Academic journal article Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science

Generalized Self-Efficacy, Self-Esteem, and Negative Affect

Academic journal article Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science

Generalized Self-Efficacy, Self-Esteem, and Negative Affect

Article excerpt


In order to help resolve the ongoing debate about the relationship between and the functions of self-esteem and generalized self-efficacy (GSE), the authors tested the hypotheses that GSE predicts future self-esteem and that self-esteem predicts unique incremental variance in future negative affect. Measures of these three constructs were administered to two samples of undergraduates (N = 160 and N = 75) twice over five-six weeks. Time 1 GSE accounted for significant variance in Time 2 self-esteem in both studies, 1.6% of the variance in Study 1 and 4.6% of the variance in Study 2, after controlling for Time 1 self-esteem. Time 1 self-esteem did not predict Time 2 GSE in either study. Self-esteem accounted for significant variance in negative affect in Study 1. Results suggest that GSE and self-esteem are distinct, that GSE may play a role in the development of self-esteem, and that self-esteem may help shape negative affect.


Afin d'aider à résoudre le débat permanent au sujet de la relation entre l'estime de soi et l'autoefficacité généralisée (AEG) et leurs fonctions, les auteurs ont testé l'hypothèse que l'AEG prédit l'estime de soi future et que l'estime de soi prédit la variance incrémentale unique dans l'affect négatif futur. Les mesures de ces trois concepts ont été administrées dans deux échantillons d'étudiants de premier cycle (N = 160 et N = 75) deux fois au cours d'une période de six semaines. La période 1 de l'AEG a tenu compte de l'écart significatif de l'autoefficacité de la période 2 dans les deux études, 1,6 % de l'écart dans l'étude 1 et 4,6% de l'écart dans l'étude 2, après avoir contrôlé le temps dans l'autoefficacité de la période 1. Le temps de l'autoefficacité de la période 1 ne prédisait pas le temps de l'AEG de la période 2 dans l'une ou l'autre étude. L'autoefficacité a représenté un écart significatif dans l'affect négatif de l'étude 1. Les résultats suggèrent que l'AEG et l'estime de soi sont distinctes, que l'AEG peut jouer un rôle dans le développement de l'estime de soi et que l'estime de soi peut aider à former l'affect négatif.

Both self-esteem and generalized self-efficacy (GSE) have been found to play important roles in psychological functioning, yet there is considerable debate about the relationship between the two constructs. While they are moderately correlated (Sherer et al., 1982; Woodruff & Cashman, 1993), several studies have found evidence that self-esteem and GSE are distinct and have different relationships with outcomes (Avery, 2003; Chen, Gully, & Eden, 2004; Dieserud, Roysamb, Braverman, Dalgard, & Ekeberg, 2003). Conceptually, the two variables also appear to be distinct: Self-esteem refers to affectively charged global self-worth, while GSE refers to broad, selfrelated competency beliefs and has been theorized to shape self-esteem (Smith, 1989).

Other authors, however, have argued that selfesteem and GSE are indistinguishable (Stanley & Murphy, 1997), and that both constructs, as well as locus of control and neuroticism, load on a single higher-order construct (Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2002). One purpose of the present study is to help clarify the relationship between self-esteem and GSE by testing Smith's (1989) hypothesis that GSE predicts future self-esteem, and by ruling out the alternative hypothesis that self-esteem predicts future GSE.


While it may be measured multidimensionally (Bracken, Bunch, Keith, & Keith, 2000; Fleming & Courtney, 1984), the view of self-esteem as a unidimensional, global sense of self-worth (Rosenberg, 1965) is supported by second-order factor analyses (Fleming & Courtney, 1984) and by studies utilizing the Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale among American adults and adolescents (Corwyn, 2000) as well as persons from other cultures (Pullmann & Allik, 2000; Tomas & Oliver, 1999). Both level and stability of selfesteem are important (Stratton, 1999), but level is the best predictor of affect and motivation (Amorose, 2000) and is utilized in this study. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.