Impression management is a conscious or subconscious process in which people attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event. They do so by regulating and controlling information in social interaction.[1] It was first conceptualized by Erving Goffman in 1959 in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, and then was expanded upon in 1967.[2] An example of impression management theory in play is in sports such as soccer. At an important game, a player would want to showcase themselves in the best light possible, because there are college recruiters watching. This person would have the flashiest pair of cleats and try and perform their best to show off their skills. Their main goal may be to impress the college recruiters in a way that maximizes their chances of being chosen for a college team rather than winning the game.[3]
Impression management is usually used synonymously with self-presentation, in which a person tries to influence the perception of their image. The notion of impression management was first applied to face-to-face communication, but then was expanded to apply to computer-mediated communication. The concept of impression management is applicable to academic fields of study such as psychology and sociology as well as practical fields such as corporate communication and media.
Johnson-Cartee, K. S.. (2010). Impression management. In Political and Civic Leadership: A Reference Handbook
“Social networking sites like myspace, facebook, and studivz are popular means of communicating personality. recent theoretical and empirical considerations of homepages and web 2.0 platforms show that impression management is a major motive for actively participating in social networking sites. however, the factors that determine the specific form of self-presentation and the extent of self-disclosure on the internet have not been analyzed. in an exploratory study, we investigated the relationship between self-reported (offline) personality traits and (online) self-presentation in social networking profiles. a survey among 58 users of the german web 2.0 site, studivz.net, and a content analysis of the respondents’ profiles showed that self-efficacy with regard to impression management is strongly related to the number of virtual friends, the level of profile detail, and the style of the personal photo. the results also indicate a slight influence of extraversion, whereas there was no significant effect fo…”
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M.. (1990). Impression Management: A Literature Review and Two-Component Model. Psychological Bulletin
“Impression management, the process by which people control the impressions others form of them, plays an important role in interpersonal behavior. this article presents a 2-component model within which the literature regarding impression management is reviewed. this model conceptualizes impression management as being composed of 2 discrete processes. the 1st involves impression motivation-the degree to which people are motivated to control how others see them. impression motivation is conceptualized as a function of 3 factors: the goal-relevance of the impressions one creates, the value of desired outcomes, and the discrepancy between current and desired images. the 2nd component involves impression construction. five factors appear to determine the kinds of impressions people try to construct: the self-concept, desired and undesired identity images, role constraints, target’s values, and current social image. the 2-component model provides coherence to the literature in the area, addresses controversial issues, and supplies a framework for future research regarding impression management.”
Gardner, W. L., & Martinko, M. J.. (1988). Impression Management in Organizations. Journal of Management
“Evidence of the process through which organizational members cre- ate and maintain desired impressions is provided by this review of so- cial psychological and relevant management research on impression management. propositions regarding the stimuli and the cognitive, motivational, and affective processes related to impression manage- ment and audience responses are advanced. finally, directions for fu- ture research into impression management in organizational settings are suggested. impression”
Moro, E., & Vidailhet, M.. (2010). Management. Blue Books of Neurology
“JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. we use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. for more information about jstor, please contact support@jstor.org. american marketing association is collaborating with jstor to digitize, preserve and extend access to journal of marketing this content downloaded from 130.160.243.18 on mon, 08 aug 2016 15:31:08 utc all use subject to about.jstor.org/terms this article develops empirically based guidelines to help managers select typefaces that affect strategically val-ued impressions. the authors discuss the potential trade-offs among the impressions created by typeface (e.g., pleasing, engaging, reassuring, prominent). the selection of typeface can be simplified with the use of six under-lying design dimensions: elaborate, harmony, natural, flourish, weight, and compressed. the visual aspects of a corporation’s marketing”
Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, M. K., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, B. J.. (2008). A multi-level review of impression management motives and behaviors. Journal of Management
“This article selectively reviews studies of impression management (im) published since 1988 and identifies strengths, limitations, and future research directions in three key areas: research investigating the use of im at the individual level of analysis (e.g., performance appraisal); research that applies im theory, concepts, and thinking to better understand organizational phe- nomena (e.g., feedback seeking); and research investigating organizational-level im (e.g., how firms create legitimacy). following their review, the authors offer some overarching recommen- dations for future examinations of im in organizations, giving particular attention to the need for clear definitions and categories of im behaviors and the value of multi-level investigations.”
Wayne, S. J., & Liden, R. C.. (1995). EFFECTS ON IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT ON PERFORMANCE RATINGS: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY.. Academy of Management Journal
“We tested a model proposing that subordinates’ impression management behavior influences performance ratings through supervisors’ liking of and perceived similarity to subordinates. we measured impression management behavior, liking, and similarity six weeks after the establishment of supervisor-subordinate dyads and measured performance ratings after six months. results indicated support for the overall model and several specified relationships. additionally, impression management behavior had a significant, indirect impact on performance ratings. implications of the results for research on impression management and performance appraisal are discussed.”
Barich, H., & Kotler, P.. (1991). A Framework for Marketing Image Management. Sloan Management Review
“Managers know that the customer’s impression of an organization is important. and sometimes companies attempt to determine just what that impression is. they conduct ad hoc surveys and focus groups. but too often the data is insubstantial, or difficult to analyze, or even inaccurate. barich and kotler introduce the concept of ‘marketing image’ and describe a system of image management: designing a study, collecting data, analyzing image problems, modifying the image, and tracking responses to that image. they argue that only a systematic approach will yield useful and accurate information that a company can translate into action.”
Bolino, M. C.. (1999). Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors?. Academy of Management Review
“Previous research on organizational citizenship behavior suggests that employees who engage in such behavior are ‘good soldiers,’ acting selflessly on behalf of their organizations. however, such behaviors also may be impression enhancing and self-serving. in this article i provide a framework showing how impression-management concerns may motivate citizenship behavior and address the conse-quences of citizenship in this context, as well as the interaction of impression-management motives with motives identified in previous research on citizenship. finally, i discuss the methodological issues associated with isolating self-serving from other-serving motivation and implications for future theory development.”
Grant, A. M., & Mayer, D. M.. (2009). Good Soldiers and Good Actors: Prosocial and Impression Management Motives as Interactive Predictors of Affiliative Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology
“Researchers have discovered inconsistent relationships between prosocial motives and citizenship behaviors. we draw on impression management theory to propose that impression management motives strengthen the association between prosocial motives and affiliative citizenship by encouraging employees to express citizenship in ways that both ‘do good’ and ‘look good.’ we report 2 studies that examine the interactions of prosocial and impression management motives as predictors of affiliative citizenship using multisource data from 2 different field samples. across the 2 studies, we find positive interactions between prosocial and impression management motives as predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors directed toward other people (helping and courtesy) and the organization (initiative). study 2 also shows that only prosocial motives predict voice – a challenging citizenship behavior. our results suggest that employees who are both good soldiers and good actors are most likely to emerge as good citizens in promoting the status quo. [publication abstract]”
Paulhus, D. L.. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
“J. millham and l. i. jacobson’s (1978) 2-factor model of socially desirable responding based on denial and attribution components is reviewed and disputed. a 2nd model distinguishing self-deception and impression management components is reviewed and shown to be related to early factor-analytic work on desirability scales. two studies, with 511 undergraduates, were conducted to test the model. a factor analysis of commonly used desirability scales (e.g., lie scale of the mmpi, marlowe-crowne social desirability scale) revealed that the 2 major factors were best interpreted as self-deception and impression management. a 2nd study employed confirmatory factor analysis to show that the attribution/denial model does not fit the data as well as the self-deception/impression management model. a 3rd study, with 100 ss, compared scores on desirability scales under anonymous and public conditions. results show that those scales that had loaded highest on the impression management factor showed the greatest mean increase from anonymous to public conditions. it is recommended that impression management, but not self-deception, be controlled in self-reports of personality. (54 ref) (psycinfo database record (c) 2012 apa, all rights reserved)”
Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H.. (2003). More than one way to make an impression: Exploring profiles of impression management. Journal of Management
“Individuals try to influence the way they are perceived by others in the inter-personal arena, a practice known as impression management. there is in social psychology a large literature devoted to impression management, or in communicative terms to the sender and the messages she sends regarding her own identity. ‘people attempt to control information for one or more salient audiences in ways that try to facilitate goal-achievement’ (136). they do so by structuring a certain account. these processes can also operate at a mass mediated level. in the following case we are interested less in the processes that produced the account than in the influence an account, in our case a mass-mediated one, has on the audience. a good quote for the aptness thesis: ‘effective communication requires that information be tailored or fitted to the audience’s knowledge and value systems, using terms, symbols, and evidence that will be readily understood and accepted without challenge’ (155).”