The other side of self-monitoring: Inhibition control in and out a social context

Pedro Figueira, Teresa Garcia-Marques


Although the Stroop effect depends on cognitive monitoring efficiency, it is not yet clear if the Self-Monitoring personality trait is related with such efficiency. Here we contrast two likely hypotheses. If we assume executive control functions to be more activated by individuals’ personality tendency to monitor their behavior, we should expect High Self-Monitors to reduce Stroop interference. However, if we assume that Self-Monitoring personality features are only monitoring social context features, it may be that High Self-monitors lack executive resources to perform a Stroop task depending on the nature of their social context. In two studies, we test these hypotheses creating a feeling of being in a social context through priming (Study 1) or by manipulating other’s presence (Study 2). In both studies we assessed High and Low Self-Monitor’s performance in a Stroop task. Results of both experiments show that while Low Self-Monitors perform better in social than in nonsocial contexts, High Self-Monitors perform worse in the social context. This pattern of results suggests monitoring activity of High Self-Monitors in the presence of others interferes with their cognitive performance in controlling Stroop interference.


Self-monitoring, Social facilitation, Stroop task.

Full Text:



Abbate, C. S., Boca, S., Spadaro, G., & Romano, A. (2014). Priming effects on commitment to help and on real helping behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 36, 347-355. Retrieved from

Barreiros, J. (2011). Automonitoragem: Processo baseado no comportamento prossocial. Tese de Mestrado, ISPA – Instituto de Universitário, Lisboa, Portugal.

Bausmeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1252-1265. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252

Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 54, 106-148. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00391.x

Cheek, J. M. (1982). Aggregation, moderator variables, and the validity of personality tests: A peer-rating study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 1254-1269. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.43.6.1254

Danheiser, P. R., & Graziano, W. G. (1982). Self-monitoring and cooperation as a self-presentational strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 497-505. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.3.497

Day, D. V., Schleicher, D. J., Unckless, A. L., & Hiller, N. J. (2002). Self-monitoring personality at work: A meta-analytic investigation of construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 390-401. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.390

Gangestad, S., & Snyder, M. (1985). “To carve nature at its joints”: On the existence of discrete classes in personality. Psychological Review, 92, 317-349. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.92.3.317

Gangestad, S. W., & Snyder, M. (1991). Taxonomic analysis redux: Some statistical considerations for testing a latent class model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 141-146. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.61.1.141

Gangestad, S. W., & Snyder, M. (2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 530-555. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.530

Harris, M. J., & Rosenthal, R. (1986). Counselor and client personality as determinants of counselor expectancy effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 362-369. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.362

Huguet, P., Galvaing, M. P., Monteil, J. M., & Dumas, F. (1999). Social presence effects in the Stroop task: Further evidence for an attentional view of social facilitation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1011-1025. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1011

Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 47-70. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.132.1.47

Kardes, F., Sanbonmatsu, D., Voss, R., & Fazio, R. (1986). Self-monitoring and attitude accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 468-474. doi: 10.1177/0146167286124010

Koch, C. (2003). Self-monitoring, need for cognition, and the Stroop effect: A preliminary study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96, 212-214. doi: 10.2466/pms.2003.96.1.212

MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychology Bulletin, 109, 163-203. Retrieved from

Psychology Software Tools, Inc. [E-Prime 2.0]. (2012). Retrieved from

Schmeichel, B. J., Vosh, K., & Bausmeister, R. F. (2003). Intellectual performance and ego depletion: Role of the self in logical reasoning and other information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 33-46. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.33

Sharma, D., Booth, R., Brown, R., & Huguet, P. (2010). Exploring the temporal dynamics of social facilitation in the Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17, 52-58. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.1.52

Snyder, M. (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 526-537. doi: 10.1037/h0037039

Snyder, M. (1979). Self-monitoring processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 85-128). New York: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60260-9

Snyder, M. (1987). A series of books in psychology. Public appearances, private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New York, NY, US: W. H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.

Snyder, M., & Gangestad, S. (1986). On the nature of self-monitoring: Matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 125-139. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.1.125

Snyder, M., Gangestad, S., & Simpson, J. (1983). Choosing friends as activity partners: The role of self-monitoring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1061-1072. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.45.5.1061

Snyder, M., & Simpson, J. (1984). Self-monitoring and dating relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1281-1291. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1281

Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662. doi:

Tyler, J. M., Mcintyre, M. M., Graziano, W. G., & Sands, K. J. (2015). High self-monitors’ cognitive access to self-presentation-related information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 205-219. doi: 10.1111/ bjso.12085

Tzelgov, J., Henik, A., & Berger, J. (1992). Controlling Stroop effects by manipulating expectations for color words. Memory & Cognition, 20, 727-735. Retrieved from

Vosh, K., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2003). Self-regulation and the extended now: Controlling the self-alters the subjective experience of time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 217-230. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.217

Wan, E. W., & Sternthal, B. (2008). Regulating the effects of depletion through monitoring. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 32-46. doi: 10.1177/0146167207306756

Webb, T. L., & Sheeran, P. (2003). can implementation intentions help to overcome ego-depletion?. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 279-286. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00527-9

Wilmot, M. P., DeYoung, C. G., Stillwell, D., & Kosinski, M. (2015). Self-monitoring and the metatraits. Journal of Personality, 84, 335-347.

Wolfe, R. N., Lennox, R. D., & Hudiburg, R. (1983). Self-monitoring and sex as moderator variables in the statistical explanation of self-reported marijuana and alcohol use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1069-1074. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.44.5.1069



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Nº ERC: 107494 | ISSN (in print): 0870-8231 | ISSN (online): 1646-6020 | Copyright © ISPA - CRL, 2012 | Rua Jardim do Tabaco, 34, 1149-041 Lisboa | NIF: 501313672 | The portal and metadata are licensed under the license Creative Commons CC BY-NC