Psychology shows that it’s not our personalities that change, but rather our behaviors based upon the situation, personal role, and audience (Myers 576). You could say this allows for one to be a different person to everyone, as was Kurtz in Heart of Darkness. The idea of person-situation controversy looks for traits that persevere through time and different situations. However, if a person is considered to be outgoing, it is unlikely that he or she will emanate this trait in every possible situation. There are certain expectations for each situation, and by changing our behaviors accordingly we are keeping up appearances. For example, there is a clear difference between the way one might act at a social gathering with a group of friends versus in a classroom setting. Our traits will persist, but they might need to be toned down or brought out to adapt to new situations. The social-cognitive perspective states that “behavior is influenced by the interaction between people’s traits (including their thinking) and their social context” (Myers 576). According to the social aspect of this perspective, we learn many behaviors through conditioning as well as modeling others. The cognitive part refers to how we think about and interpret different situations, taking into account that our past experiences and expectations will influence behavior too.

Going off of the idea of personality and environment influencing behavior, economist Adriaan R. Soetevent studied the change in church donation patterns comparing open collection baskets with closed bags. In these churches, donations were collected in “a closed bag that was passed along from person to person, row to row”. Then Soetevent asked the churches to randomly substitute the closed bag with an open collection basket  over a period of several months. As expected, the “added scrutiny” meant that open collection baskets resulted in more money from churchgoers. Seeing the already collected money, neighbors’ donations, and the eyes of others pressured people to match donations if not give more money, simply for the sake of keeping up appearances. In this situation, people’s internal cognition and environment affected their resulting behaviors.

Making comparisons, competitiveness, and conformity are commonplace in day-to-day interactions, especially with the culture of suburbia and the idea of “keeping up with the Joneses”. People in society keep up a social status in order to avoid feelings of shame, embarrassment, and social exclusion. Psychology Today article by Sam Sommers analyzes a study that tested the effects of conformity. Statistics about energy usage were sent out to residents, comparing a household and its neighbors. Those who used more energy than their peers started to use less energy, while those whose energy usage was lower eventually used more energy because they felt better in comparison.
Those whose energy usage was higher were influenced to lower their usage because of surrounding statistics. Even though some residents’ level of energy usage was positive news, their behaviors were affected by the results of others. This study reinforces the idea of our need to keep up appearances and evaluate and change ourselves based on social and cognitive factors.

Myers, David G. Psychology. 9th ed. New York: Worth Publishers, 2010. Print.

Soetevent, Adriaan R. “Anonymity in Giving in a Natural Context – a Field Experiment in 30 Churches,” Journal of Public Economics 89 (2005).

Sommers, Sam . “Keeping Up With The Joneses.” Psychology Today. Science of Small Talk, 8 Apr. 2011. Web. 15 Mar. 2013. <www.psychologytoday.com/collections/201205/keeping-the-joneses/keeping-and-down- the-joneses>.