Mark Swanson

Rian Davis

An Examination of Self-inflation in Teachers

Abstract

This paper presents the findings of a quantitative study that examined the
following main research questions: 1) Do EFL teachers generally believe
they are better teachers than most of their colleagues? 2) Do EFL
teachers, when comparing themselves to their colleagues, rate their
teaching skills more highly than skills that are not directly related to
teaching? 3) Do EFL teachers think they are less likely than other
teachers are to overrate their own teaching ability? This study sought to
expand on the research of Jonathan D. Brown, whose findings support the
claim that people tend to believe they are more competent than others,
especially for characteristics and skills that are important to them. Based
upon the survey responses of 98 EFL university teachers in Japan, the
answers to the above research questions appear to be yes.

1. Introduction

Teachers are faced with difficult judgments: Are my current teaching

practices preferable to alternative approaches? Could modifications to my
lessons and teaching style result in higher student motivation and a more
efficient learning environment? Are my lessons providing students with
the knowledge and skills that they most need? The complexity of the
classroom, among other factors, can make it difficult to answer such
questions. Furthermore, teachers may be prone to overvalue the
effectiveness of their teaching. If so, could self-bias lead to undue
complacency in one’s teaching? Could it even contribute to poor teaching
decisions? We strongly believe that these questions merit consideration.

1
2. Theoretical Background

Traditional views in psychology held that it was beneficial for individuals

to possess accurate self-perceptions, yet subsequent research has
suggested that overly-positive self-evaluations are normal and may be
advantageous (Taylor and Brown, 1988). Most people tend to view
themselves as unique rather than common and believe themselves to be
more talented, capable, competent, honorable, moral, compassionate and
sympathetic than others (Brown, 2011). Moreover, the tendency to self-
inflate is heightened for characteristics and abilities that the individual
regards as important (Brown, 2011).

There are various explanations to account for self-inflation. It may derive

mainly from self-enhancement needs – the desire to feel good about
oneself – and may at times be solely produced by cognitive factors, such
as an asymmetry of knowledge and the tendency to focus on oneself
when making comparative judgments (Brown, 2011). Moreover, its
origin may be traced to natural selection. When competing for resources
and mates, there is a selection advantage in inflating one’s worth (Varki
& Brower, 2013), and evolutionary psychologist Robert Trivers (2011)
argues that self-deception evolved in the service of deception of others,
since a self-deceived liar can more easily escape detection. Furthermore,
Trivers believes there is a “systematic deformation of the truth at each
stage of the psychological process.” He adds, “from its biased arrival, to
its biased encoding…to misremembering and then misrepresenting it to
others, the mind continually acts to distort information flow in favor of
the usual good goal of appearing better than one really is” (p. 139).

3. Methods of Research

A ten question survey was created via SurveyMonkey. The survey

included two versions, A and B, with the only difference between them
being the order in which one of the questions appears. Having two
versions allowed us to study the priming effect, which will be discussed
in our other paper. To collect the opinions of non-Japanese teachers at the
tertiary level in Japan the survey was distributed through email and
announcements on social media such as Facebook. 102 teachers
participated in the study and of these, 4 were thrown out due to
incomplete answers. The participants were directed to version A or B
depending on the month of their birthday. The data from the two versions
was combined to present the findings below.

2
4. Demographic Data of the Participants

The survey participants were non-Japanese, mostly male, and represented

a wide range in age. Of the 98 participants, 73 were male and 25 were
female (figure 1). The youngest age range represented was 25 to 34 years
old and the oldest was 75 years old or over (figure 2). There were no
participants under 25 years old.

Number of Male and Female Participants

(combined data)
80 73
70
Count (total = 98)

60
50
40
30 25
20
10
0
Male Female
Figure 1: Male and Female Distribution

Age of Particpants (combined data)

40 37
34
35
Count (total =98)

30
25
20
14
15
9
10
5 3
1
0
25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 or older
Age Range By Groups

Figure 2: Age of the Participants

5. Results

Three main findings will be discussed. Firstly, the vast majority of

participants rated their own teaching skills highly and better than average.
Secondly, participants rated their teaching skills compared to their
present and former colleagues more highly than they rated their computer
literacy skills compared to present and former colleagues. Thirdly, the

3
majority of participants answered that they are less likely than other
teachers are to overrate their own teaching ability.

5.1) Participants were asked to rate their own teaching ability on a scale
of 1 to 10 (1 being extremely poor and 10 being superb). Almost all
participants rated themselves highly. The average self-rating was
approximately 7.7 (figure 3). Four participants rated themselves as a 10.
Only one participant rated himself as less than a 5, and notably this
participant was still in his first year of university teaching in Japan.

Self Rating Score (combined data)

45
39
40

35
30
Count (total = 98)

30

25

20
16
15

10 8
4
5
1 0
0
0-4 >4 - 5 >5 - 6 >6 - 7 >7- 8 >8 - 9 >9 - 10
Score By Groups

Figure 3: How the Survey Participants Rated Their Teaching Ability on a Scale of 1 to 10

Descriptive Statistics of Self Rating Score

Mean 7.698969
Standard Error 0.108563
Median 8
Mode 8
Standard Deviation 1.069218
Sample Variance 1.143228
Kurtosis 3.072634
Skewness -0.6852
Range 7
Minimum 3
Maximum 10
Sum 746.8
Count 98

4
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Self-Rating Score

Next, participants were asked to compare their teaching ability to present

and former non-Japanese colleagues. Only 2 of the 98 participants rated
themselves as below average. Furthermore, one of them had only been
teaching at a Japanese university for two-and-a-half years and the other
only for one year. In theory there should have be an even distribution of
answers above average and below average, yet the distribution is highly
skewed towards a positive self-rating (figure 4). These results seem to
confirm Brown’s (2011) claim that most people tend to view themselves
as above average.

Teaching Compared To Others (combined data)

35 31
30 27
Count (total = 98)

25 22
20
14
15
10
5 1 1 2
0
0

Assessment of Other Teachers

Figure 4: How Participants Rated Their Teaching Compared to Current and Former Colleagues

5.2) Participants were asked to rate their computer literacy skills in

comparison to present and former non-Japanese colleagues. The purpose
of this question was to test Brown’s (2011) claim that the self-inflation
effect is heightened for skills and characteristics that the individual views
as important. It would seem likely that teachers would regard their
teaching skills as more important to them than their computer literacy
skills, and thus a higher self-rating may be expected. The results seem to
confirm Brown’s claim as the average score for computer literacy skills is
comparatively lower and there is a higher number of teachers who rated
their computer literacy skills as being below average (figure 5).

5
 Computer Literacy Skills (combined data)
30
25
25 23
Count (Total = 98)

20
20
14
15
11
10
5
5
0 0
0

Self-Assessment

Figure 5: How Participants Rated Their Own Computer Literacy Skills Compared to Current and Former
Colleagues

5.3) Participants were asked if they think they are most likely to overrate,
accurately rate, or underrate their own teaching ability (figure 6). Of the
98 participants, 60 answered that they are most likely to accurately rate,
20 answered that they are most likely to underrate, and only 18 answered
that they are most likely to overrate their own teaching ability. Next,
participants were asked if they think other teachers are most likely to
overrate, accurately rate, or underrate their own teaching ability (figure
7). Of the 98 participants, 51 answered that other teachers are most likely
to overrate, 31 answered that other teachers are most likely to accurately
rate, and only 16 answered that other teachers are most likely to underrate
their own teaching ability. There is a significant contrast between the
answers for these two questions. Most participants believe that they
would be most likely to accurately rate their own teaching ability, yet
they believe other teachers are most likely to overrate their own teaching
ability. These results seem to suggest that teachers are more skeptical of
other teachers than they are of themselves when it comes to self-
evaluation.

6
 Perceived Accuracy of Self-Evaluation (combined data)

70
60
60
Count (Total = 98)

50

40

30
18 20
20

10

0
overrate your own teaching accurately rate your own underrate your own
ability teaching ability teaching ability
Figure 6: How Participants Rated the Likely Accuracy of Rating Their Own Teaching Ability

Perceived Accuracy of Other Teachers' Self-

Evaluations (combined data)
60
51
50
Count (Total = 98)

40
31
30

20 16

10

0
overrate their own teaching accurately rate their own underrate their own teaching
ability teaching ability ability
Figure 7: How Participants Rated the Likely Accuracy of Other Teachers’ Self-Evaluations

6. Conclusion

The main motivation for conducting this survey was born out of a
curiosity to find out if and to what degree teachers exhibit self-inflation,
as well as a concern that being unaware of this tendency could have
negative repercussions for teachers. Overall, the results of the survey
seem to suggest a bias towards one’s teaching. Having a high opinion of
one’s own teaching is often justified and may even benefit teachers in

7
some ways. However, in some cases perhaps an overly-high opinion of
one’s teaching could lead to complacency and thereby undercut
motivation to improve. Additionally, perhaps self-bias could result in
teachers being less willing to try alternative teaching approaches if they
have undue confidence in their current ones. It is our hope that raising
awareness regarding the pervasiveness of self-inflation may encourage
teachers to do more self-reflection and obtain more feedback on one’s
teaching practices from colleagues and students.

7. Room for Improvement

A few ideas occurred to the authors after the study was completed. First,
it may have been useful to have participants rate the teaching abilities of
others on a scale from 1 to 10 in the same way they were asked to rate
themselves, which would have allowed for more quantification of results
and greater ability to analyze the data more efficiently. Secondly, for the
question that asked participants to rate their own teaching ability on a
scale of 1 to 10, some participants chose non-discrete answers such as
7.5, which proved slightly problematic when graphing the data. Thirdly,
having the participants explain the reasons for their answers may have
been informative, such as the reasons for thinking that other teachers are
more likely than they are to overrate their own teaching ability. Lastly, a
larger sample size would provide for a more accurate statistical result.

8. Further Analysis and Research

This paper focused on only three main aspects of the data. However,
there were other aspects that may have merited analysis. First, there may
have been a correlation between the years of teaching experience and
self-rating scores. Secondly, there may have been a distinction between
male and female participants’ answers to some of the questions. Thirdly,
it would be interesting to expand this study to different levels of
education, rather than limited to university teachers, to see if the results
would hold. Lastly, this survey could be altered to do a cross-cultural
study to find out to what degree self-inflation may be a culturally based
phenomenon.

8
References
Brown, J. D. (2011). Understanding the better than average effect: Motives (still)
matter. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(2) 209-219.

Taylor, S.E. & Brown J.D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological
perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193-210.

Trivers, R. (2011). The folly of fools. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Varki, A. & Brower, D. (2013) Denial: Self-deception, false beliefs, and the origins of
the human mind. New York, NY: Twelve.