Possible and Impossible Selves: a Conceptual Framework

A developed concept of the Possible self reflects the need for a closer investigation of the desires, fears, possibilities and cognitive representations related to man’s future. The motivational aspect of the construct, which can affect behavior, is emphasized by the concept of A developed concept of the Possible self reflects the need for a closer investigation of the desires, fears, possibilities and cognitive representations related to man’s future. The motivational aspect of the construct, which can affect behavior, is emphasized by the concept of agency. According to the authors, agency can be defined as the ability to develop, maintain and expand Possible selves and is characterized by personality causality, self-regulation and control. This mechanism allows a person to decide if the selected possible image will be one to attain or to avoid. Regardless of the proactive mechanisms of Possible selves, there are situations when personality possibilities can be experienced as “impossibilities”. The phenomenon of Impossible selves was introduced in the previous empirical work of the authors and now is further theoretically elaborated within this article. The Impossible self is a manifestation of the significant Possible self, which is influenced by rumination and neuroticism, and is correlated with higher levels of negative affect and self-accusation. The unconstructive phenomena of self-reflection apparently restrain the energy of wanted Possible selves, which are normally used to facilitate motivation. The assessments of different aspects of Possible selves and personality traits were not influenced by the specific content of the possibilities, demonstrating the universal nature of the observed phenomenon. We discuss the possibilities for operationalization and the theoretical background of the construct. The conceptual framework of Impossible selves emerges from (1) the general interest for the modality of “possible” in personality psychology; (2) the core theory of Possible selves; (3) the motivational potential of the Possible selves reflected in the concept of “agency”.

Kostenko V. Yu., Grishutina M. M. Impossible Self: preliminary research in the context of the theory of Hazel Markus. Penzenskii psikhologicheskii vestnik, 2018, vol. 1 (10). https://doi.org/10.17689/psy2018.1.8. (In Russian)

Leontiev D. A. New orientations in understanding of personality in psychology. Voprosy psikhologii, 2011, vol. 1, pp. 3–27. (In Russian)

Epshtein M. N. The philosophy of possible: thinking and culture modalities. St. Petersburg, Aleteiia Publ., 2001. 334 p. (In Russian)

Petrovskii V. A. A person under situation. Moscow, Smysl Publ., 2010. 559 p. (In Russian)

Starovoitenko E. B. Capacities of the I in Relationship with the Other: Hermeneutics and Reflection. Psikhologiia. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, 2013, vol. 4, pp. 121–142. (In Russian)

Grishina N. V. ‘Self-changes’ of person: Possible and necessary. Vestnik of Saint-Petersburg University. Psihology and Pedagogy, 2018, vol. 2 (8), pp. 126–138.https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.202. (In Russian)

Vasilevskaia E. Iu., Molchanova O. N. Psychological content of Possible selves in emerging adulthood crisis. Aktual’nye problemy psikhologicheskogo znaniia, 2016, vol. 2, pp. 13–23. (In Russian)

Markus H., Nurius P. Possible Selves. American Psychologist, 1986, vol. 41 (9), pp. 954-969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X. 41.9.954

Belinskaia E. P. Temporal aspects of the self-concept and identity. Mir psikhologii, 1999, vol. 3, pp. 40–46. (In Russian)

Rogers K. Views on psychotherapy. Becoming a person. Rus. Ed. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1994. (In Russian)

Berns R. What is self-concept? Psikhologiia samosoznaniia: Khrest. Rus. Ed. Samara, Bakhrakh-M Publ., 2003, pp. 333–392. (In Russian)

Kostenko V. Yu. Possible selves: a theory by Hazel Markus. Psikhologiia. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, 2016, vol. 2, pp. 421–430. (In Russian)

Oyserman D., Markus H. Possible Selves and Delinquency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1990, vol. 59 (1), pp. 112–125.

Hoyle R. H., Sherrill M. R. Future orientation in the self-system: Possible selves, self-regulation, and behavior. Journal of Personality, 2006, 74, pp. 16731696.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‑6494.2006.00424.x

Ryff C. Possible Selves in Adulthood and Old Age: A Tale of Shifting Horizons. Psychology and Aging, 1991, vol. 6 (2), pp. 286–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.6.2.286

Hooker K. Possible Selves and Perceived Health in Older Adults and College Students.Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 1992, vol. 47 (2), pp. 85–95.

Cross S., Markus H. Self-schemas, possible selves, and competent performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1994, vol. 86 (3), pp. 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.3.423

Leontiev D. A. What does the concept of subject impact to psychology: subjectivity as a dimension of personality. Epistemologiia & Filosofiia nauki, 2010, vol. 25 (3), pp. 136–153. (In Russian)

Harre R. Social being: a theory for social psychology. Oxford: Blackwell, 1979.

Erikson M. The Meaning of the future: Toward a more specific definition of possible selves. Review of General Psychology, 2007, vol. 11 (4), pp. 348–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089 2680.11.4.348

Norman C., Aron A. Aspects of possible self that predict motivation to achieve or avoid it. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003, vol. 39, pp. 500-507.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022‑1031(03)00029-5

Oyserman D., Bybee D., Terry K., Hart-Johnson T. Possible selves as roadmaps. Journal of Research in Personality, 2004, vol. 38, pp. 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00057-6

Hoyle R. H., Sowards B. A. Self-monitoring and the regulation of social experience: A control process model. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1993, vol. 12, pp. 280–306. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1993.12.3.280

Hoyle R. H., Vandellen M. R. Possible Selves as Behavioral Standards in Self-regulation. Self and Identity, 2008, vol. 7, pp. 295–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860701641108

Leontiev D. A., Osin E. N. “Good” And “Bad” Reflection: From An Explanatory Model To Differential Assessment. Psikhologiia. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki, 2014, vol. 4, pp. 110–135. (In Russian)

Nolen-Hoeksema S., Wisco B. E., Lyubomirsky S. Rethinking Rumination. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2008, vol. 3 (5), pp. 400–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00088.x

Kuhl J. Action Control: The maintenance of motivational states. Ed. by F. Halisch, J. Kuhl. Motivation, intention, and volition. Berlin; Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 1987.

Pham L. B., Taylor S. E. From thought to action: Effects of process- versus outcome-based mental simulations on performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1999, vol. 25, pp. 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299025002010

Meevissen Y. M. C., Peters M. L., Alberts H. J. E. M. Become more optimistic by imagining a best possible self: Effects of a two week intervention.Journal of Behavior and Experimental Psychiatry, 2011, vol. 42, pp. 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2011.02.012

Dunkel C., Kelts D., Coon B. Possible selves as mechanisms of change in therapy. Ed. by C. Dunkel, J. Kerpelman. Possible selves: theory, research and application. New York, Nova Science Publishers Inc., 2006, pp. 187–204..6.2.286