot hers' judgment s are clearly post ed."[7]

Findings
Of t he Yout ube producers asked, many not ed t hat producing cont ent gave t hem a sense of self-
confidence and self-wort h, enhanced t heir creat ivit y, increased t heir sense of professionalit y,
and t heir plat forms offered a posit ive space t o int eract wit h ot hers.

Critical perspectives
It has been argued t hat t he looking glass self concept ualizat ion of t he social self is crit ically
incomplet e in t hat it overlooks t he divergent roles of ingroups and out groups in self-definit ion.[12]
That is, it has been demonst rat ed t hat while individuals will converge upon t he at t it udes and
behaviours of ingroup members, t hey will also diverge from t he at t it udes and behaviours of
out group members.[13] The neglect of t he lat t er scenario is at t ribut ed t o t he looking glass
approaches' implicit focus on ingroup member appraisals. This alt ernat ive perspect ive is derived
from t he self-cat egorizat ion t heory analysis of social influence.[14] Indeed, it is furt her argued
t hat t he looking glass self met aphor fails t o reflect t he fact t hat influence derives from t he
self-cat egorizat ion of ot her individuals as part of t he self.[12][15] In ot her words, people are not
shaped by t he reflect ions from 'ot hers', but rat her are shaped by t he creat ion of a collect ive
social ident it y t hat cont rast s 'us' against relevant 'ot hers'. Therefore, t he concept of self-
ident it y may be considered an example of a social const ruct ion.

See also

Expectancy effect Psychology

portal
Michelangelo
Society
phenomenon portal

Self-concept
Symbolic interactionism

Notes

1. "Charles Horton Cooley: Human

Nature and the Social Order: Table of
Contents" (https://brocku.ca/MeadProj
 ect/Cooley/Cooley_1902/Cooley_1902
toc.html) . brocku.ca. Retrieved
2019-03-25.

2. "Looking-glass self" (https://dictionary.

apa.org/looking-glass-self) . APA
Dictionary of Psychology. Washington,
DC: American Psychological
Association. n.d. Retrieved
2019-03-25.

3. admin (28 October 2011). "Looking

Glass Self" (http://www.psychologycon
cepts.com/looking-glass-self/) .
Psychology Concepts. Retrieved
2019-03-25.
4. Shaffer, Leigh S. (January 2005).
"From mirror self-recognition to the
looking-glass self: exploring the
Justification Hypothesis". Journal of
Clinical Psychology. 61 (1): 47–65.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.541.2928 (https://cit
eseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summar
y?doi=10.1.1.541.2928) .
doi:10.1002/jclp.20090 (https://doi.or
g/10.1002%2Fjclp.20090) .
ISSN 0021-9762 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/0021-9762) .
PMID 15558625 (https://pubmed.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/15558625) .
5. Cooley, Charles Horton (1998). On self
and social organization (https://archiv
e.org/details/annualreporttown1960ce
nt) . Schubert, Hans-Joachim.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
ISBN 978-0226115085.
OCLC 38550770 (https://www.worldca
t.org/oclc/38550770) .

6. Mary, Aiken (2016). The cyber effect: a

pioneering cyber-psychologist
explains how human behavior changes
online. New York.
ISBN 9780812997859.
OCLC 933719272 (https://www.worldc
at.org/oclc/933719272) .
7. Jones, Julie (2015-08-01). "The
Looking Glass Lens: Self-concept
Changes Due to Social Media
Practices" (https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/306031974) . 4: 100.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal
requires |journal= (help)
8. Unoka, Zsolt; Vizin, Gabriella
(December 2017). "To see in a mirror
dimly. The looking glass self is self-
shaming in borderline personality
disorder". Psychiatry Research. 258:
322–329.
doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2017.08.055
(https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.psychre
s.2017.08.055) . ISSN 0165-1781 (htt
ps://www.worldcat.org/issn/0165-178
1) . PMID 28865721 (https://pubmed.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28865721) .
S2CID 25576158 (https://api.semantic
scholar.org/CorpusID:25576158) .
9. Harter, Susan; et al. (July 1996). "The
Perceived Directionality of the Link
Between Approval and Self-Worth: The
Liabilities of a Looking Glass Self-
Orientation Among Young
Adolescents" (http://search.ebscohost.
com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&
AN=18278241&site=ehost-live&scope
=site) . Journal of Research on
Adolescence. 6 (3): 285–308 – via
EBSChost.
10. Gamble, Wendy C.; Yu, Jeong Jin
(2008-02-07). "Adolescent Siblings'
Looking Glass Self-Orientations:
Patterns of Liabilities and
Associations with Parenting". Journal
of Youth and Adolescence. 37 (7):
860–874. doi:10.1007/s10964-008-
9276-9 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs1
0964-008-9276-9) . ISSN 0047-2891
(https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0047-
2891) . S2CID 145114924 (https://api.
semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:14511
4924) .
11. Cook, William L.; Douglas, Emily M.
(1998). "The looking-glass self in
family context: A social relations
analysis". Journal of Family
Psychology. 12 (3): 299–309.
doi:10.1037/0893-3200.12.3.299 (http
s://doi.org/10.1037%2F0893-3200.12.
3.299) . ISSN 0893-3200 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/issn/0893-3200) .
12. Turner, J. C.; Onorato, R. S. (1999).
Tyler, T. R.; Kramer, R. M.; John, O. P.
(eds.). "Social identity, personality, and
the self-concept: A self-categorization
perspective". The Psychology of the
Social Self. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum: 11–46.
13. David, B.; Turner, J. C. (1992). "Studies
in self-categorization and minority
conversion: Is being a member of the
outgroup an advantage?" (https://doi.o
rg/10.1111%2Fj.2044-8309.1996.tb01
091.x) . British Journal of Social
Psychology. 35: 179–200.
doi:10.1111/j.2044-
8309.1996.tb01091.x (https://doi.org/
10.1111%2Fj.2044-8309.1996.tb0109
1.x) .

14. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence.

Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
15. Turner, J. C. (1999). Ellemers, N.;
Spears, R.; Doosje, B. (eds.). "Some
current issues in research on social
identity and self-categorization
theories". Social Identity. Oxford:
Blackwell: 6–34.

References

Beaman, AL; Klentz, B; Diener, E; Svanum,

S (1979). "Self-awareness and
transgression in children: two field
studies". J Pers Soc Psychol. 37 (10):
1835–46. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.37.10.1835 (https://doi.org/10.103
7%2F0022-3514.37.10.1835) .
PMID 512839 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/512839) .
McGraw Hill Ryerson "Challenge and
Change: Patterns, Trends and Shifts in
Society" New York: 2012 pp. 130 ISBN 0-
07-094157-2 for quote "In Cooley's
words, 'I am not what I think I am and I
am not what you think I am; I am what I
think you think I am.' "
Cook, W. L.; Douglas, E. M. (1998). "The
looking-glass self in family context: A
social relations analysis". Journal of
Family Psychology. 12 (3): 299–309.
doi:10.1037/0893-3200.12.3.299 (http
s://doi.org/10.1037%2F0893-3200.12.3.
299) .
Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and
the Social Order. New York: Scribner's,
1902. Confer pp. 183–184 for first use
of the term "looking glass self".
Cooley, Charles H. On Self and Social
Organization. Ed. Schubert Hans-
Joachim. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1998. ISBN 0-226-11509-7.
(pp. 20–22)
Cook, William L.; Douglas, Emily M.
(1998). "The Looking Glass Self in
Family Context: A Social Relations
Analysis". Journal of Family Psychology.
12 (3): 299–309. doi:10.1037/0893-
3200.12.3.299 (https://doi.org/10.103
7%2F0893-3200.12.3.299) .
Coser, Lewis A., Masters of Sociological
Thought: Ideas in Historical and Social
Context, New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, 1971. ISBN 0-15-555128-0.
He has a chapter (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20070814013608/http://www2.p
feiffer.edu/~lridener/DSS/Cooley/COOL
WRK.HTML) on Cooley and the Looking
Glass Self.
Hensley, Wayne (1996). "A Theory of the
Valenced Other: The Intersection of the
Looking-Glass-Self and Social
Penetration". Social Behavior and
Personality. 24 (3): 293–308.
doi:10.2224/sbp.1996.24.3.293 (https://
doi.org/10.2224%2Fsbp.1996.24.3.29
3) .
McIntyre, Lisa. The Practical Skeptic:
Core Concepts in Sociology. 3rd ed. New
York: McGraw Hill, 2006. ISBN 0-07-
288524-6.
Shaffer, Leigh. "From Mirror Self-
Recognition to the Looking-Glass Self:
Exploring the Justification Hypothesis".
Journal of Clinical Psychology 61
(January 2005): 47–65.
 Starks, Rodney. Sociology. 10th ed.
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth,
2007. ISBN 0-495-09344-0. (pp. 73–75)
Yeung, King-To; Martin, John Levi (2003).
"The Looking Glass Self: An Empirical
Test and Elaboration". Social Forces. 81
(3): 843–879.
doi:10.1353/sof.2003.0048 (https://doi.
org/10.1353%2Fsof.2003.0048) .
S2CID 143702092 (https://api.semantics
cholar.org/CorpusID:143702092) .

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Looking-glass_self&oldid=1221942491"
This page was last edited on 2 May 2024, at
22:46 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.