Understanding Self-Monitoring Theory

Self-observation refers to the process of consciously monitoring our own behavior, focusing on both our thoughts and actions. It involves being aware of how we present ourselves to others, assessing our social image, and adjusting our behavior accordingly. People high in self-observation are often regarded as adept at adapting their behavior to match the expectations of others, while those low in self-observation tend to stay true to their internal values and attitudes.

Snyder theorizes that we have the ability to monitor and censure some of our nonverbal behaviors. He wrote, “Individuals can voluntarily express emotions with their vocal and/or facial expressive behavior in such a way that their expressive behavior can be accurately interpreted by observers” (Snyder, 1974, p. 526).

Our self-awareness of our impact on others, according to the theory, motivates a theatrical performance to project the image we wish others to receive. Snyder wrote, “Self-management requires a repertoire of face-saving devices, an awareness of the interpretations which others place on one’s acts, a desire to maintain social approval, and the willingness to use this repertoire of impression management tactics” (Snyder, 1974, p. 526).

Basically, a fundamental concept of Snyder’s self-monitoring theory is that people can observe and control their self-presentation and expressive behaviors.

Motivation to Monitor Emotions

We may be motivated to control emotional expressions for a number of reasons. In social situations, when attention is drawn towards me, I notably blush. Cognitive theories such as self-monitoring theory suggest that because of my perception of how others are viewing me in the moment, I experience embarrassment and consequently, I blush. Other theories, such as The James-Lange theory of emotions, I blush first and then because of my blushing I feel embarrassed.

Whichever the case, I would love to control the blushing, which seems to draw more attention to me than the original event. At least I perceive it does, and this perception then magnifies the blushing.

Snyder presents five reasons people may wish to control their presentation of emotional expression:

1. to communicate accurately one’s true emotional state by means of an intensified expressive presentation;
2. to communicate accurately an arbitrary emotional state which need not be congruent with actual emotional experience;
3. to conceal adaptively an inappropriate emotional state and appear unresponsive and unexpressive;
4. to conceal adaptively an inappropriate emotional state and appear to be experiencing an appropriate one;
5. to appear to be experiencing some emotion when one experiences nothing and a nonresponse is inappropriate (Snyder, 1974, p. 527).

Self-Monitoring Scale

Self-monitoring is not a universal skill shared by all. People vary in their ability to self-monitor and control self-presentations. Most of us have experienced the embarrassment of being in a group where one or more of the party is completely oblivious to the impact of their behaviors on others. Perhaps, low self-monitoring is a symptom of more abrasive personalities.

Snyder developed a self-monitoring scale to measure the individual differences in self-monitoring. High self-monitoring persons are said to process the following five social aspects of the ability and motivation to self-present:

1. Concern for the social appropriateness of one’s self presentation
2. Attention to social comparison information as cues to appropriate self presentation
3. The ability to control and modify self-presentational and expressive behavior
4. The use if this ability in particular situations
5. Cross situational variable in behavior (Gabrenya, 1980).

---

Snyder’s self-monitoring scale consists of twenty-five true-false self descriptive statements. The test presenter is able to rate a subject’s self-monitoring level based on their answers.

A few examples of the self-monitoring scales self-descriptive statements:

• I can only argue for ideas which I already believe.
• I laugh more when I watch a comedy with others than when alone.
• I am not particularly good at making other people like me.
• I can look anyone in the eye and tell a lie with a straight face (if for a right end).

The Two Types of Self-Monitoring

Self-observation is often divided into two distinct types: public and private self-awareness.

1. Public Self-Awareness: This type of self-observation occurs when individuals focus their attention on how they appear to others. In a public self-aware state, people tend to be more conscious of their behavior, maintaining social norms, and conforming to expectations to avoid judgment or embarrassment.
2. Private Self-Awareness: On the other hand, private self-awareness involves a person’s self-reflection, focusing on their internal thoughts, emotions, and values. In this state, individuals delve into their inner selves and take into account their personal beliefs while making decisions and engaging in actions, even if they might deviate from social expectations.

---

These two types of self-observation often interact with each other and have a significant impact on how individuals behave and express themselves in different situations.

Influences on Self-Monitoring

According to self-monitoring theory, several factors influence an individual’s self-observation tendencies. Personality traits (Briggs et al., 1980), cultural background, and social context play key roles in shaping how people monitor and adjust their behavior. Some individuals naturally possess higher self-monitoring skills due to their personality traits, such as being highly adaptable, socially astute, and concerned about social acceptance. Cultural norms and values also shape the degree to which self-observation is valued or encouraged.

Additionally, the social context or situation can impact self-monitoring. For example, people may be more aware of their behavior in formal settings or when they feel they are being closely observed. Conversely, in more relaxed or comfortable environments, individuals may exhibit lower levels of self-awareness.

The Benefits of Self-Monitoring

The self-monitoring theory offers several benefits for individuals in their personal and professional lives. By practicing self-observation, people can:

• Improve social interactions: By closely monitoring their behavior and making necessary adjustments, individuals can enhance their social skills, build rapport with others, and effectively navigate different social environments.
• Develop self-awareness: Self-monitoring helps individuals gain a deeper understanding of their own thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. This increased self-awareness cultivates personal growth, empowers self-reflection, and allows individuals to align their actions with their values.
• Adapt to varying situations: Self-monitoring enables individuals to adapt their behavior to fit different circumstances, which is crucial for success in various social and professional settings.

Possible Drawbacks to Self-Monitoring

While most of this article has dealt with the benefits of self-monitoring in social situations, like all attributes and characteristics, over-self-monitoring can create distress. Our social emotions arise from social interactions, driving appropriate social behaviors. Social emotions depend on a person’s perception about what others believe and feel, and these perceptions can trigger emotions such as guilt, shame, and envy.

Thomas Scheff wrote that psychological literature suggests that “shame is the primary social emotion, in that it is generated by the virtually constant monitoring of the self in relation to others.” He continues to explain that, “Shame is the social emotion, arising as it does out the monitoring of one’s own actions by viewing oneself from the standpoint of others” (Scheff, 1997).

Over-self monitoring can lead to maladaptive behaviors such as an overwhelming need to please, abandoning of personal autonomy, and debilitating social anxiety.

There is also a darker side to self management of expressed emotions. One that is aware of how others perceive their expressions, and have skill at presenting expressions in social environments, can use their heightened self-monitoring abilities to manipulate others in more nefarious ways. For example, a person at the bar may express emotions that are more likely to lure a person back to their apartment for the night.

Applying Self-Monitoring in Daily Life

Incorporating self-monitoring theory into daily life can be a valuable practice for personal development. Here are a few tips for applying self-monitoring:

• Reflect on your behavior: Take time to analyze your actions, thoughts, and emotions in different situations. Ask yourself why you behaved in a particular way and if it aligned with your values.
• Seek feedback: Encourage open and honest feedback from trusted friends, colleagues, or mentors. Others’ perspectives can provide valuable insights into your behavior and help you identify blind spots.
• Set goals for self-improvement: After identifying areas for improvement through self-observation, set specific goals to adjust your behavior accordingly. Monitor your progress and make adjustments as needed.
• Practice mindfulness: Cultivate self-awareness through mindfulness techniques such as meditation or journaling. Being present in the moment allows you to observe and regulate your behavior effectively. “If you spend a chunk of time every day exploring your inner experience in formal meditation, the same kind of compassionate self-monitoring is more likely to continue throughout the day, even during the worst of times” (Germer, 2009).

---

By incorporating these practices, you can harness the power of self-observation to enhance your personal growth, strengthen relationships, and navigate social situations with confidence.

Research on Self-Monitoring and Dating Relationship Behaviors

In 1984, Snyder explored the importance of self monitoring in a series of experiments exploring self-monitoring impacts on relationship behaviors. Snyder and his colleague Jeffry Simpson found that self-monitoring propensities significantly influence individuals’ approaches to dating relationships, leading to distinct “uncommitted” and “committed” orientations (Snyder & Simpson, 1984).

High self-monitoring individuals tend to adopt an “uncommitted” stance. They express a considerable willingness to engage in activities with partners other than their current dating partners and indicate readiness to terminate current relationships in favor of alternative ones. Their dating histories often reflect this orientation: if involved in an exclusive relationship, they report dating their partner for relatively shorter periods; if not exclusive, they report having dated a larger number of different individuals in the preceding year.

Conversely, low self-monitoring individuals adopt a “committed” orientation. They express little willingness to spend time with partners other than their current dating partners and profess no intentions or desires to change dating partners. Their dating histories corroborate this, revealing that if in an exclusive relationship, they have dated steady partners for relatively long periods, and if not exclusive, they have dated a smaller number of different partners within the preceding year. These distinct patterns suggest that high self-monitors are more open to exploring romantic alternatives, while low self-monitors prioritize stability and continuity in their romantic connections.

Self-Monitoring Orientations and Levels of Intimacy

These differing orientations also manifest in the emergence, growth, and long-term levels of intimacy within dating relationships. For high self-monitoring individuals, a higher degree of intimacy may initially exist in the early stages of a relationship. This might be attributed to their interpersonal style, as they tend to speak first, initiate conversation, and adapt their behavior to their partner, potentially fostering a quicker (or apparent) sense of intimacy. However, their “uncommitted” orientation is reflected in a slower rate of intimacy growth with relationship length. This is because they may be less willing to invest heavily in any single relationship, viewing it as risky due to potential termination and subsequent distress.

In the context of long-term relationships like marriage, high self-monitors may tend to view them as activity-centered partnerships, deriving satisfaction predominantly from shared activities. In contrast, for low self-monitoring individuals, the link between relationship length and intimacy is more pronounced, indicating a steady and substantial growth of intimacy over time. They tend to experience higher levels of intimacy in long-term relationships, consistent with their committed orientation and greater emotional investment.

Low self-monitoring individuals are more likely to view marriage as a partner-centered phenomenon, with satisfaction stemming from simply being with one another. These patterns underscore how self-monitoring profoundly shapes not just the quantity but also the quality and developmental trajectory of romantic bonds (Snyder & Simpson, 1984).

---

Research, such as this one on dating relationships and self-monitoring, highlight the complexity of human behaviors. The interactive role between a single factor and other seemingly non-related events magnificently form the course of our lives through small differences in personality and environments.

Associated Concepts

• Looking Glass Theory: This theory coined by Charles Cooley, posits that our self-perception is predominantly shaped by the way others perceive us and how we interpret their evaluations.
• Personal Constructs: These are subjective beliefs used to interpret the world. Developed by George Kelly, they influence emotions, memories, and future evaluations.
• Self-Perception Theory: This theory explores how individuals form their self-concept. It explores the role of self-observation, self-attribution, and social comparison in shaping our understanding of ourselves.
• Self-Verification Theory: This theory suggests individuals have a strong need to confirm their self-concept. This means that people seek out information and experiences that validate their self-perceptions, whether positive or negative.
• Self-Discrepancy Theory: This theory proposed by psychologist E. Tory Higgins suggests that individuals have three specific representations of the self: the actual self, the ideal self, and the ought self. The theory posits that emotional discomfort and negative emotions arise from the gaps or “discrepancies” between these self-representations.
• Self-Schema: These are the cognitive frameworks that shapes our beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors about ourselves. It impacts how we perceive and interpret experiences, influencing emotional well-being.
• Self-System: This refers to the framework within an individual’s personality that encompasses their sense of self. This includes their perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs about themselves, as well as their experiences and interactions with others.

A Few Words by Psychology Fanatic

In conclusion, the self-monitoring theory serves as a powerful lens through which we can examine our interactions and behaviors in various social contexts. By actively observing and adjusting our actions based on social cues, we not only enhance our self-awareness but also enrich our connections with others. This mindful approach empowers us to reflect on our thoughts and behaviors, fostering personal growth that enhances not just ourselves but also the relationships we build in both personal and professional environments.

Ultimately, embracing the principles of self-monitoring allows us to navigate the complexities of social dynamics more effectively. As we learn to adapt our behaviors while staying true to our core values, we cultivate an authentic sense of self that resonates with those around us. Through this journey of introspection and adaptability, we open doors to deeper understanding and connection with others—creating a more fulfilling experience in an ever-evolving world.

Last Update: February 18, 2026

References:

Briggs, Stephen; Cheek, Johnathan; Buss, Arnold (1980). An analysis of the Self-Monitoring Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(4), 679-686. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.679
(Return to Main Text)

Gabrenya, William; Arkin, Robert (1980). Self-Monitoring Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(1), 13-22. DOI: 10.1177/014616728061002
(Return to Main Text)

Germer, Christopher (2009). The Mindful Path to Self-Compassion: Freeing Yourself from Destructive Thoughts and Emotions. The Guilford Press; 1st edition. ISBN-10: 1593859759; APA Record: 2009-09433-000
(Return to Main Text)

Scheff, Thomas J. (1997). Shame in Social Theory. In: Melvin R. Lansky and Andrew P. Morrison (eds.), The Widening Scope of Shame. ​Routledge; 1st edition. ISBN-10: 1317771370; DOI: 10.4324/9781315803388
(Return to Main Text)

Snyder, Mark (1974). Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(4), 526-537. DOI: 10.1037/h0037039
(Return to Main Text)

Snyder, M., & Simpson, J. (1984). Self-monitoring and dating relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1281-1291. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1281
(Return to Main Text)

Related Articles