Content uploaded by Sander Thomaes
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sander Thomaes on Aug 07, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Arousing “Gentle Passions” in Young Adolescents: Sustained Experimental
Effects of Value Affirmations on Prosocial Feelings and Behaviors
Sander Thomaes
Utrecht University Brad J. Bushman
The Ohio State University and VU University Amsterdam
Bram Orobio de Castro and Albert Reijntjes
Utrecht University
When people reflect on their important values, they may become more attuned to the needs of others.
Two longitudinal field experiments examined whether a subtle value-affirmation manipulation can
initiate relatively enduring increases in young adolescents’ prosocial feelings (Study 1; M
age
⫽12.9) and
prosocial behaviors (Study 2; M
age
⫽12.9). Participants completed a brief writing exercise that affirmed
the values they deemed either most important (value-affirmation group) or unimportant (control group).
As predicted, the value affirmation, coupled with a booster affirmation 6 weeks later, caused increases
in prosocial feelings and behaviors over the 3-month study period. Antisocial students who were
value-affirmed showed especially strong increases in prosocial behavior. These results suggest that
“gentle passions” can be aroused in youth by cost- and time-efficient means. The practical utility of value
affirmations will need to be evaluated in future work.
Keywords: value affirmation, self-affirmation, prosocial behavior, identity, adolescents
We should arouse in him kindness, goodness, pity, and beneficence,
all the gentle and attractive passions which are naturally pleasing to
man.
—Jean Jacques Rousseau, Emile
French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778)
thought that children are predestined by nature to be compassion-
ate, loving, and caring toward others. The challenge for adults, he
argued, is to cultivate children’s innate goodness. Although the
notion that children are innately good has proved controversial
(e.g., Tremblay et al., 1999), the notion that we should help
children to live in harmony with others is as important today as it
was in Rousseau’s days (Damon, 2002; Durlak & Wells, 1997;
Spinrad & Eisenberg, 2009). The present article reports two field
experiments that illustrate the possibility of boosting young ado-
lescents’ prosocial feelings and behaviors using a value-
affirmation manipulation.
Value-affirmation manipulations (also called “self-affirmation”
manipulations) allow people to reflect on their important personal
values, skills, or traits by means of a brief (e.g., 15 min), structured
writing assignment. Individuals are asked to think of the things
they value in life (e.g., athletic abilities, music, religion) and to
write a short paragraph about those values. Value affirmations do
not boost self-esteem, but they activate individuals’ awareness of
their core sources of identity, and provide individuals with a
stronger sense of “who they are” (Sherman & Cohen, 2006; Steele,
1988). Past research has documented that value affirmations can
have important short- and long-term benefits, especially among
young adolescents. Value affirmations reliably attenuate the neg-
ative impact of social-evaluative stress and boost the psychological
and behavioral adjustment of individuals who frequently experi-
ence social-evaluative stress, such as members of stigmatized
groups (Creswell et al., 2005; Sherman & Cohen, 2002). For
example, value affirmations have a long-term positive impact on
African American adolescents’ school grades by attenuating per-
formance-based threat and stress (Cohen, Garcia, Apfel, & Master,
2006; Cohen, Garcia, Purdie-Vaughns, Apfel, & Brzustoski,
2009).
According to value-affirmation theory, writing about per-
sonal values satisfies important self-needs, including the need
for self-integrity (i.e., seeing oneself as adequate and effica-
cious) and the need for self-consistency (i.e., confirming and
perpetuating one’s existing self-conceptions; Sherman & Co-
hen, 2006; Steele, 1988). For many individuals, the desire to
have one’s self-needs satisfied can be so pressing that it makes
them narrowly self-interested, and keeps them from focusing on
the needs of others (Crocker, 2008; Crocker, Olivier, & Nuer,
2009). When value-affirmed, however, people feel relieved
from the task of establishing self-integrity and identity, and so
they may become more open and responsive to the needs of
others (cf. Burke & Stets, 1999; Hoffman, 1994; Kenrick,
Griskevicius, Neuberg, & Schaller, 2010). Such an interperson-
This article was published Online First October 3, 2011.
Sander Thomaes, Department of Psychology, Utrecht University,
Utrecht, the Netherlands; Brad J. Bushman, Department of Psychology,
The Ohio State University and Department of Psychology, VU University
Amsterdam; Bram Orobio de Castro, Department of Psychology, Utrecht
University; Albert Reijntjes, Department of Pedagogics, Utrecht Univer-
sity.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sander
Thomaes, Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box
80.140, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail: s.thomaes@uu.nl
Developmental Psychology © 2011 American Psychological Association
2012, Vol. 48, No. 1, 103–110 0012-1649/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0025677
103
ally attuned mind-set should evoke prosocial feelings and be-
haviors.
Supporting this theory, recent laboratory research involving
adult participants found that value affirmations cause people to
experience momentary increases in prosocial feelings, such as
love, connectedness, and empathy (Crocker, Niiya, & Misch-
kowski, 2008). The present field research involving young adoles-
cents builds on this work and tests whether value affirmations may
yield increases in both prosocial feelings and actual prosocial
behavior. More important, whereas Crocker and colleagues exam-
ined the immediate, momentary impact of value affirmations, we
examined in the present research whether the benefits of value
affirmations may be longer lasting (i.e., spanning a period of 3
months rather than a single experimental session in the laboratory).
Although it may seem far-fetched to propose that brief writing
assignments can promote increased compassion months later, pre-
vious research has shown that value affirmations can have surpris-
ingly lasting effects on young adolescents’ psychological adjust-
ment, ranging from 1 week (Thomaes, Bushman, Orobio de
Castro, Cohen, & Denissen, 2009) to several months or even
longer (Cohen et al., 2006, Cohen et al., 2009; Cook, Purdie-
Vaughns, Garcia, & Cohen, 2011). To be sure, these studies
focused on different domains of psychological adjustment (i.e.,
aggressive behavior and school performance) than does the present
study. These studies are directly relevant to the present study,
however, in showing that the psychological and behavioral effects
of value affirmations among young adolescents can be relatively
enduring. Early adolescence is a time when children are strongly
motivated to experience self-integrity and to establish an autono-
mous identity (Collins & Steinberg, 2006; Erikson, 1968; Rosen-
berg, 1965; Thomaes, Poorthuis, & Nelemans, in press). Value
affirmations capitalize on that motivation by allowing children to
reflect on the core values that define them as a person. Reflectivity,
or the ability to reflect on one’s important values or life experi-
ences, has been identified earlier as an important factor predicting
intervention effectiveness among adolescents (Brophy-Herb &
Honig, 1999). Value affirmations may be especially powerful
when timed shortly after the transition to secondary school, a time
when many children feel uncertain about who they are and how
they will fit in with others (Cook et al., 2011; Eccles & Midgley,
1989; Kalakoski & Nurmi, 1998; Yeager & Walton, 2011).
It should be emphasized that value affirmations are likely to
benefit some youth more than others. Much like aspirin is effective
for those who suffer from headaches but does little for those who
feel fine, the logic of value-affirmation theory implies that value
affirmations may be most effective for relatively self-centered
individuals (i.e., individuals who routinely prioritize their own
needs and interests over those of others) more so than for individ-
uals who are already attuned to others’ interests. Such self-
centered disregard of others’ needs or interests is at the root of
antisocial behavior. Antisocial youth tend to be low in empathy,
relatively indifferent to others’ needs, and prone to harm others if
doing so benefits their own interests (Dodge, Coie, & Lynam,
2006; Frick & Viding, 2009; Miller & Eisenberg, 1988). Thus, if
value affirmations allow people to become more invested with the
needs of others, then they should be most effective for antisocial
youth (see Gibbs, Potter, Barriga, & Liau, 1996, for a review of
more comprehensive interventions to help antisocial youth become
more prosocial).
Overview of the Present Research
In two longitudinal field experiments, we examined whether a
subtle value-affirmation manipulation, coupled with a booster af-
firmation 6 weeks later, can initiate increases in young adoles-
cents’ prosocial feelings (Study 1) and prosocial behaviors (Study
2) over a 3-month period. In addition, we examined whether the
value affirmation may be particularly effective at initiating in-
creased prosocial behavior among youth high in antisocial behav-
ior problems. We studied young adolescents who just entered
secondary school. At this point in development, the psychological
impact of value affirmations tends to be strong. Because the
foundation for future relationships in school is laid at this time,
early alterations in interpersonal mind-set (e.g., alterations induced
by a value-affirmation procedure) may easily become self-
reinforcing (Cook et al., 2011; Yeager & Walton, 2011).
Study 1
Participants in Study 1 completed either a short value affirma-
tion or a control writing exercise in their classes, and a booster
exercise 6 weeks later. Prosocial feelings and “proself feelings”
(i.e., positive feelings directed toward oneself, such as pride,
feeling strong, and in control) were measured at baseline and 3
months later. Proself feelings were measured to establish discrim-
inant validity. Teachers were blind to the conditions to which
students were assigned. We predicted that the value affirmation
would boost prosocial but not proself feelings across the 3-month
study period.
Method
Participants. Participants were 173 seventh graders (51%
boys, 49% girls) recruited from a public secondary school in the
southern part of the Netherlands—a region that is representative of
the Netherlands in terms of both socioeconomic status (SES) and
cultural and ethnical diversity (Statistics Netherlands, 2009, Sta-
tistics Netherlands, 2010). The school serves students from the
entire region, consisting mainly of middle-class communities. The
school was approached for participation because the principal had
expressed interest in research on prosocial development. Students
ranged in age from 11 to 14 years (M
age
⫽12.9 years, SD ⫽0.5
years). Most were ethnic Dutch (90%) or had mixed cultural or
ethnical origins (6%). No information on the languages students
spoke in the home was obtained, but they all understood and spoke
Dutch at school. Students obtained informed parental consent
(consent letters were sent home from school to all entering stu-
dents’ families, were signed, and returned; consent rate ⫽86%)
and provided their own assent (assent rate ⫽96%). They were
enrolled at school throughout the study period (participation rate ⫽
98%; three students left school just before or during the study
period). Participants received a small gift (e.g., mechanical pen-
cils) in exchange for their voluntary participation.
Procedure. In the Netherlands, children transition into sec-
ondary school at seventh grade. Approximately 2 months after
students had entered secondary school (range ⫽7–9 weeks after
the first school day), they completed the Time 1 mood assessment
in their classes. They rated “how often” they experienced prosocial
feelings (i.e., love,giving,empathic,connected,grateful; Time 1
104 THOMAES, BUSHMAN, DE CASTRO, AND REIJNTES
Cronbach’s ␣⫽.72) and proself feelings (i.e., proud,strong,
admirable,powerful,in control; Time 1 Cronbach’s ␣⫽.75) in
their daily lives. Items were rated along a 4-point scale ranging
from 0 (almost never)to3(always), and responses were summed
and averaged. Items were taken from Crocker et al. (2008).
One week later, students were randomly assigned within their
classes to either the value-affirmation (n⫽88) or control condi-
tion (n⫽85). In each class, there were approximately equal
numbers of participants in the two conditions. Standard value-
affirmation procedures were followed (Cohen et al., 2006). Re-
search assistants prepared the packets for the different conditions,
put them in closed envelopes, and handed over the envelopes to the
teachers. Teachers distributed the closed envelopes to each partic-
ipating student in their class and presented the exercise as a regular
class assignment. Teachers were instructed to stay at their desk
while students completed the exercise independently. Students
opened the envelopes and were guided through the exercise via
written, self-explanatory instructions that required no guidance
from teachers. These instructions had previously been tested to
ensure they were intelligible and age appropriate (Cohen et al.,
2006).
Students were given a list of 12 values (i.e., being athletic, being
good at art or liking art, being smart or getting good grades, being
creative, being independent, living in the moment, belonging to a
social group, being good at music or liking music, being knowl-
edgeable about politics, having good relationships with friends or
family, being religious, having a good sense of humor). In the
value-affirmation group, students selected two or three of their
most important values and were instructed to “think about times
when these values were important to you” and to “describe in a
few sentences why these values are important to you.” They were
also instructed to “focus on thoughts and feelings, and don’t worry
about spelling or grammar.” One 13-year-old boy wrote:
Music is very important to me. [. . .] I like rap music a lot. Rap music
is an important part of who I am and what I stand for. [. . .] Listening
to rap music and writing rap lyrics give meaning to my life.
In the control condition, students selected two or three values
they considered unimportant and wrote about why these values
may be important to others. One 12-year-old girl wrote: “God
isn’t really important in my life, but I understand why other
people would think more about God than I do. [. . .]” Students
also rated their level of agreement with several statements about
the values they selected (e.g., “these values influence the kind
of person I am”).
After finishing, participants returned their work in a closed
envelope to the teacher, who forwarded the envelopes to the
research assistants. The exercises took approximately 15 min to
complete. To reinforce the manipulation, students received an
additional affirmation 6 weeks later using the same procedures.
Students remained in their same experimental group. Finally, again
6 weeks later (i.e., 3 months after the Time 1 mood assessment),
students completed the Time 2 mood assessment using the same
measure (Cronbach’s ␣s⫽.75 and .71 for Time 2 prosocial and
proself feelings, respectively). A protocol on how value-
affirmations can be administered and implemented in schools can
be obtained from the first author.
Results and Discussion
Preliminary analyses and checks. Time 1 prosocial and
proself feelings did not differ between the value-affirmation and
control groups (ps⬎.46), indicating that random assignment to
groups was effective. No main or interactive effects for gender or
age were found, so the data for boys and girls of different ages
were combined for subsequent analyses. Intraclass correlations
(ICCs) showed that the proportion of variance in the outcome
measures that was due to classroom differences was negligible
(i.e., ICC for change in prosocial feelings ⫽0.01%, p⬎.50; ICC
for change in proself feelings ⫽1.47%, p⬎.50). Supporting the
fidelity of students’ writings, two coders (i.e., licensed child psy-
chologists) who were blind to the purposes of the study indepen-
dently judged that all participants followed instructions and wrote
about the values they selected as most important or unimportant.
Primary analyses. Table 1 (Panel A) contains the descriptive
statistics for Study 1. We analyzed data using two separate re-
peated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs). Prosocial and
proself feelings at Time 1 and Time 2 were the within-subjects
dependent variables; affirmation condition (value affirmation vs.
control) was the between-subjects factor.
Across groups, students’ prosocial feelings increased throughout
the 3-month study period, as indicated by a significant effect for
time, F(1, 171) ⫽17.82, p⬍.001. More important for the present
study purposes, the Affirmation Condition ⫻Time interaction was
also significant, F(1, 171) ⫽3.94, p⬍.05. As predicted, simple
effects analyses showed that prosocial feelings increased more
strongly among value-affirmed students than among control stu-
dents, F(1, 87) ⫽19.26, p⬍.001, d⫽0.47, Mdifference ⫽0.25,
95% CI [0.14, 0.37]; and, F(1, 84) ⫽2.50, p⬍.12, d⫽0.19, M
difference ⫽0.09, 95% CI [⫺0.02, 0.21], respectively. A similar
repeated measures ANOVA revealed that, across groups, students
also experienced more proself feelings throughout the study pe-
riod, as indicated by a significant effect for time, F(1, 171) ⫽6.21,
p⬍.02. However, as predicted, this effect was not qualified by
affirmation condition, F(1, 171) ⫽0.55, p⬎.46.
Thus, Study 1 builds on and extends previous laboratory re-
search involving adult participants by showing that value affirma-
tions can have a sustained, real-world impact on the positive
feelings that young adolescents experience toward others, but not
toward themselves. The latter finding is important because it
attests to the specificity of our findings and shows that value
affirmations do not simply boost all forms of positive mood.
Together, the Study 1 findings are consistent with the theory that
value affirmations influence people to become more attuned to the
needs of other people (Crocker et al., 2008).
Study 2
In Study 2, we examined in a different cohort of students
whether the value-affirmation procedures used in Study 1 would
also have sustained effects on actual prosocial behavior. In addi-
tion, we examined individual differences in antisocial behavior as
a potential moderator of the hypothesized link between value
affirmations and prosocial behavior. If value affirmations make
people more sensitively attuned to others, then they should be
particularly effective for antisocial individuals. Prosocial behavior
and antisocial behavior were reported by teachers at baseline and
105
VALUE AFFIRMATION AND COMPASSION
again 3 months later. Teachers were blind to the conditions to
which students were assigned. We predicted that the value affir-
mation would increase prosocial behavior, especially among stu-
dents high in antisocial behavior.
Method
Participants. Participants were a different cohort of 163
seventh graders, recruited 1 year later from the same school as in
Study 1 (51% boys, 49% girls; 81% were ethnic Dutch, 11% had
mixed cultural or ethnical origins; all students understood and
spoke Dutch at school). Students ranged in age from 11 to 14 years
(M
age
⫽12.9 years, SD ⫽0.6 years). They obtained informed
parental consent (following the Study 1 procedures; consent rate ⫽
82%), provided their own assent (assent rate ⫽98%), were en-
rolled at school throughout the study period (participation rate ⫽
99%; two students left school during the study period), and re-
ceived a small gift for their voluntary participation.
Procedure. The research design, manipulation procedures
(N
value affirmation
⫽82; N
control
⫽81), and time schedule were the
same as in Study 1, but the measures differed. Rather than having
students complete mood measures, teachers completed the
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire–teacher report (A. Good-
man & Goodman, 2009; R. Goodman, 1997). This well-validated
behavioral screening questionnaire contains five-item subscales
for prosocial behavior (e.g., considerate of other people’s feelings;
often offers to help others; Cronbach’s ␣⫽.84 and .85 at Time 1
and Time 2, respectively) and antisocial behavior (e.g., often fights
with other youth or bullies them; often lies or cheats; Cronbach’s
␣⫽.77 and .68 at Time 1 and Time 2, respectively). Teachers
rated their agreement with the items along a 3-point scale ranging
from 0 (not true)to2(certainly true), and responses were summed
and averaged.
Results and Discussion
Preliminary analyses and checks. Time 1 prosocial and
antisocial behavior did not differ between the value-affirmation
and control groups (ps⬎.47). Thus, random assignment to groups
was effective. No main or interactive effects for gender or age
were found, so the data for boys and girls of different ages were
combined. The proportion of variance in prosocial behavior
change that was due to classroom differences was nonsignificant
(ICC ⫽7.70%, p⬎.15). Participants’ writings were checked by
the same two coders as in Study 1. Again, the coders indepen-
dently judged that all participants followed instructions and wrote
about the values they selected.
Primary analyses. Table 1 (Panel B) contains the descriptive
statistics for Study 2. We analyzed data using hierarchical multiple
regression analysis. The dependent variable was prosocial behav-
ior at Time 2. We entered prosocial behavior at Time 1 in Step 1.
We entered affirmation condition (i.e., value affirmation vs. con-
trol) and antisocial behavior at Time 1 in Step 2. We entered the
interaction between affirmation condition and antisocial behavior
in Step 3. We centered continuous variables to reduce multicol-
linearity (Aiken & West, 1991).
Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations in Studies 1 and 2
Variable MSD
Zero-order correlations
1234
Panel A (Study 1)
1. Prosocial feelings Time 1
Value affirmation 1.56 0.55 — .42
ⴱⴱ
.54
ⴱⴱ
.28
ⴱⴱ
Control 1.63 0.55 — .17 .58
ⴱⴱ
.02
2. Proself feelings Time 1
Value affirmation 1.49 0.53 — .14 .41
ⴱⴱ
Control 1.43 0.50 — .08 .37
ⴱⴱ
3. Prosocial feelings Time 2
Value affirmation 1.81 0.56 — .39
ⴱⴱ
Control 1.72 0.59 — .24
ⴱ
4. Proself feelings Time 2
Value affirmation 1.62 0.52
Control 1.51 0.48
Panel B (Study 2)
1. Prosocial behavior Time 1
Value affirmation 1.22 0.51 — ⫺.33
ⴱⴱ
.65
ⴱⴱ
⫺.18
†
Control 1.26 0.50 — ⫺.26
ⴱ
.78
ⴱⴱ
⫺.25
ⴱ
2. Antisocial behavior Time 1
Value affirmation 0.16 0.33 — ⫺.01 .60
ⴱⴱ
Control 0.14 0.27 — ⫺.21
†
.71
ⴱⴱ
3. Prosocial behavior Time 2
Value affirmation 1.30 0.50 — ⫺.18
†
Control 1.23 0.54 — ⫺.25
ⴱ
4. Antisocial behavior Time 2
Value affirmation 0.14 0.24
Control 0.16 0.27
†
p⬍.10.
ⴱ
p⬍.05.
ⴱⴱ
p⬍.01.
106 THOMAES, BUSHMAN, DE CASTRO, AND REIJNTES
The value affirmation marginally influenced change in prosocial
behavior over time, t(159) ⫽1.78, p⬍.08, ⫽.10. Affirmed
students tended to show increased prosocial behavior 3 months
later, F(1, 81) ⫽3.17, p⬍.08, d⫽0.19, M
difference
⫽0.08, 95%
CI [⫺0.01, 0.18], whereas control students did not, F(1, 80) ⫽
0.63, p⬎.43, d⫽⫺0.06, M
difference
⫽⫺0.03, 95% CI [⫺0.11,
0.05]. More important, there was a significant interaction between
affirmation condition and antisocial behavior, t(158) ⫽2.16, p⬍
.04, ⫽.19 (see Figure 1). We analyzed the interaction using
simple slopes analyses (Aiken & West, 1991). Relative to the
control writing exercise, the value affirmation did not increase
prosocial behavior among students low in antisocial behavior (1
SD below the mean; ⫽⫺.02, t⫽⫺0.29, p⬎.77), marginally
increased prosocial behavior among students showing moderate
levels of antisocial behavior (⫽.10, t⫽1.81, p⬍.08), and, as
predicted, significantly increased prosocial behavior among stu-
dents high in antisocial behavior (1 SD above the mean; ⫽.23,
t⫽2.80, p⬍.01). Thus, as hypothesized, the value affirmation
was especially effective for relatively antisocial students—the very
individuals who “needed” it the most.
1
General Discussion
These two longitudinal field experiments support the hypothesis
that a subtle value-affirmation manipulation (i.e., two writing
exercises that each took about 15 min to complete), timed shortly
after the transition to secondary school, can yield relatively endur-
ing increases in young adolescents’ prosocial feelings and behav-
iors. In Study 1, we found that value-affirmed students more
frequently experienced love, connectedness, and related prosocial
feelings over a 3-month period. In Study 2, conducted in an
independent cohort of students, and informed by teachers who
were blind to experimental conditions, we found that value-
affirmed students tended to show small increases in prosocial
behavior over a 3-month period. The largest value-affirmation
effect was found among students who were initially high in anti-
social behavior problems. Antisocial students who had written
about their important values, skills, or traits became more proso-
cial over time, whereas antisocial students in the control group did
not.
Overall, these results are consistent with the theory that value
affirmations allow people to satisfy their self-needs (i.e., basic
needs to view oneself as adequate and efficacious and to have
one’s existing self-conceptions confirmed) and to become more
attuned to the needs of others. Previous laboratory research in-
volving adults supported this theory by showing that value affir-
mations lead to increased prosocial feelings in the moment
(Crocker et al., 2008). Our field research involving young adoles-
cents shows that the impact of value affirmations on prosocial
feelings lasts much longer, generalizes to prosocial behavior, and
is moderated in a theoretically meaningful way.
The effects of our apparently minor value-affirmation ma-
nipulation may seem disproportionate, yet they are not unprec-
edented in value-affirmation research that focused on different
domains of psychological adjustment. In fact, in research that
was published in the journal Science, Cohen and colleagues
(2006) reported that value affirmations have a “large” positive
effect on targeted young adolescents’ school performance,
when judged against Cohen’s (1988) conventional values for
large effects. To compare, the effect sizes obtained in the
present research were “medium” (Study 1) and “small” (Study
2) when judged against these same standards. Perhaps even
more telling, in a follow-up study that was also published in
Science, Cohen and colleagues (2009) found that their value-
affirmation procedure continued to benefit targeted students’
school performance for a period of up to 2 years. Similarly,
research showed that value affirmations timed early in second-
ary school help sustain targeted students’ sense of belonging in
school for a period of up to 2 years (Cook et al., 2011).
We propose that our apparently minor experimental manip-
ulation produced sustained effects for at least three reasons.
First, in early adolescence, value-affirmations allow children to
satisfy their self-needs at a time they need it the most (Cohen et
al., 2006, Cohen et al., 2009; Thomaes et al., 2009). Young
adolescents typically feel pressured to establish a sense of
self-integrity and identity, and value affirmations reduce those
pressures by activating existing conceptions of who one is as a
person. Second, the value affirmation was timed shortly after
students transitioned into secondary school. For many children,
this is a time of insecurity when their psychological experience
1
Although the goal for this study was to test how value affirmations
influence prosocial behavior, we also explored how our value affirmation
influenced antisocial behavior. A repeated measures ANOVA with antiso-
cial behavior as the within-subjects dependent variable and affirmation
condition (value affirmation vs. control) as the between-subjects factor
found no significant impact of the intervention on antisocial behavior (p⬎
.40). Thus, the impact of the value affirmation appeared specific for
prosocial behavior.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
High level of antisocial behavior (+1 SD)
Moderate level of antisocial behavio
r
Low level of antisocial behavior (-1 SD)
Prosocial Behavior
Experimental Condition
Control Value-Affirmation
Figure 1. Prosocial behavior at Time 2 (adjusted for prosocial behavior
at Time 1) in the value-affirmation and control conditions as a function of
low (⫺1SD), moderate (at the mean), and high (⫹1SD) levels of
antisocial behavior.
107
VALUE AFFIRMATION AND COMPASSION
is relatively malleable (e.g., Eccles & Midgley, 1989). Accord-
ingly, the seemingly small act of writing about one’s personally
important values may feel quite large to the student who is new
in secondary school and is defining his or her identity and
forming new relationships with peers (Yeager & Walton, 2011).
Consistent with that notion, one study that was specifically
designed to test how timing affects the impact of value affir-
mations found that value affirmations were more effective to
the extent they were delivered earlier after the secondary school
transition (Cook et al., 2011). Third, also because of its post-
transition timing, the prosocial feelings and behaviors that the
value affirmation initiated may have been self-reinforcing. Ini-
tial increases in loving feelings and caring behaviors, even if
relatively modest in magnitude, may have increased the likeli-
hood that students’ formed positive new relationships. Those
relationships, in turn, may have provided the social context
within which initial increases in loving feelings and caring
behaviors could be sustained or even further enhanced, creating
an upward spiral of compassion.
Strengths, Limitations, Future Research, and Practical
Implications
Our research adds to a growing number of studies in which
subtle experimental manipulations, or “small interventions,” have
been used to try to gain sustained improvement in children’s
psychological functioning (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck,
2007; Cohen et al., 2006, Cohen et al., 2009; Hulleman & Har-
ackiewicz, 2009; Oyserman, Bybee, & Terry, 2006; Thomaes et
al., 2009; Walton & Cohen, 2011). In contrast to more conven-
tional school-based intervention approaches that broadly target
multiple psychological processes, small interventions narrowly
target a single psychological process known to impede children’s
optimal adjustment and seek to subtly influence that process. One
strength of small intervention research is that it provides real-
world tests of basic psychological theory. Another strength is that
it may also yield potentially powerful techniques that—when
formally established as evidence-based educational practice—may
be used in applied settings to improve children’s adjustment.
Similarly, the present research provided a stringent, real-world test
of value-affirmation theory, and also illustrated the possibility of
yielding relatively enduring increases in youth’s compassion by
easy-to-use, cost- and time-efficient means.
We have argued that early adolescence, and especially the first
year in secondary school, is a critical time period for the purposes
of the present research. However, our developmental focus limits
the ability to draw conclusions about the impact of value affirma-
tions among children of other ages. Future research should exam-
ine to what extent the impact of value affirmations is influenced by
children’s age and by its timing in the aftermath of major life
transitions. Another limitation is that Studies 1 and 2 were con-
ducted at one and the same school. This school provides regular,
public secondary education, and is located in a region representa-
tive of the Netherlands in terms of SES and cultural and ethnical
diversity (Statistics Netherlands, 2009, Statistics Netherlands,
2010). Still, we cannot be sure to what extent our findings rested
on school-specific preconditions that permitted the value affirma-
tion to be effective (e.g., the presence of a dedicated team of
teachers already invested in supporting students’ prosocial devel-
opment), and so replication is needed.
We acknowledge that the impact of the value affirmation was
rather small, especially in Study 2. Moreover, although a 3-month
impact seems surprisingly long, intervention effects on prosocial
behavior ideally last longer than 3 months. Future research is
needed to test more powerful value-affirmation techniques, to
establish their effectiveness over even longer time periods, and to
explore opportunities to implement these techniques into existing,
more comprehensive intervention programs that aim to increase
students’ prosocial feelings and behaviors (for a review of such
programs, see Spinrad & Eisenberg, 2009). Value-affirmation
techniques are meant to complement, not to replace more compre-
hensive interventions (Thomaes et al., 2009; Yeager & Walton,
2011).
To be sure, our research was designed as an initial test of the
potential effectiveness of value affirmations to enhance stu-
dents’ prosocial orientation, not to formally test the merit of
value affirmations as a ready-to-use intervention technique.
Now that we have found evidence for the potential effectiveness
of value affirmations, however, a formal impact evaluation (i.e.,
an evaluation that complies with standard criteria to produce
evidence-based educational practices; e.g., Kratochwill & Sher-
noff, 2003) is warranted. One priority for such an evaluation
will be to establish generalizability to other settings and other
students. Are value affirmations equally effective when used in
other cultures (including cultures that are less individualistic
than the Netherlands; Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010),
when used with students of other ages, or when timed in
nontransition periods? In addition to teacher reports, peer re-
ports may provide a valuable complementary perspective on
value affirmation-induced prosocial behavior change. A second
priority will be to systematically identify the traits or charac-
teristics of students who are most likely to benefit from value
affirmations. Such research should answer whether value affir-
mations are most appropriate as universal intervention or as
targeted intervention for certain subgroups of students. A third
priority will be to evaluate the feasibility and added value of
implementing value affirmations in more comprehensive inter-
vention programs to enhance youths’ prosocial feelings and
behaviors.
In summary, the practical value of the present research is that it
identified value affirmations as a promising intervention tech-
nique, and illustrated the possibility of helping students to adopt a
more prosocial orientation by allowing them to reflect on their
personal values—by providing them a stronger sense of who they
are. We hope that basic and applied researchers will join forces to
formally test the merit of value affirmations as intervention tech-
nique. Value affirmations may have the potential to do exactly
what Jean Jacques Rousseau advocated: to arouse in youth “kind-
ness, goodness, pity, and beneficence, all the gentle and attractive
passions which are naturally pleasing to man.”
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and
interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories
of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A
108 THOMAES, BUSHMAN, DE CASTRO, AND REIJNTES
longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–
263. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x
Brophy-Herb, H., & Honig, A. S. (1999). Reflectivity: Key ingredient in
positive adolescent parenting. Journal of Primary Prevention, 19, 241–
250. doi:10.1023/A:1022652011620
Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (1999). Trust and commitment through self-
verification. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62, 347–366. doi:10.2307/
2695833
Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006, September 1).
Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological interven-
tion. Science, 313, 1307–1310. doi:10.1126/science.1128317
Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Apfel, N., & Brzustoski, P.
(2009, April 17). Recursive processes in self-affirmation: Intervening to
close the minority achievement gap. Science, 324, 400–403. doi:
10.1126/science.1170769
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(2nd ed.). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Collins, W. A., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Adolescent development in inter-
personal context. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.) & N.
Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social,
emotional, and personality development (pp. 1003–1067). New York,
NY: Wiley.
Cook, J., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Garcia, J., & Cohen, G. L. (2011, April).
Longitudinal impact of a values-affirmation and its timing on minority
students’ belonging and performance in middle school. Paper presented
at the 2011 biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child
Development, Montreal, Canada.
Creswell, J. D., Welch, W., Taylor, S. E., Sherman, D. K., Gruenewald, T.,
& Mann, T. (2005). Affirmation of personal values buffers neuroendo-
crine and psychological stress responses. Psychological Science, 16,
846–851. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01624.x
Crocker, J. (2008). From egosystem to ecosystem: Implications for learn-
ing, relationships, and well-being. In H. A. Wayment & J. J. Brauer
(Eds.), Transcending self-interest: Psychological explorations of the
quiet ego (pp. 63–72). Washington, DC: American Psychological Asso-
ciation. doi:10.1037/11771-006
Crocker, J., Niiya, Y., & Mischkowski, D. (2008). Why does writing about
important values reduce defensiveness? Self-affirmation and the role of
positive other-directed feelings. Psychological Science, 19, 740–747.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02150.x
Crocker, J., Olivier, M. A., & Nuer, N. (2009). Self-image goals and
compassionate goals: Costs and benefits. Self and Identity, 8, 251–269.
doi:10.1080/15298860802505160
Damon, W. (Ed.). (2002). Bringing in a new era in character education.
Palo Alto, CA: Hoover Institution Press.
Dodge, K. A., Coie, J. D., & Lynam, D. (2006). Aggression and antisocial
behavior in youth. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.) & N.
Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social,
emotional, and personality development (pp. 719–788). New York, NY:
Wiley.
Durlak, J. A., & Wells, A. M. (1997). Primary prevention mental health
programs for children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. Ameri-
can Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 115–152.
Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit: Developmen-
tally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In R. Ames & C.
Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (pp. 139–181). New
York, NY: Academic Press.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.
Frick, P. J., & Viding, E. (2009). Antisocial behavior from a developmental
psychopathology perspective. Development and Psychopathology, 21,
1111–1131. doi:10.1017/S0954579409990071
Gibbs, J. C., Potter, G. B., Barriga, A. Q., & Liau, A. K. (1996). Devel-
oping the helping skills and prosocial motivation of aggressive adoles-
cents in peer group programs. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 1,
283–305. doi:10.1016/1359-1789(95)00018-6
Goodman, A., & Goodman, R. (2009). Strengths and Difficulties Ques-
tionnaire as a dimensional measure of child mental health. Journal of the
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 48, 400–403.
doi:10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181985068
Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A
research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38, 581–
586. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x
Hoffman, M. L. (1994). Empathy, role taking, guilt, and development of
altruistic motives. In B. Puka (Ed.), Reaching out: Caring, altruism, and
prosocial behavior (pp. 196–218). New York, NY: Garland Publishing.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, J. H., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and orga-
nizations: Software of the mind. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009, December 4). Promoting
interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326,
1410–1412. doi:10.1126/science.1177067
Kalakoski, V., & Nurmi, J. E. (1998). Identity and educational transitions:
Age differences in adolescent exploration and commitment related to
education, occupation, and family. Journal of Research on Adolescence,
8, 29–47. doi:10.1207/s15327795jra0801_2
Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2010).
Renovating the pyramid of needs: Contemporary extensions built upon
ancient foundations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 292–314.
doi:10.1177/1745691610369469
Kratochwill, T. R., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Evidence-based practice:
Promoting evidence-based interventions in school psychology. School
Psychology Quarterly, 18, 389–408. doi:10.1521/scpq.18.4.389.27000
Miller, P. A., & Eisenberg, N. (1988). The relation of empathy to aggres-
sive and externalizing/antisocial behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 103,
324–344. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.324
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and aca-
demic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 188–204. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.91.1.188
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2002). Accepting threatening informa-
tion: Self-affirmation and the reduction of defensive biases. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 119–123. doi:10.1111/1467-
8721.00182
Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). The psychology of self-defense:
Self-affirmation theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental
social psychology (Vol. 38, pp. 183–242). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Spinrad, T. L., & Eisenberg, N. (2009). Empathy, prosocial behavior, and
positive development in schools. In R. Gilman, E. Scott Huebner, &
M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in schools (pp.
119–130). New York, NY: Routledge.
Statistics Netherlands. (2009). Statline: Regionaal inkomensonderzoek
[Statline: Regional income study].Voorburg, the Netherlands: Author.
Statistics Netherlands. (2010). Statline: Aandeel allochtonen per gemeente
[Statline: Proportion ethnic minorities per community].Voorburg, the
Netherlands: Author.
Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the
integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental
social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261–302). New York, NY: Academic
Press.
Thomaes, S., Bushman, B. J., Orobio de Castro, B., Cohen, G. L., &
Denissen, J. J. A. (2009). Reducing narcissistic aggression by buttressing
self-esteem: An experimental field study. Psychological Science, 20,
1536–1542. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02478.x
Thomaes, S., Poorthuis, A., & Nelemans, S. (in press). Self-esteem. In
109
VALUE AFFIRMATION AND COMPASSION
B. B. Brown & M. Prinstein (Eds.), Encyclopedia of adolescence.
Oxford, England: Elsevier.
Tremblay, R. E., Japel, C., Perusse, D., Boivin, M., Zoccolillo, M., Mont-
plaisir, J., & McDuff, P. (1999). The search for the age of “onset” of
physical aggression: Rousseau and Bandura revisited. Criminal Behav-
ior and Mental Health, 9, 8–23. doi:10.1002/cbm.288
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2011, March 18). A brief social-belonging
intervention improves academic and health outcomes among minority
students. Science, 331, 1447–1451. doi:10.1126/science.1198364
Yeager, D. S., & Walton, G. M. (2011). Social psychological interventions
in education: They’re not magic. Review of Educational Research, 81,
267–301. doi:10.3102/0034654311405999
Received September 24, 2010
Revision received June 6, 2011
Accepted July 27, 2011 䡲
E-Mail Notification of Your Latest Issue Online!
Would you like to know when the next issue of your favorite APA journal will be available
online? This service is now available to you. Sign up at http://notify.apa.org/ and you will be
notified by e-mail when issues of interest to you become available!
110 THOMAES, BUSHMAN, DE CASTRO, AND REIJNTES
A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Developmental Psychology
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
