Self-Monitoring Presentation Style

Each person will differ in how they present themselves. Some people are more aware about their public impression, some people may be more use of self-straregik percentage, while others are more like self-justification (self-verification). According to Mark Snyder (1987), this difference is associated with a characteristic personality trait called self-monitoring is the tendency to set the behavior to suit the demands of social situations-tuntutaan. Thus, self-monitoring is the tendency to change behavior in response to the presentation itself, which was centered on the situation (Brehm & Kassin, 1993). Or according to Worchel, et al. (2000), self-monitoring is to adapt the behavior to situational norms and expectations of others. While Brigham (1991) states the self-monitoring is the process by which individuals conduct the monitoring (monitor) to manage the impression he had made.

Individuals who have high self-monitoring focuses on what is socially feasible and pay attention to how people behave in social settings. They use this information to guide their behavior. Their behavior is determined by a match with the situation rather than attitudes and their true feelings. They are capable of feeling desire and expectations of others, skilled or expert in presenting some of the behavior in different situations and can change the ways of self presentation or modifying behavior to conform with the expectations of others. High self-monitors described as having "pragmauic self '. They can be called also as an astute manager of the impression ("skilled managers impression.)

Instead of individuals who are low in self-monitoring (low self-monitors) tend to be more attentive to their own feelings and less concerned with the situation cues that could indicate whether their behavior is feasible. In a test tool called "self-monitoring scale" developed by Mark Snyder can be seen that in fact people have a wide variation in the readiness and ability to monitor themselves.

Based on the results of the study, people who get high scores on self-monitoring scale, will have good luck in social situations, people will regard them as being friendly and relaxed (Lippa, 1978), is not shy and more ready to take the initiative in various situation (Pilkonis, 1977). But they are likely to be less reliable and assessed shallow (Gergen, 1977). So it is assumed that those who are at the level of self-monitoring moderate (moderate / in-the middle) is the socially ideal. Because this will allow them to operate effectively in presenting themselves, without becoming a "social chameleon".

The results of another study showed that because of high self-monitors perceive yourself as a person who succeeded in giving the impression to others, so they tend to have higher self-esteem (Sharp & Getz, 1996). They are also socially skilled in testing hypotheses about the personality of people (Dardenne & Leyens, 1995). They are also more mengingar information about other people or the actions of others. High self-monitors more places on physical attractiveness rather than personal qualities when they have a romantic partner. While low self-monitors more emphasis compatibility in personality and interests than the match with physical attractiveness in choosing a mate (Glick. DeMorest, & Hotze, 1988). Finally, in organizational studies indicate that individuals of high self-monitoring is better than low self-monitoring in working across departments or between sections that demands flexibility and open to the desires and expectations of others.