Effect of Low Self Esteem on Academic Performance

Abstract

The aim of this study was to inspect the self-esteem and contingencies of self-worth used to see the relationship of students academic performance. Iqra University students (N=90) participant completed Rosenberg’s Global Self-esteem (Rosenberg, 1965) and Contingencies of self-worth scale developed by (Crocker, Luthanen, Cooper, & Bourvrette, 2003). Students Cumulative Grade Points Average taken from the EDP department of university, to check those students who score high on self-esteem also have high academic results, Also checked which domain of CSW out of seven factors (Academic Competence, approval from others and virtue) are more likely students tend to invest their self-esteem. Students’ global self-esteem and CSW shows that these students academic performance was independent of their self-esteem. No matter how much students have low or high grades they have on an average healthier and good level of self-esteem. The incorporations of findings from the CSW showed that Iqra University students more likely to invest their self-esteem in the domain of virtue than any other domain; they tend to invest in this variable which is under their control and can be easily satisfy the accomplishment of self-esteem through Virtue. Other domain variables had negative or no significance relationship with students’ academic performance. Iqra University students did not shown the variables which are independent on others approval or on the control of others like, approval from others, family support etc. Research shows that these students more likely to invest in those domains which are under their control.

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

To Study the Impact of Self-Worth on Student Academic Performance at University Level

The conventional symbol of proficient university graduates career has been the acquisition of a ‘good’ degree, underlying by specialist knowledge, transferable and marketable skills with successful outcomes measured in quantifiable terms. At the personal level, better academic accomplishments attached are with higher self-esteem, and this is especially the case for non-traditional students. At the university level, understanding and willing to help the dispositional and emotional needs of students is important, not least because student mental health linked to success and retention rates. For this reason, university students’ whether graduation level or post graduation level are subjective interpretations of their education experiences and how this impose on very personal aspects of their lives and themselves is receiving increasing attention.

The construct of self-esteem is crucial in this debate, because it is an integral part of the self, of personal well-being and a prerequisite for educational achievement. Self-esteem is one of the important factors that help for learning outcomes. The question is how this a vital notion would be measured and analyze in university level students? The purpose of this research is to report the relationship of students’ academic performance, their level of self-esteem, the study adopted a self-worth measuring instrument, about 90 students of bachelors, and masters level from different the department of Iqra University.

The research begins with a review of the concept of self-esteem, its introduction, definition and how this has been viewed by many researchers; it will also discuss about the contingencies of self-worth, a concept which was majorly define and describe by Jennifer Crocker. Results from all the students who fill up the CSWS (Contingencies of self-worth Scale) along with Rosenberg Self-esteem scale will be taken their GPA or CGPA from examination department and will see that those students who have higher GPA like 3 or more, where these students mostly invested their self esteem.

Contingencies of self-worth also shape long-term and short-term goals. People want to prove that they are a success, not a failure, in domains of contingent self-worth, because that would mean they are worthy and valuable; in other words, they have self-validation goals in these domains (Crocker & Park, 2004). People not only need to be recognized by others but it is also an inner satisfaction through which people want to have a feeling of self-acceptance about their worth & value.

The main research question addressed was: Is there any relationship of students self-esteem with their academic performance, Is student’s high or low self esteem of a have any impact on his/her academic performance? One of the main objectives of this research is to check where university students mostly place their self-esteem in the domains of contingencies of self-worth. the research will conclude whether the high or significantly good level of self esteem of student have any positive or negative impact on his/her academic performance or there is no link in between these variables.

Hypotheses

H1. The relationship of students’ academic performance is depended on student’s self-esteem.

H2. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of family support in the contingencies of self-worth.

H3. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of God’s Love in the contingencies of self-worth.

H4. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Academic Performance in the contingencies of self-worth.

H5. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Appearance in the contingencies of self-worth.

H6. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Virtue in the contingencies of self-worth.

H7. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Competence in the contingencies of self-worth.

H8. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Approval from others in the contingencies of self-worth.

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

The Concept of Self-esteem

Self-esteem is the most highlighted concept that is discusses not only psychological clinical situations but also one of the most research concepts in psychology. According to statistical research on Wikipedia, Self-esteem is one of the most frequent themes in psychological literature, which been used for the research in psychology. Self-esteem is continue to be one of the most generally research thought in social psychology (Wells & Marwell, 1976).

Fortunately, in recent years, a growing number of researchers have begun to incorporate additional aspects of self-esteem into their research and theories. These aspects include implicit self-esteem (Covington, 2000), contingent self-esteem (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001) and stability of self-esteem (Kernis & Goldman, 2002). In this research, the research had discussed the concept of self-esteem and the contingencies of self worth of students in the university sample. Students are future of any nation; there natural development is very vital and effective while it comes to their studies and development of these skills. The study examines the joint implications of level and stability of self-esteem for various aspects of psychological and interpersonal functioning. This research has begun by discussing some definitional and measurement issues concerning these two self-esteem components.

In clarification of the optimistic emotions and favorable beliefs are associated to the self with high self-esteem. It seems reasonable to think that people who have high self esteem fare better in terms of the objective outcomes they experience in life— that they would not only be happier but also richer, more successful, better loved, and perhaps even more attractive than low self-esteem people. Although researchers have long speculated that high self-esteem also has objective benefits, these hypothesized benefits are typically small or nonexistent (Kernis, 2006).

As (Wells & Marwell, 1976) pointed out in their important monograph, three difficulties arise out of the ubiquity of the term. First, the reliance upon common-sense definitions gives the misleading impression that different writers are referring to the same thing when they discuss self-esteem. Secondly, the assumption that everyone has an intuitive understanding of its nature hides the fact that individual theorists hold different views as to what comprises a healthy component of personality. It is a natural phenomenon for general people to think differently and have a concept of complex description and understanding as the phenomenon sound complex and un-unique with general speaking and term for daily life.

According to identity theory, the self is composed of multiple identities that reflect the various social positions that an individual occupies in the larger social structure. Meanings in an identity reflect an individual’s conception of himself or herself as an occupant of that particular position (Stryker, 1980). Self-verification occurs when meanings in the social situation match or confirm meanings in an identity. Thus, when individuals enact and verify an identity, they simultaneously produce and reproduce the social structural arrangements that are the original source of those meanings. In adopting such a position in the investigation, the research maintains the central focus on the individual within the social structure that has traditionally characterized the structural symbolic interactions position (Stryker, 1980).

Understanding of self-esteem is one issue, which still needs to be clear and require much work to be understandable for everyone. On the other hand talking about self-esteem it is also an issue that is very enlighten about its level. There are no. of researches been done for measuring the levels of self-esteem and debating on LSE or HSE have any/what impacts and benefits. Getting high self-esteem also require some cost as nothing is free or for granted. Some recent evidence suggests that high self-esteem has costs, especially under conditions of ego threat. Ego threat did not only losing of money but sometimes losing of relationships as well. How students can cope up with ego threat on the negative aspects shows their over-confident leads to lack of exam preparations or class presentation cause reduction in their marks and failure.

While research in each of the directions is extensive (Wells & Marwell, 1976), little research has been synthesized the three research streams into an overall integrated model. The theory of self-esteem integrated with the three conceptualizations within the context of structural symbolic interaction, or identity theory (Stryker, 1980). (Ervin & Stryker, 2001) began the process by discussing the links between self-esteem, identity salience, and identity commitment. The connections between the different conceptualizations of self-esteem, however, remain unclear. The research connecting the self-esteem with the contingencies of self worth and measuring with GPA scores of student’s academic performance.

In popular culture like today when people have life which not only very fast but also facing pressure from different dimensions, over 2000 self-help books, audiotapes, and childrearing manuals have been developed to enhance people’s self-esteem, with the assumption that high self-esteem (HSE) leads to a more successful, satisfying life. Having high self-esteem create difficulty is a different story but this is for sure that people having low self-esteem will definitely create problem for that person, nevertheless for him/her family too. People who find that have low value in their life, or they think like they haven’t achieve much their life and they have not much to get or work to get are having somewhere around having low self-esteem, self-concept and self-worth.

Measuring or assessment of self-esteem is not that easy, it is a very difficult concept to evaluate for research. Self-esteem is a complex psychological concept, difficult to define and challenging to assess and to research (Rosenberg, 1965). The row form of self-esteem, it is define as “the value or worth a person think he have about his self” it is the reflection of person’s value and appraisal about his self worth and value. Self-esteem is overall evaluation of persons trait about his emotions believe and perception, for example “I am a good student in general” “I have an ability to make tasty food” or “I am proud on my academic performance”.

Much self-esteem research in the 20th century focused on global self-esteem. According to (Rosenberg, 1965), the social learning theorist define self-esteem as, an individual’s global judgments about him- or herself, including levels of self-worth, self-acceptance and self-respect.

Some psychologists (Wagner & Valtin, 2004) anticipated that self-esteem was a global concept of one self, which was firm by some precise self-concepts. Self-Esteem establishes most frequently to an individual’s overall positive valuation of the self (Rosenberg, 1965).Self-esteem is the inside feeling of a person about one self whatsoever the domain of that self-esteem. Some researchers said that, the collection of two diverse magnitudes were, competence and worth (James, 1890). The competence measurement (efficacy-based self-esteem) submits to the degree though which an individual can see himself as competent and efficacious. The worth measurement refers to the degree though which an individual’s feel that they have some value and they are a persons of worth & value.

In this world of today where everybody is fighting for survival and succession in the life, people are developing their self to be more competent and successful they need to have high level of self-confident and self-esteem i.e. they must believe on their own ability that they can do whatever the environment & society is depending. During the 1990s, some psychologists claimed that self-esteem was not a global one-dimensional construct; accordingly, studies on the structure of self-esteem have become increasingly popular. Until recently, researchers believed that self-esteem was a hierarchically organized and multifaceted construct, but they did not agree on how to define the different domains. (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). Now some of the researches have demonstrated different aspects with different domains, through which people can increase their self-esteem, and eventually could decrease their self-esteem, when those domains been affected by any means these different domains were used.

Self-esteem has different levels, the highest being global self-esteem, the lowest being evaluation of specific, concrete behaviors in context and with domain self-esteem, such as academic self-esteem and nonacademic self-esteem, being somewhere in the middle. Researchers have explored the structure of self-esteem extensively using this hierarchical model. Other then these hierarchical levels there are also domains through which one can find where he/she is mostly lacking or prospering their self-esteem.

In the year 2001, (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001) proposed that self-esteem is contingent on different domains like appearance, competition, family support, perception of God’s love, approval from others, school competence and behavior, and they claimed that both global self-esteem and domain self-esteem could be classified as both a trait and a state. Trait self-esteem is relatively more of stable over time, at the same time as state self-esteem fluctuates according to the immediate circumstances or any situation that can affect the persons.

The study, deployed instrument of Contingencies of self-worth scale, which have seven factors of domain self-esteem. A contingency of domain self-esteem is the degree to which a person stakes his/her self-esteem on a particular domain or category, such that the person values himself/herself more if s/he meets his/her personal standards of success in these domains (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). It depends in what domain people based their self-esteem; those different domains have different contingencies for their self-esteem.

People differ in the contingencies of self-esteem because it all depends where they based their self-esteem (James, 1890), and a person may value multiple contingencies to varying degrees (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). Many researchers like (Crocker, et al., 2003; Crocker, 2006) have done a lot of research on domain based self-esteem conducted in 2003, demonstrated that contingency of academic self-esteem moderates the effect of success and failure events on academic state self-esteem.

The domains on which self-esteem is highly contingent, enduring events or dramatically and permanently changed circumstances would influence the level of trait self-esteem claimed by (Crocker & Park, 2004). However, these contingencies are the sort of effect, which would not replicated for trait self-esteem, and the social approval contingency did not moderate the effect of social approval from others on trait self-esteem demonstrated by (Lemay & Ashmore, 2006). High level of self-esteem often regarded as the holy grail of psychological health— the major keys of self a person can have are like happiness, self-value, self-confidence, success, and popularity. In contract to high self-esteem, low self-esteem blamed for societal problems ranging from poor educational attainment to drug and alcohol abuse.

Nevertheless, this glowing view of high self-esteem has detractors who argue that the purpose benefits of high self-esteem are small and limited (Crocker, 2006). Even though pleasant feelings, high self-worth and enhanced initiative are the producer of high self-esteem, it did not cause high academic achievement, good job performance, or leadership, nor did low self-esteem cause violence, smoking, drinking, taking drugs, or becoming sexually active at an early age. Many parents, educators, and policymakers are confused, with some holding steadfastly to the idea that low self-esteem is the root of much, if not all, evil, and others concluding that self-esteem are, at best, irrelevant. Although high self-esteem did little to cause positive outcomes in life, and low self-esteem is not to blame for most social and personal problems, but some of the researcher are disagree that self-esteem is inappropriate (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). There is always a detriment of high or low self-esteems one can get.

People want to believe with the aim of they are praiseworthy and important human beings, in addition to this desire drives their behavior. Here the research suggest that self-esteem has great significance lies less in whether it is high or low, but fact of the matter is that, in what manner people judge that, they are in need of to have value and person of worth (Crocker, 2006). What the research call is the contingencies of self-worth.

Self-esteem and Contingencies of self-worth

About a century ago, William James (James, 1890) recommended that self-esteem is both a stable trait as well as an unstable state; transitory feelings of self-esteem fluctuates a person’s distinctive or trait level in response to good and bad events around him. James also noted and highlighted in his research that people are selective about what kinds of events affect their self-esteem.

Self-esteem is a belief of one person he/she hold about themselves. High self-esteem people believe they are intelligent, attractive, and popular. Nevertheless high self-esteem people acknowledge that they had flaws or made mistakes in the distant past, they see their present or recent past selves in a particularly positive light, believing they have changed for the better even when concurrent evaluations suggest they have not (Ross, 2002).

(Crocker & Wolfe, 2001) proposed that good and bad events in domains of contingent self-worth raise or lower momentary feelings of self-esteem around a person’s typical or trait level of self-esteem, and these fluctuations in state self-esteem have motivational consequences. When level of self-esteem is on higher site people feel good, and self-esteem is on lower site then people feel bad. Consequently, apart from that whether people typically have high or low self-esteem, they search for the emotional high linked with success in domains of contingent self-worth and struggle to avoid the emotional lows that accompany failure in these domains. Consequently, contingencies of self-worth regulate behavior.

Many research studies have verified that people those have high self esteem gets the benefits of having high trait self esteem. The clearest benefits are positive emotions, and certain self-concepts that accompany high self-esteem (Kernis, 2006). Self-esteem strongly related to the sentimental character of daily life, with high self-esteem people reporting happier events, feeling of successes, positive effect, less hopelessness, more life satisfaction, less anxiety, and fewer depressive symptoms as compare to people who are low in self-esteem.

In June 20, 2006, a 16-year old boy in Tokyo set fire to his house, killing his stepmother, brother, and sister. The reason for this act was. The boy was ashamed of his poor academic test performance and wanted to avoid scolded by his “results-obsessed” parents (Lewis, 2006). Although an extreme case, this example illustrates how profoundly failure can affect self-esteem, emotion, motivation, and behavior. When people fail, they may be devastated emotionally; link failure to the self, thinking “I am a failure” rather than “I failed”; and pursue goals and behaviors to alleviate the pain of failure (Park, Crocker 2004). This is not the case in everyone’s situation, however, reacts to failure in the same way. Research has reveals that people react on failure conditions according to their level of self esteem; more particularly, people those have low self-esteem (LSE) are more sensitively hurt and discouraged by failure as compare to people those have high self-esteem (HSE). People who have moderate or good level of self worth like students, are they also performing good on academic mode, whether the students did not invest their self esteem in the domain of academic competences.

However focusing on one’s strengths and minimizing one’s weaknesses often foster positive mood, optimism, and perseverance, when one’s weaknesses interfere with accomplishing important goals and can be addressed, the exaggeratedly positive and highly certain self-views of high self-esteem may be an obstacle to recognizing and addressing their weaknesses and accomplishing their goals. When people have successes, particularly students when performing well and having good GPA are also having higher score on self worth scale.

In general, it seems likely that both low and high self-esteem are helpful or adaptive in some situations, and not adaptive in others. Because low self-esteem people doubt their abilities and worry about whether others will accept them, they tend to integrate feedback from others (Brockner, 1984). These positive illusions can be helpful or unhelpful, depending on the state of affairs. the positive self-views associated with high self-esteem may be helpful for asking the boss for a raise, but interfere with understanding his feedback about areas in which one needs to improve before a raise is about to happen.

On the bases of previous research and theories, the research hypothesized that people more specifically students based their self-esteem in the domain of academic competence, when they have lower level of GPA must be having a lower score on the scale of CSWS. In the present studies, the research examined the overall self-worth of students at university level; the research also examined their results in GPA form and link with the domain of academic competence. a domain of importance and relevance to many college students (Crocker, Luhtanen, Cooper, & Bouvrette, 2003).and found the relationship of Academic performance have any impact on students level of self esteem or not.

Contingencies of self-worth symbolize the domains of those people who invest their self-esteem; and their success in these domains boosts self-esteem, whereas failure diminishes it (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). A daily report study of university seniors applying to graduate school showed that academic contingency predicts an increase in self-esteem on days they accepted to graduate programs and a decrease in self-esteem on days they were rejected (Crocker, 2006). Because success and failure in domains of contingencies affect self-worth, people who have contingent self-worth seek success and avoid failure in these domains to maintain or boost their sense of self-worth.

Among the seven domains of contingencies commonly identified in university students (Crocker, Luthanen, Cooper, & Bourvrette, 2003), the research focused on all the domains of self worth and hypothesized that the significantly high level of self esteem of those students also have higher GPA score when performance academically. The study also see that where university student mostly invest their self-worth in these domains of contingencies. When students are not, sure, that success is possible or failure avoided they will disengage from the task, deciding it did not matter, rather than suffer the loss of self-esteem that accompanies failure in these domains (Crocker, et al., 2002).

The Contingencies of self-worth approach extends or challenges existing models of self-esteem in several ways. Crocker & Wolfe argument on the importance of self-esteem that lies in what it is contingent upon stands in contrast to decades of research focused on whether trait self-esteem is high or low (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). Furthermore, they did not break up the focus to whether people have low or high self-esteem in specific domains such as academics or competence, but rather symptomatic of that regardless of people’s level of domain-specific self-esteem, contingent self-worth in these domains has predictable consequences.

Although the Kernis study complementary to research that focuses on the stability of self-esteem over time (Kernis, 2006), their research also extended that work by showing that instability of self-esteem results from experiencing positive and negative events in those domains in which self-esteem is contingent. The research argues that nearly everyone has contingencies of self-worth but that people differ as to what their self-esteem is contingent happening.

Those students who based their self-esteem on top of their academic accomplishments typically have self-validation goals in this domain, viewing their schoolwork as an opportunity to demonstrate their intelligence. Because failure in domains of contingency threatens self-esteem, people try to avoid failure by increasing effort, if they are still uncertain of success, they may abandon their self-validation goal and become unmotivated, or prepare excuses that will soften the blow to self-esteem in case they fail. Basing self-esteem on external factors such as appearance, others’ approval, or academic achievement has more negative consequences than basing it on internal factors such as virtue or God’s love. And in contrast to most researchers who argue that self-esteem is a fundamental human need that people need to pursue (Stryker, 1980), Pursuing for self-esteem by attempting to prove that one is a success in domains of contingency is costly were argued by (Crocker & Park, 2004). There is always a cost for getting to improve self-esteem & those domains, which can boost your level, require different events or elements according to your domain.

When failure in domains of contingency cannot dismissed with defensive responses, self-esteem decreases. Consequently, contingencies of self-worth are both a source of motivation and a psychological vulnerability (Crocker, 2006). Making excuses or blaming others is defensive maneuvers by which people deflect the threat to self-esteem when they do fail.

In this study the research have investigated the domains in which university students commonly invest their self-esteem, including appearance, others’ approval, outperforming others, academics, family support, virtue, and religious faith or God’s love. The research indicates that contingencies of self-worth shape students’ emotions, thoughts, and behavior.

In a sample of university, students over all have high self-esteem have also higher when they have to show their performance on academic scales, the additional students pedestal their self-esteem on their academic success. The higher students’ self-esteem was on days they were admitted to graduate school and the lower their self-esteem was on days they were rejected (Crocker, et al., 2002). It is all about the event, which makes the students self esteem to affected, whether it is getting admissions, getting scores on final exams or getting feedback on their class performance.

Contingencies of self-worth are strongly related to the goal of validating one’s abilities in the domain of contingency (Crocker & Park, 2004), and students report spending more time on activities that are related to their contingencies of self-worth (Crocker, et al., 2002). People always spend time in those activities where they most found themselves worthy and feel un-worthy when they lack or failure on those domains. The research has to see & relate with the higher level of self-esteem of students with the domain academic performance of contingencies of self worth.

All the educational achievements at university level are measures on GPA bases. GPA is the ultimate result that reflects the students’ attention on his/her academics. When students based their self esteem in the domain of academic competence/performance then their score in the CSW scale must be high and those who base their self esteem on academics they contingent their self esteem by knowing and upgrading their learning ability and increase their academic performance. One of this research’s important variables is students GPA.

Academic achievements measured by students’ results in form of grades, percentages and Grand point assessments. Student’s results are depending of many elements but classroom environment and facilitation for learning are the core elements, which are subject to university or institute. Nonetheless, the abilities like mentions above about cognitive learning have to contribute to students’ performance and it is most important for those people who based their self-esteem in the domain of academic competence, and it is highly depended on students’ learning attributes and academic environment that ultimately lead to healthier academic self-esteem.

Self-esteem is collective of many attributes and component, one of them is person is itself, the image they carry about perception they thing people have for them in their minds. The self-worth theory of achievement motivation suggests that people are motivated to construct an image of them as competent to maintain and enhance their self-esteem (Covington, 2000). Researcher also comment on the situation in which their findings had shown that students whose self worth is contingent on academics tend to adopt achievement goals focused more on performance than on learning.

There is another group of students out general people, who base their self esteem on their appearance and approval of others, in this case most of the time students not much focus on their academic results, they try to invest more on their looks, clothes and appearance. Any researches had work on it and propose many conclusions reveals findings. Along these lines, the research propose that constructing an image of the self as competent may involve not only seeing one as competent but also ensuring that others perceive and acknowledge one’s competence. Another term for this idea is self-presentation— people’s attempts to create, modify, or maintain an impression of the self in the minds of others. Like many other people who focus and define self-presentation goal as an effort to convey a desired image of one to others students also involve in creating they self-presentation to make an image to your viewpoint.

Crocker & Wolfe anticipated that people with LSE would show negative responses to failure, but only if they strongly based their self-worth on academics. Specifically, students with LSE who based their self worth on academics and experienced failure expected to have lower state self-esteem and positive affect than academically contingent HSE participants, who may be more elastic to negative feedback. Experiencing failure in a domain of contingent self worth also expected to influence the self-evaluations of people with LSE at an implicit, automatic level. Specifically, LSE participants who experienced failure expected to show faster embedded associations between self and failure words versus success words, but only if they strongly based their self-worth on academics. In short, one aim of the present research was to demonstrate that not all students with LSE respond the same way to failure, only those who strongly base their self-worth in the domain of where they base their self-esteem expected to show effects. Nevertheless, these effects are limited to students' performance in this research.

Students who are on master's level are not the one who is full time students, there are almost 80% masters level students who are working or running some kind of business. Students spending less time studying and more time working are two trends that all colleges and universities will have to confront. Lowering academic standards by rewarding minimum effort and achievement (expecting less) is certainly a short-term strategy, but one that will have negative long-term consequences.

Even though students' have many variables which may contribute for creating students depressive symptoms, the most ordinary reasons involve are academic recital, economic problems, social stressors and the alteration innate in the alteration which is caused when student shift from a family setting to a college atmosphere. Doing jobs or running business is not an easy; dealing with costumers or boss is another ball game. When students having different situations and ways where he/she have to face many times gives depression or lack of self-validation or efficacy. These kinds of issues also lead to students' academic performance without any doubts. Moreover, students who base their self-esteem in the domain of academic competency face lack in self-worthiness.

It is common that students who spend more time on academic-related activities outside of class (e.g., reading the text, completing assignments, studying, and preparing reports) are better performers than students who spend less time on these activities. There are various pragmatic supports for this conviction. For example, (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991) found that the study habits of freshmen relate significantly to their first year cumulative grade point average (GPA). In their investigation of 143 college students, (McFadden & Dart, 1992) reported that total study time influenced expected course grades, the ultimate outcome of academic performance is an output in the form of GPA, other than GPA whatsoever result outs it basically have some affects to students mental behavior or effect its self esteem.

Many researchers endeavored to plug this negated in the literature. They attempted to determine the direct relationship that time spent on academics outside of class and working had on academic performance among business students. They attempted to determine whether the time spent on academics outside of class interacts with variables, such as student ability and motivation, in influencing the academic performance of business students (Nonis & Hudson, 2006).

Other researches had found something different like (Mouw & Khanna, 1993) find study habits to significantly improve the explanatory power of the first year cumulative GPA of college students. (Ackerman & Gross, 2003) have found more recently that students with less free time have a significantly higher GPA than those with more free time. The research is just over viewing this finding, which is conflicting with each other, is finding this issue also needs to reinvestigated, but at the end of the day students, result is the outcome of their efforts whether it is due to spending less time in class or having some depressive issues in life. Those who look their self esteem in academics loss their self-esteem level & those who do not invest in academic their results did not affect them.

An additional, more plausible reason for this lack of research may be the complex nature of relationships with student academic performance and effect on their self-esteem specially when evaluated in the presence of other variables, such as student ability and motivation. For example, it is likely that time spent studying outside of class will have a differential impact on the academic performance of college students who vary in ability. That is, the relationship that ability has with student performance will be stronger for those students who spend more time outside of class studying than for students who spend less time studying.

It been noticed from more than 20 years that students attending college is normally viewed as a constructive experience, a dramatic enhance in stress among college students. a major contributing factor which develop depression in college students who presenting with symptoms of depression are commonly cite college-related stress, when students are been disturb by any mean it is very obvious that, their academic performance will be affected too . University students exposed, sometimes suddenly, to a host of narrative academic stressors, which includes time limitations, enlarged writing demands, and organization of multiple deadlines. Academic tasks sometimes require more demands from students, at the same time as correcting to the realities of university life. It is not a startlingly think, it is a circular relationship develops, in which academic depression and pressures may exaggerate one other (Heiligenstein & Guenther, 1996). Working part time or full time is a major cause of depression or disturbance for students. In Addition to this, many other students those who wish to spend their time outside the class are another situation. Academic performance has great contribution to the students overall results which is based on their presence in the class and attending the class work as well as lectures.

Basing one's self worth on appearance is significantly correlates with narcissism, neuroticism and it is highly correlated with public self-consciousness. (Crocker, et al., in press). These finding suggesting that students who based their self-worth on appearance and highly contingent are likely to be focused on how they appear to others during social interactions, not only in parties they tend to spend time outside the class for gathering with other student to get remarks on their appearance by others.

One reason for a lack of research in this area may be the common belief among most students and academicians that more time spent studying outside of class positively influences academic performance and that more time spent working negatively influences academic performance (Nonis & Hudson, 2006). this is an assumption of common people, researchers have to find and deliver their finding that, it is all time rule those who have their self esteem in particular domain they always contingent their self esteem in it.

The trend which is presently going on for students who spending less time on academic-related activities, a growing number of college and university administrators are concerned that today's postsecondary students are working more hours than their counterparts were years ago (James, 1890). It can be logically implicit that students working more hours per week will leave them less time for studying outside of class and that it will depressingly pressure their academic performance. Although working more hours per week can be one key reason for a student to be in academic problem, the research did not seem to support this hypothesis as the research are looking for other variables that can cause to affect the main domain of academic competency of students.

(Stauss & Volkwein, 2002) reported that working more hours per week positively related to a student's GPA, they took interviewed of undergraduate students from all majors; he found no significant relationship between paid work and grades. It been found in many cases but on an average and general rule of thumb are students who put more effects on academics having better results and higher GPA's.

Self-worth is also having a link with the image one can think about his self in the perception of other people. Out of those seven domain of contingencies of self-worth, there is also a factor of others approval, when students are belong from a group which is in minority or different language, this issue is also very intuitive factor that students face in university settings.

Much of the research (Jencks & Philiphs, 1998) examining the various factors thought to underlie the minority achievement gap concludes that sociological factors, such as teachers' expectations, are often to blame. In addition, Black students perform more poorly on examination when they think them being judged as members of a typecast group rather than as an individual. It is all about the students domain where he/she contingent their self esteem. These are the some of the issues as if belonging to some minority group always damages students' self-confidence and lead to lack of healthier self-esteem. When students do not have a good approval from other even if they are from the minority group, they fall into lack of confidence and deem to be less value and worth of their self.

Many Researchers provide empirical evidence to suggest that this stereotype threat felt as a physiological arousal that often results in substantial decreases in intellectual performance (Covington, 2000). These findings detailed by stating that those minority group who are weak, will display wrong and uneven self-knowledge about their academic abilities.

The low self-esteem, highly contingent students may constantly have negative views of themselves (Alicke, 1985). particularly in important and highly contingent domains there is no hesitation about proposing that, it is possible that jointly contributing GPA of student with their contingencies of self-worth & level of self-esteem with their results of university academic performance, with the impact of contingent self-worth moderated by level of self-esteem. On one hand, it is possible that students who are low in self-esteem and highly contingent experience more stress and pressure in the domain of contingency.

Individual can disagree that simply the study behavior that ultimately brings the desired performance and not students' inner motivations. This supported by the widely held belief that it is hard work. Student may have different issues or factors like spending time on academic activities outside of class by a student, or facing depression from different ways like job or business dealings, having issue of appearance or belongs to a minority group that results in academic success. Laziness and procrastination ultimately result in academic failure. Therefore, similar to how motivation interacts with ability to influence academic performance, one can suppose that behavior such as hard work interacts with ability to influence performance among college students.

Researcher suggested that students who foundation their self-worth on their appearance are highly dependent on validation and approval from others and, consequently, experience more social pressure and stresses in universities, just as students who base their self-worth on academics are hypothesized to experience more academic stresses and pressures. It had been hypothesize that the critical factor linking self-esteem to social and academic problems may not be its level, as many researchers and theorists have assumed, but the contingencies on which one's self-esteem is based (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). Those people who foundation their self esteem on academic, when affected from the variables that directly affect their academics are contingent on self-worth mostly facing low self-esteem.

The research measures contingencies of self worth and global self-esteem of university students and relate their GPA results. It is earlier to say that maybe students those score low on academic domain have high GPA results.

Other than issues directly related to student itself are on the other hand, scientists are also viewing students behavior when they are having LSE or HSE level, many researchers suggests that the combination of high and contingent self-esteem may be particularly problematic.

The concept of self-esteem known in the multinational cultures and people know this term when talking specifically in Pakistan. Saying that there has been not much research done on this concept, moreover how students can cope up with the situation of low self-esteem and how to handle with it require much work to do in it. Previous research on the effects of contingent self worth on academic problems has not directly measured the extent to which students base their self-esteem on academic performance. Instead, contingent self-worth inferred from other indicators, such as shame and anxiety (Covington, 2000).

A very renown researcher the research have refer in the research many times Baumeister with his colleagues also reviewed a wide range of verification and accomplished that fragile insensitivity, or high but vulnerable self-esteem, is associated with hostility and aggression. Because self-esteem is unstable and vulnerable when people experience positive and negative events in domains of contingency (Crocker, et al., 2002; Crocker & Wolfe, 2001), people with high and contingent self-esteem may experience more stresses in domains of contingency. In the study the research measure students global self-esteem by Rosenberg self esteem scale and measure CSW scale and relate it with the participant students GPA, to check the hypothesis that students those have high self esteem level perform better and score high on academic results or not. The research also tested students those perform high by GPA results and have high level of global self esteem, where they base their self-worth, the research hypothesize that those students who perform academically invest their self-esteem in the domain of academics measuring by Contingencies of self-worth scale.

Because researchers have not typically directly measured the degree to which self-worth based on academic performance, they have also not addressed a host of questions about the nature of these effects. First, is basing self worth on academics a specific helplessness for academic problems or is it a general vulnerability for many types of problems, such as social or even financial problems. When students have different domain in contingency of self-worth also lead to academic or other types of problems or is there something unique about basing self-worth on academics. The research have discuss many variables that can affect the self esteem of students and factors that lead to lack in performance of students academic competency.

The present study examined the possessions for the contingencies of self-worth and its self-esteem level in university students on their experience of academic. In contrast to previous research, the study assessed contingencies of self-worth of students of all the departments of both the genders, filling out both scales will tell the general self-esteem level and domain base then it will relate the GPA score and self-esteem score. The research is not only measuring self-esteem of students but also contingencies of their self-worth. It taken the GPA of participant students and relates their results with the results of their global self-esteem and then match with the contingencies of self-worth, to fine students those have high GPA, what is their score in the domain of contingencies of self-worth and where they invest their self-esteem mostly. Other than that, those who not perform well academically where they had invest their self-esteem out of those seven factors. To investigate these issues, the research analyzed data from Rosenberg self esteem scale by (Rosenberg, 1965) and validation of the Contingencies of Self-Worth Scale (CSW) (Crocker, 2001). The research had also taken GPA results from examination department of Iqra University to match and analyze the academic performance and level of self-esteem.

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD

The study tries to found the relationship of students' academic performance measured by CGPA by means of their self-esteem. With Rosenberg, self-esteem scale along with contingencies of self-worth scale performing high or low with the CGPA of their academic results. The liner regression analysis used to find out whether the academic performance is depended on their self-esteem or independent.

Participants

The Data for this research collected from 100 students, out of those 10 students who filled questionnaires with errors, which discarded. A sample (N=90) students from Iqra University, out of these ninety students (58 males and 32 females), the study covered both the levels of education of university (59% Bachelors and 31% Masters) level students. The sample of students which were collected data were studying in there different programs offered by university were (Business Administration, Computer Sciences and Media Sciences)

Apparatus

The study deployed two instruments for measuring participant self-worth and global self-esteem.

a) Contingencies of self-worth

The CSW (Crocker, Luthanen, Cooper, & Bouvrette, In Press) the instrument Contingencies of self-worth scale was mainly includes 35- term scale which was evaluated seven contingencies in which numerous university students support their self-esteem. The study used the same version, which developed initially. The CSW had sale from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree), with the midpoint (3) labeled neutral, and the items were reverse scored as standard instrument was made by the researcher. Each of the subscales of the CSW has good test and used my many researcher in the past for different findings of CSW of different domains , (r s ranging from .51 to .88) and correlates in the expected direction with other personality measures (Crocker, Luhtanen, et al., 2002). In the present study, CSW assessed at one Time with no limitation of education levels, all levels, students from all discipline (Business Administration, Computer Sciences, and media Science) taken from both the genders. Research had taken students from Graduation and post graduation programs.

b) Rosenberg's Global Self-Esteem

Global self-esteem was evaluated at the Time when students were given CSW questionnaire Rosenberg's Self-esteem was also attached and made a one questionnaire form. With the well-validated and widely used Rosenberg Self-Esteem Inventory (RSE) (Rosenberg, 1965), which includes 10 items. Responses were made on a scale from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree), with the midpoint (3) labeled neutral, and the items were reverse scored as standard instrument was made by the researcher.

Content Validity

The questionnaire designed to test the validity of the contents and shown to the professors who were actively involved in classroom for their expert opinion and judgments to see that the items meet the criterion.

Cronbach's Alpha

Reliability Statistics

Number of items include in the reliability test were 45 and Alpha =.708

Since it is positive, it ranges between .0021, which is actually.708 shows high level of internal consistency in this instrument.

Pre-Testing

The instrument was pre-tested and 4 to 5 sample questionnaire were filled to identify if there are any issues with the instrument and whether it was easy to understand and comprehend the questions or not. Through pretesting, it found that all respondents felt comfortable in responding and found the instrument interesting as well. Not only have many students requested to know the score of their self-esteem.

Target Population

The Target population comprised of University bachelors and Master level students of Business Administration, Computer sciences and Media Sciences Programs. The demographic section also filled to see the origin of respondent. Most of the students belong to Sindh region and having Urdu as a home language.

Sampling Criteria

The criteria specified for the selection of respondents subjected to their availability on campus. The requirement of the research was that they must be Bachelor or Master's student of Business Administration or Computer Sciences or Media Sciences Department. Respondents must have finished at least one semester. Respondents must register in current semester to be a part of research so that their cumulative GPA taken. Furthermore, they also asked to fill the instrument. It expected that they have certain level of maturity and more exposed to the educational environment and environmental circumstances.

Procedure

The questionnaire used for data collection had some demographic questions such as, student registration no. respondent's gender, level of study i.e. (Bachelors or Masters), and program of study i.e. (Business Administration, Computer Sciences or Media Sciences). For measuring students' contingency of worth-esteem and Rosenberg's self-esteem, these two instruments attached with the demographic questionnaire to make it one set of instrument.

The instrument starts with first question of student registration no. which is enormously important because this student ID were provide CGPA of students that measured their academic performance with their self-worth & self-esteem. The research mostly distributed questionnaire in the classroom setting with the cooperation of class teachers in the beginning of class and these papers collected back in the break from the students. The researcher briefly instructed students about the importance of the first part of questionnaire, which carried demographic question. Nevertheless initially the questionnaire had filled out 100 respondents out of which some responds missed the important questions, like registration no. level of study and programs they were studying; the research discarded some participants data as their response were suspicion regarding providing ID no. level and program of study.

Respondents who Participants within class environment or outside both were briefly address the research variables, more importantly their CGPA that is sometimes student put in confidential information told about that their CGPA collected from examination department and will be stay in confidential mode. Those participants who participant outside the class were first noted their contact numbers and decided time to return back the filled questionnaire; they bring their questionnaire on next day or week with complete questionnaire filled.

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS

Linear regression Analysis for test of relationship between Academic Performance = RGSE X CSW

a. Dependent Variable: Academic Result

Table no. 1 shows the Beta effect on academic results, which is dependent variable, global self-esteem have .056% effects on students academic performance and CSW had .028% impact on students academic results. According to the hypothesis student academic performance was dependent on their self-esteem; here p < 0.001 nevertheless the table shows global self-esteem have p >= .012 there is no significant relationship of student's academic results with their self-esteem and CSW had p > = 0.009 in their self-worth.

The first question which study carried out about the student's academic performance has any relationship with their self-esteem and contingencies of their self-worth. The research hypothesized those students academic performance is depended of their self-esteem.

The structural Education Model of the research was Academic Performance = Rosenberg Global self-esteem + CSW. According to this, table and finding the research are rejecting that Iqra University Students have any relationship of their academic results with their self-esteem. The data which research had for the research have both types of students who perform higher and lower side of CGPA. Table no.1 shows CGPA lower reporting was .18 and higher recorded was 3.74, the interesting part the research found in this study that almost all students have reasonably good and healthier self-esteem, no matter they performed poor in their studies. These findings had publicized that IU students had no relationship with their self-esteem to their academics. Results had shows that student with higher self-esteem had both type of performances i.e. low and high GPA. Because self esteem is unstable and vulnerable when people experience positive and negative events in domains of contingency (Crocker, et al., 2002; Crocker & Wolfe, 2001), the study reveals that no matter what type of results and grades students receive from their studies their self-esteem did not have any impact.

Table no. 1 shows the results that clearly reject the H1 the students' academic performance is depended on their self-esteem. The result shows that Iqra University students' academic results are independent of their self-esteem.

The research had also explore the research on the factors of Contingencies of Self-worth which had seven domains, these domains are (God's Love, Appearance, Approval from others, Academic competence, family support, Competition and virtue) Physical appearance was rated by university students as the most superficial and the most dependent. On others of seven domains of contingencies and, overall, was the least healthy domain of contingency (Crocker, et al., 2003). The results had so far shown no significant relationship of academic results and self-esteem; however, most of the students report higher self-esteem on CSWS. The research had tested out of seven domains, which are the most prominent factor where IU students invest their self-esteem. the research hypothesized that Iqra University Students based their self-worth in the domain of God's Love, Appearance, Approval from others, Academic competence, family support, Competition and virtue in contingencies of self-worth.

a. Dependent Variable: Academic Result

b. a = 10%, 0.01

The research put students' academic results as a dependent variable, which is dependent on students' self-esteem, especially the domain on which they invest their self-esteem. When students find negative events or outcomes from those domains it affects their self-esteem and move it to lower side and gradually performing badly. The research tested by the regression analysis technique; entering variables and removing as the least significant to each other. Table no. 2 shows ß and a on CSW with academic results. The test removed the factors, which are least significant in a systematic manner until the fifth stage.

Table no. 2 had shown the results of the study, it removes the variables, which are least significant with the students' academic results. The first variable competition had been removed in the second round, it had ß 0.21 and p=.868, whereas in the third level appearance with ß value 0.57 p (sig) .619 removed, which means IU students did not invest their self-esteem in the domain of appearance. Table 2 shows that regression removes family support, author got results that student did not have any problems in reducing their self-esteem when they do not have family support. Academic competence has negative value of ß -.176 with p value .134, which means students who tried to invest their self-esteem on academic competence, would decrease their self-worth. At level sixth table discard the variable of approval from others, which have negative value of ß -.142 and p (sig) .158 that is not a good significant level. God's love in last level was also negative ß value -0.248 but p (sig) is 0.018, it means the more students invest their self-esteem in God's love the lower their academic results will be. God's love is inversely propositional to academic results. The only variable, which has ß value of 0.363 have p (sig) value 0.001, is directly propositional to student's academic results. It means the more IU students invest their self-esteem in the domain of virtue the better they will performance in their academics.

Hypothesis Testing

Based on the second question that is, where IU students based their self-esteem in the domain of contingencies of self-worth, the research have developed following seven hypothesis.

H2. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of family support in the contingencies

Of self-worth will increase their academic results.

H3. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of God's Love in the contingencies

of self-worth will increase their academic results.

H4. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Academic Performance in the

contingencies of self-worth will increase their academic results.

H5. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Appearance in the contingencies

of self-worth will increase their academic results.

H6. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Virtue in the contingencies

of self-worth will increase their academic results.

H7. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Competence in the contingencies

of self-worth will increase their academic results.

H8. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of Approval from others in the

contingencies of self-worth will increase their academic results.

The result of first question already shows that IU students' academic results are independent of their self-esteem. Results of Table no. 2 also support findings of H1; Table no.2, which clarifies that student's of Iqra University did not care about investing their self-esteem in the domains like (family support, appearance, competition, approval from others, academic performance). In fact, some variables like God's Love are inversely proportional to academic results of students, which mean the more students have God's love the lower their academic results will be. Therefore, according to the findings of table no. 2 the research reject H2, H3, H4, H5, H7, H8 hypothesis, whereas H6 accepted that; if Iqra University students invest their self-esteem in the domain Virtue they will perform better have will have higher academic results as their level of self-worth increase based on virtue.

Graphical Presentation of Virtue

In the last 6th step the test had shown the two variables out of which God's Love had also negative relationship with academic performance, but virtue have shown the relationship exist in between Iqra University student's self-worth with their academic performance. Table no.3 shows that if student more likely to invest their self-esteem in the domain of virtue they will increase their CGPA as an academic performance. If .461 units of virtue increase 1 unit of academic result of student increases where p < 0.001. The research accept the hypothesis that. Students invest their self-esteem in the domain of virtue will have positive impact on their academic performance.

A Liner Regression model used to determine the connection between the dependent with the independent variable i.e. Student academic Results (CGPA) and their self-esteem.

Descriptive Statistics

Mean, Standard Deviation, minimum and maximum ranges of Academic Results + RGSE +CSW

The mean and standard deviation of three main variables are shown in Table 3, Contingencies of self-worth scale had (M=26.34, SD=2.413), Rosenberg's (M=32, SD=3.586) and Academic Results (M=2.478, SD=.743). The collected research data from university students reported in minimum range of CSW (19.60-to-30.40), according to the Likert scale of CSW the highest one can score could make 35. The maximum score of Rosenberg self-esteem could be 50, the research participants score minimum 25 to maximum 37, after discarded 10 participants data at this stage the research also omit the data of one student whose CGPA is 0.00, therefore the (N=89) for academic result had shown with highest CGPA of 3.74 to the lowest of 0.18.

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION

The research carried the tools of self-esteem measures university students with their academic performance, using Rosenberg's global self-esteem scale to check overall self-esteem of each student simultaneously measuring CSW on seven factors to clear the main domains where mostly students base their self-esteem. Many research findings provided for the support of the hypothesis of this research that self-esteem and student's academic performance had positive and significant relationship with each other however; this research fails to provide the evidence of such kind of relationship.

(Crocker, et al., 2003) developed the contingencies of self-worth scale. It had seven factors that mostly involved in increasing the self-esteem of anybody. Coinciding with other research findings the research had very different results, this is all because of participants responses, the sample of students response showed that they did not based their self-esteem on any of the domains of CSW except virtue. In fact the domains which the research tested (academic competence, approval from others, God's Love) had negative relationship, i.e. the more the students have academic competence and approval from others or God's love the lower they perform in their academics. Whereas virtue had a significance relationship of students, academic performances with the virtue they have by investing their self-esteem on it. The research has strong support on this theory for people who invest their self-esteem on the factors that are controllable and internal; they tend to have high self-esteem (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001; James, 1890).

(Crocker & Wolfe, 2001) claimed that people who depend on those domain variables which require other response like approval from others, family support and appearance. these factors are out of control of one's self, and hard to meets the need of self-esteem through these domains because these domain contingents are on a great extends outside one's control and therefore hard to satisfy and accomplished the healthier level of self-esteem. The research showed, that participants of university sample tend to invest on those variables, which are controllable, and those not require much from other people's approval. Students investing on those variables, which are under their control, are more likely to satisfy and accomplished their reasonable level of self-esteem. However there were so many researches had done which proves the positive relationship of self-esteem with academic performance, and many shows the significance relationship of many factors of CSW with academics results.

The sample of students did not develop any relationship with their studies to their self-esteem. It could be due to the factor that, they might have many others things around them, which are more important to academic performances. One of the limitations, which the research would like to express here, is, when the research collect data was the time when students were in the middle of semesters and forget the regrets of their low or bad academic performance of last semester, therefore they report healthier and higher self-esteem. Nevertheless, the domains in which students mostly invest their self-esteem could not be change with that shortage of time.

---

If you're looking for help with writing your own dissertation, you can get dissertation assistance at UKEssays.com where you will be connected with academic writers specialising in your field of study.

References

Ackerman, D. S., & Gross, B. L. (2003). Is time pressure all bad: Measuring between free time availability and students performance perceptions. Marketing Education Review, 12, 21-32.

Alicke, M. (1985). Global self-evaluation as determined by the desirability and controllability of trait adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1621-1630.

Brockner, J. (1984). Low Self-esteem and behavioral Plasticity: Some implications of Personality and social psychology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative review. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 171-190.

Crocker, J. (2006). Self-Esteem issues and answers. In Michael H. Kernis (Ed.), A Sourcebook on Current Perspectives (pp. 273-279). New York: Psychology Press.

Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of Self-Worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593-623.

Crocker, J., Luthanen, R. K., Cooper, M. L., & Bouvrette, S. A. (in press). Contingencies of self-worth in college students: Measurements and theory. Journal of Personality and social Psychology.

Crocker, J., & Park, (2004). The expensive gain of Self-esteem. psychosomatic Bulletin, 130, 392-414.

Heiligenstein, T., & Guenther, G. (1996). Depression and academic impairments in college students. Journal of American College Health, 45, 1-9.

James, W. (1890). The Principles of psychology (1). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Jencks, C., & Philiphs, M. (1998). The Black-White test score gap. Education Week, 18, 44.

Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2002). Stability and Variability in Self-Concept and Self-Esteem. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.), self and identity handbook: Guilford Press.

Kernis. (2006). Self-Esteem Issues and Answers. : Psychology Press.

Kuiper, N. A., & Olinger, L. J. (1986). Dysfunctional attitudes and a self-worth contingency model of depression. New York: Academic Press.

Lemay, E. P., & Ashmore, R. D. (2006). The Relationship of Social approval contingency to trait self-esteem: Causes, consequence, or moderator? Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 121-211.

Lewis, L. (2006). Pupil kills family to hide failure. Retrieved June 27, 2006, from http://www.timeonline.co.uk/articles/0,,3-2243186,00.htm

McFadden, K., & Dart, J. (1992). Time management skills of undergraduate business students. Journal of Education for Business, 68, 85-88.

Mouw, J., & Khanna, R. (1993). Predictions of Academic Success: A review pf the literature and some recommendations. College Students Journal, 27(3), 328-336.

Nonis, ., & Hudson, . (2006). Academic Performance of College Students: influence of time spent studying and working. Journal of Education of Business.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college afflicts students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

Ross, M. (2002). It feels like yesterday: The social psychology of subjective time judgments. Thesis presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Savannah, CA.

Stauss, L. C., & Volkwein, F. J. (2002). Comparing Students performance and growth in 2- and 4-years institutions. Research in Higher Education, 44(2), 133-161.

Stryker, Sheldon. (1980). Symbolic Interactions. A Social Structural Version.

Wagner, C., & Valtin, R. (2004). Determinants of Self-Esteem in young adolescents. Proceedings of the 3rd International Biennial Self Research Conference, Berlin.

Wells, L. Edward., & Marwell, Gerald. (1976). Self-Esteem: Its Conceptualization and Measurement. Sage.

Wong, J. L., & Whitaker, D. J. (1993). Depletive mood states and their cognitive and personality correlates in college students: the improve over time. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 29, 615-621.