Self-Enhancement Among High-Exposure Survivors of the September 11th Terrorist Attack: Resilience or Social Maladjustment?

The authors examined self-enhancing bias as a predictor of adjustment among individuals in or near the World Trade Center during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Resilience was defined from categorical and continuous analyses of both participant self-report and friend and relative ratings of adjustment. Self-enhancement was associated with a resilient outcome, ratings of better adjustment prior to September 11th, greater positive affect, and reduced perceptions of social constraints. Additional analyses indicated that self-enhancers' reduced symptom levels were fully mediated by their low perceived social constraints. However, consistent with previous evidence suggesting a social cost to self-enhancement, at 18 months post-September 11th, self-enhancers' friends and relatives also rated them as decreasing in social adjustment and as being less honest.

Why do people report better health by phone than by mail?

CONTEXT

Past research shows that fewer health symptoms are reported by phone than by mail.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine whether interview mode-dependent differences in health symptom reporting are the result of socially desirable responding or to expending less cognitive effort when formulating responses, a behavior known as satisficing.

DESIGN

Participants were randomly assigned to telephone interview only or to mail interview followed 2 weeks later by telephone interview.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Participants were American veterans from the Gulf War Registry (n=719).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Our main outcome measure was the number of mild, moderate, or severe symptoms reported (of 48 possible).

RESULTS

Veterans reported an average of 5 more symptoms via mail than via telephone, F (1, 709) = 32.50, P < 0.001. The difference was mainly the result of symptoms reported by mail as mild but not reported at all by phone. Veterans with higher social desirability scores reported fewer symptoms by phone and mail, F (1, 709) = 10.11, P = 0.001, but social desirability scores did not interact with interview mode. Furthermore, embarrassing symptoms such as genital complaints were no less likely to be reported by phone.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of better health in phone surveys is the result of fewer mild symptoms reports but not of socially desirable responding. The findings are consistent with phone interviews encouraging satisficing by limiting the recall of less severe health states. Researchers should handle mild symptom reports with some skepticism.

Are self-enhancing cognitions associated with healthy or unhealthy biological profiles?

Self-enhancement is variously portrayed as a positive illusion that can foster health and longevity or as defensive neuroticism that can have physiological-neuroendocrine costs. In a laboratory stress-challenge paradigm, the authors found that high self-enhancers had lower cardiovascular responses to stress, more rapid cardiovascular recovery, and lower baseline cortisol levels, consistent with the positive illusions predictions and counter to the predictions of the defensive neuroticism position. A second set of analyses, replicating the "illusory mental health paradigm" (J. Shedler, M. Mayman, & M. Manis, 1993), also did not support the defensive neuroticism hypothesis. The association between self-enhancement and cortisol was mediated by psychological resources; analyses of the cardiovascular results provided no definitive mediational pathway. Discussion centers on the potential stress-buffering effects of self-enhancing beliefs.