Correlational findings

Study Ludwig (1971): study US 1966

Female students, undergraduates, University of Wisconsin, USA, 196?
N = 72
Non Response
81%; 61% refusal, 5% eliminated on basis of screening data, 15% miscellaneous re
Multiple assesment methods
Structured questionnaires, tests; and interview.


Authors's Label
Our Classification
Ss answered these questions at the end of an experimental situation in which their self-esteem was experimentally altered. This was done by means of a false personality report dealing with the subject's creativity, maturity and other things.
Two indicators:
1. Adjective checklist scored for how
   do you feel at the moment?
   (Modified Leventhal Self Esteem
   scale; see Dabbs & Leventhal, 1966)
2. Each subject was asked to place her-
   self and 5 other persons (such as a
   friend, a selfish person, a grand-
   mother, a sad person, a doctor, a
   strong person, etc.) in a line of
   6 circles. This was done 6 times
   with different combinations of
   persons. Each placement of the self
   in the circle farthest to the left
   was most indicative of high self-
   esteem(score 6), and placement in the
   circle farthest to the right of low
   self-esteem (score 1).
   (Ziller Self-Esteem Scale; see
   Ziller et al., 1964).

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks A-AOL-u-mq-v-10-a r = +.35 p < .01 For happy Ss self-esteem is unaffected by    bolstered self-esteem and decreased by reduced   self-esteem.
For unhappy Ss self-esteem is higher by    bolstered self-esteem than by reduced self-esteem.
A-AOL-u-mq-v-10-a r = +.08 ns - For happy Ss self-esteem is unaffected by
  bolsered self-esteem and decreased by reduced
- For unhappy Ss self-esteem is high after bolse-
  ring of self-esteem than after reduction.