• dr.hosamani marilingappa

The aim of the study is to assess the level of self-concept among male and female corporate employees and to find the differences in the level of self-concept among corporate employees. The data was collected from 100 male and female corporate employees, using Self-concept scale by R.K Saraswat. The self-concept inventory provides six separate dimensions of self-concept viz., physical, social, intellectual, moral, educational and temperamental self-concept. It also gives a total self-concept score. The hypothsis of the study states that there is a signifcant differences in the level of self concept among male and female corporate emplyoees and also there is significant differences in different sub areas (physical, social, temperamental, moral, educational and intellectual) of the self concept scale among male and female corporate employees.The analysis of the data was done by using statistical analysis like‘t’ test (independent sample‘t’ test), S.D and mean. Hence from the study we come to the conclusion that there are a no significant differences in the level of self-concept among male and female corporate employees, There is a significant difference in the physical area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees is according to the hypothesis. And there is no significant difference in the social area, temperamental area, educationalarea, moral area intellectual area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees is not according to the hypothesis. INTRODUCTION Self-concept is an overarching idea we have about who we are—physically, emotionally, socially, spiritually, and in terms of any other aspects that make up who we are (Neill, 2005). We form and regulate our self-concept as we grow; based on the knowledge we have about ourselves. It is multidimensional, and can be broken down into these individual aspects; for example, you may have a very different idea of who you are in terms of your physical body and who you are in terms of your spirit or soul. The influential self-efficacy researcher Roy Baumeister (1999) defines self-concept as follows: “The individual’s belief about himself or herself, including the person’s attributes and who and what the self is.” A similar definition comes from Rosenberg’s 1979 book on the topic; he says self-concept is: “…the totality of an individual’s thoughts and feelings having reference to himself as an object.” Self-concept is related to several other “self” constructs, such as self-esteem, self-image, self-efficacy, and self-awareness. Self-Concept vs. Self-Esteem Self-concept is not self-esteem, although self-esteem may be a part of self-concept. Self-concept is the perception that we have of ourselves, our answer when we ask ourselves the question “Who am I?” It knows about one’s own tendencies, thoughts, preferences and habits, hobbies, skills, and areas of weakness. According to Carl Rogers, founder of client-centred therapy, self-concept is an overarching construct that self-esteem is one of the components of it (McLeod, 2008). Self-Concept vs. Self-Image Self-image is related to self-concept, but is generally less broad. Self-image is how an individual sees him- or herself, and it does not necessarily have to align with reality! A person’s self-image is based only on how they see themselves, while self-concept is a more comprehensive evaluation of the self based on how a person sees herself, values herself, thinks about herself, and feels about herself. Carl Rogers posited that self-image is a component of self-concept, along with self-esteem or self-worth and one’s “ideal self” (McLeod, 2008). Self-Concept vs. Self-Efficacy Self-concept is a more complex construct than self-efficacy; while self-efficacy refers to an individual’s judgments of their own abilities, self-concept is more general and includes both cognitive (thoughts about) and affective (feelings about) judgments about oneself (Bong & Clark, 1999). Self-Concept vs. Self-Awareness Self-awareness may also be considered a component of or factor influencing self-concept. It is the quality or trait that involves conscious awareness of one’s own thoughts, feelings, behaviours, and traits (Cherry, 2018A). To have a fully developed self-concept (and one that is based in reality), a person must have at least some level of self-awareness. We explore this further in The Science of Self-Acceptance Master class The Meaning of Self-Concept Theory There are many theories about what exactly self-concept is and how it develops, but generally, theorists agree on these points: • On the broadest level, self-concept is the overall idea we have about who we are and includes cognitive and affective judgments about ourselves. • Self-concept is multi-dimensional, incorporating our views of ourselves in terms of several different aspects (e.g., social, religious, and spiritual, physical, emotional). • It is learned, not inherent. • It is influenced by biological and environmental factors, but social interaction plays a big role as well. • Self-concept develops through childhood and early adulthood when it is more easily changed or updated. • It can be changed in later years, but it is more of an uphill battle since people have established ideas about who they are. • Self-concept does not always align with reality. When it does, our self-concept is “congruent.” When it doesn’t, our self-concept is “incongruent.” (Cherry, 2018B; Gecas, 1982). Identity and Self-Concept Theory in Psychology vs. Self-Concept in Sociology While both psychology and sociology have had an interest in self-concept over the last 50 years or so, they often take slightly different tacks to exploring it. Individual researchers vary, of course, but generally, the divide can be thought of in these terms: • Sociology/social psychology focuses on how self-concept develops, specifically within the context of the individual’s social environment. • Psychology focuses on how self-concept impacts people (Gecas, 1982). There are other differences between the two, including psychology’s general focus on the individual versus sociology’s focus on the group, community, or society; however, this difference in focus has led to two diverse research streams. Both have resulted in great insights and interesting findings, and they sometimes overlap, but this divide can still be seen in the literature today. Carl Rogers and the Self-Concept Theory of Personality Famed psychologist, theorist, and clinician Carl Rogers posited a theory of how self-concept influences and, indeed, acts as the framework for, one’s personality. The image we have of who we are necessarily contributes to our personality, as the actions we take in alignment with our personality feed back into our image of ourselves. Rogers believed that our personality is driven by our desire for self-actualization or the condition that emerges when we reach our full potential and our self-concept, self-worth, and ideal self all overlap (Journal Psyche Authors, n.d.). The ways in which we develop our personalities and self-concepts varies, resulting in the unique individuals we are. According to Rogers, we are always striving for self-actualization—some with more success than others. You might be wondering how people go about striving for self-actualization and congruence; read on to learn about the ways in which we maintain our self-concept. Self-Concept Maintenance Theory Self-concept maintenance refers to the efforts people make to maintain or enhance their sense of self. Although self-concept is relatively fixed after a person reaches adulthood, it can—and does—change based on the person’s experiences. The theory of self-concept maintenance posits that we do not simply sit idly by while our self-concept develops and shifts, but take an active role in shaping our self-concept at all ages (whether we are aware of this or not). Although there are several different theories about the processes that make up self-concept maintenance, it is generally thought of as concerning: 1. Our evaluations of ourselves 2. Our comparison of our actual selves with our ideal selves 3. Our actions taken to move closer to our ideal selves (Munoz, 2012). However, although this may seem like a pretty logical and straightforward process, we tend to give ourselves room for moral ambiguity. For example, a study by Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2007) showed that people will generally engage in beneficial dishonesty when given the opportunity, but will also generally not revise their self-concept to incorporate this dishonesty. If participants in the study were prompted to be more aware of their own internal standards for honesty, they were less likely to engage in beneficial dishonesty; on the other hand, if they were given “degrees of freedom” (greater separation between their actions and the rewards they would receive for dishonesty), they were more likely to engage in dishonesty with no impact to their self-concept. This is but one example of the work on self-concept maintenance, but it offers a convincing case of how people actively manage their own self-concept based on the context. Self-Concept Clarity and Differentiation Self-concept clarity and self-concept differentiation are two important concepts in the literature. Self-concept clarity (SCC) refers to how clear, confident, and consistent an individual’s definitions of his- or herself are (Diehl & Hay, 2011). On the other hand, self-concept differentiation (SCD) refers to the degree to which an individual’s self-representations vary across contexts or social roles (e.g., self as a spouse, self as a parent, and self as a student). SCC and SCD have been hot topics in psychology, in part due to the implications they have on thought patterns and behavior. We have gained some insights through research, but there is still much to be learned. As you can probably guess, higher SCC indicates a firmer and more stable self-concept, while low SCC indicates that an individual is unclear or vague about whom she really is. Those with low SCC generally struggle with low self-esteem, self-consciousness, and neuroticism. SCD is not as clear-cut; although having a high SCD may be viewed as a bad thing, it could also be an effective coping mechanism for succeeding in the modern world where much is demanded of an individual in each of their different roles. If SCD is extremely high, it might mean that the individual does not have a stable self-concept and “wears a different mask” for each of their roles. A very low level of SCD may indicate that the individual is authentically “them” across all of their roles—although it may also indicate that he cannot effectively switch from one role to another (Diehl & Hay, 2011). The Components and Elements of the Self-Concept Model As noted earlier, there are different ideas about exactly what makes up self-concept and how it should be defined; however, there are some characteristics and dimensions that apply to the basic, agreed-upon conceptualization of self-concept. Characteristics of Self-Concept Self-concept is the overarching perspective we have on who we are. Each of us has our own unique self-concept, different from the self-concept of others and from their concept of us. However, there are some characteristics that all of our self-concepts have in common. Self-concept: 1. Is unique to the individual. 2. Can vary from very positive to very negative. 3. Have emotional, intellectual, and functional dimensions. 4. Changes with the context. 5. Changes over time. 6. Has a powerful influence on the individual’s life (Delmar Learning, n.d.) Dimensions of Self-Concept As a broad and holistic construct, there are many dimensions or components of self-concept. Further, different dimensions may make up different kinds of self-concept; for example, the dimensions that make up academic self-efficacy will likely not have much overlap with social self-efficacy. However, there are some overarching dimensions that many researchers agree on as pieces of the self-concept puzzle. These dimensions include: • Self-esteem • Self-worth • Self-image (physical) • Ideal self • Identities or roles (social) • Personal traits and qualities REVIEW OF LITERATURE 1. A study on self-concept – A psychosocial study on adolescents by Sangeetha Rath and Sumithra Nanda published in Zenith International journal of multidisciplinary research –vol 2 issues 5, may 2012. An attempt has been made to examine the effect of gender and academic competence on the self-concept of adolescents. The study adopted a 2 (academically competent versus academically less-competent adolescents) × 2 (boys versus girls) factorial design. In the present study, two hundred forty adolescents (120 academically competent adolescents securing 80% or more marks and 120 academically less-competent adolescents securing 50% or less mark) are randomly sampled from different urban colleges of Odessa. In each group of 120 adolescents, there are 60 boys and 60 girls. All the subjects are first year graduate students. The participants of all the four groups are compared with respect to their self-concept. The result indicated that academically competent adolescents have higher physical, moral, personal, family, social and overall self-concept than less-competent ones. The strength of association between personal self-concept and overall self-concept in boys is higher than the association found in girls. Similarly, the strength of association between physical self- concept and overall self-concept, as well as social self-concept and overall self-concept is higher in girls than that of the boys 2. A mini literature review of self-concept by Aida Mehrad published in journal of educational, health and community psychology vol 5 no.2, 2016. The aim of the current literature review is to focus on individuals´ self-concept. The results of thepresent study reveal that self-concept assumed as an important factor for each and can change his orher belief, attitude, and reaction toward personal and social life. This study likewise explained thebeginning of self-concept, different views toward this vital factor, the role of introspection, andmulticultural. Furthermore, this paper supported the imperative of self-concept; additionally, it has anessential role in individual advance. 3. A study on Role of self-concept by Malikeh Behetifar and Zohre Rahim-Nazhad published in the European journal of economics, finance and administrative sciences in the year Jan 2012, the study aims that Self-concept refers to the totality of a complex, organized, and dynamic system of learned beliefs, attitudes and opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her personal existence. Self-concepts represent knowledge structures that consist of beliefs about the self, including one's attributes, social roles, and goals. The main factors determining the formation of the self-concept of an individual are the environment as well as people with whom the individual lives. Notion of self-concept is developing around people's work and organizational experiences. The individual, relational, and collective self-concepts refer to whether the self is viewed as separate from others, linked to others through relationships, or included in large groups, respectively. Researchers have established that individuals differ in their orientations toward the three levels of the self-concept. Also, self-concept in organizations could effect on social work behaviours, organization-based role-set in workplace, career satisfaction, and achievement. When managers have favourable attitudes toward themselves, they are in a much better position to build positive and realistic self-concept in their employers. However, promoting high self-concept is important. It is suggested that positive self-concept is considered and reinforced among employees. 4. A study on the effect of self-concept and organizational identity on organizational citizenship- behavior by Sayyeh Mohier Allameh, Saeed Alinajimi, and Ali Kazemi published in the International journal of human resource studies vol2, no1, 2012. The study states that during the two recent decades, researchers of organizational behavior have paid special attention to extra-social behavior in organizations, and there has been specific focus on employees' affairs which are developed beyond formal job demands. Globalization era has created increased inter-individual mutual dependencies among organizations and groups. Thus, it has made more need for extra-social cooperation and interaction inside and outside the organizations. Therefore, organizational citizenship behavior plays a role in increasing the effectiveness and durability of the organization. The main purpose of this survey is to study the manner of impact of self-concept, and organizational identity on organizational citizenship behavior of employees of Social Security Corporation in Isfahan province and also to examine the existence of the balancing role of self-concept variable in the relationship between organizational identity and organizational citizenship behavior. This survey was conducted using descriptive-metrical method. Obtained results of this survey reveal that organizational citizenship behavior is affected by organizational identity, and self-concept; and each variable of organizational identity has positive correlation with organizational citizenship behavior. It means that by strengthening and improving the above variables it is possible to enhance organizational citizenship behavior. Also, results demonstrate that self-concept balances the relationship between organizational identity and organizational citizenship behavior. 5. Rajgopal (1965) in his study explored the relationship between self concept and productivity of textile mills workers belonging to high and low productive mills. Six mills, three high and three low (Productivity was indexed in terms of operative hours per unit of Production four the past three years) were chosen for the study. 75 workers each from high Productive and low Productive mills were chosen for the study. They were asked to indicate their self concept level on a 5-point scale ranging from high self concept to low self concept The results highlighted that high productive mill workers were significantly high levels of self concept with five of the seven aspect excluding job and coworkers. 6. Lodahl&Kejner (1965)found in a study that level of self concept is affected by meaningfulness of work and adequacy of supervision. 7. Rao (1969) had examined the age and attitude towards officers in understanding the self concept of 146 female employees. His research highlighted that female employee and married female employee having more than twenty five years of age always oppose against injustice and struggle against management too. 8. Jawa (1971) collected data on 70 semi-skilled workers in his study on self concept and job satisfaction. On the basis of the self concept scale filled by the respondents and their scores, self concept was divided into three groups of high, average and low self concept. In addition to this a satisfaction questionnaire was also filled by the respondents. The results indicate a trend of increasing satisfaction with increasing self concept. 9. Smith, Scott and Hulin (1977)selected 4000 managers of the 145 company for the sample of the study on self concept of professional employees of the company. It was found out through this research that self-conceptlevel increase with the age. Thus, indicating a positive relation of self concept with the age. 10. Richmond, Mccroskey and Davis (1982), stated that “moderate levels of self-concept employees may be more productive than low levels of self-concept employee; extremely high levels of self-concept employees may form the type of work group known as the “happiness for lunch bunch” (McCroskey, Larson & Knapp, 1971) and be more of a social group than a work group, hence lowering productivity. 11. Bhatt (1987)studied the personality determinations of self concept of college teachers of Saurashtra University and all college teachers were included in the sample of the study. It was found that female teachers were high levels of self concept than male teachers, also no significant difference was found in the mean scores of married and unmarried teachers 12. Sharma(1987)examined the effects of work culture on employee self concept level, sense of participation, role stress and alienation in private sector and public sector and found that the private sector and the public sector varied significantly on the dominant culture variables and there was significant correlation between the work culture variable and role stress variables. 13. Rajendran (1987) in a public sector industry highlighted a significant correlation between work culture and self concept. 14. .Rain et al., (1991)stated that self concept has a correlation with life satisfaction. People who are high in levels of self concept will tend to be satisfied with the job and vice versa. METHODOLOGY AIM: To assess the self concept level among male and female employees working in a corporate sector. OBJECTIVES: • To find the differences in the self concept level among male and female employees working in a corporate sector. • To assess the differences in areas of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. HYPOTHESIS: 1. There is a significant difference in self-concept level among male and female employees working in a corporatesector. a. There is a significant difference in the physical area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. b. There is a significant difference in the social area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. c. There is a significant difference in the temperamental area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. d. There is a significant difference in the educational area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. e. There is a significant difference in the moral area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. f. There is a significant difference in the intellectual area of self-concept among male and female corporate employees. VARIABLES:- Independent variable: male and female corporate employees Dependent variable: self-concept SAMPLE: The sample consisted of 100 employee’s workingin corporate sector in non voice process of which 50 male and 50 female employees. All the subjects were working in rotational shifts. Inclusion criteria: • Respondent able to read, write and speak English. • Male and female employers in corporate sectors with degree/ post graduate degree qualification. • The person who has experienced more than one year were taken. • Employees from other states or foreigners were not considered. Exclusion criteria: • HR were not considered • The person who has experienced less than one year were not considered. RESEARCH DESIGN Within group designs was considered for the corporate employees. TOOLS Self-concept scale by R.K Saraswat The self concept inventory provides six seperate dimensions of self concept viz., physical, social, intellectual, moral, educationaland temperamental self concept. It also gives a total self concept score. The operational definitions of self concept dimensions mesured by this inventory are:- 1. PHYSICAL- individual view of their body, health, physical appearance and strength. A –item no: - 2,3,9,20,22,27,29,31 2. SOCIAL- individual’s sense of worth in social interactions. B-item no:-1, 8,21,37,40,42,46,48 3. TEMPERAMENTAL- indivduals view of their prevailing emotional state or predominance of a particular kind of emotional reaction. C-item no:-4, 10,14,16,19,23,24,25 4. EDUCATIONAL- individual’s view of themselves in relation to school, teachers and extracurricular activities. D-item no:-9, 13,15,17,20,26,30,32 5. MORAL- individual’s estimation of their moral worth, right and wrong activities. E-item no:-6, 34,35,41,42,44,45,47 6. INTELLECTUAL- individual’s awareness of their intelligence and capacity of problem solving and judgements. F-item no:-7, 11,12,18,33,36,38,39 The inventory contains 48 items. Each diemension is provided with eight items with five alternatives ranging from most acceptable to least acceptable description of his/her self-concept. The alternatives or responses are arranged in such a way that the scoring syatem to all the items will remain same i.e., 5, 4,3,2,1 whether the items are positive or negative. Alternative no. 1 2 3 4 5 score 5 4 3 2 1 SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET This was developed by the researcher to collect information about the age, gender, Education, external factors and internal factors. PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHIES Item N MEAN SD Sex M 50 F 50 AGE 23-<28 YEARS SHIFTS MORNING - 34 NIGHT-50 AAFTERNNON(AUSTRALIAN SHIFT)-16 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE <2-5 YEARS PROCEDURE The present study was conducted to know the self concept and achievement motivation of the corporate employees. The subjects working for different organizations at Bangalore study was informed to them. The study comprised of 100 subjects of which 50 are males and 50 are females who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study. The English version of the scale was administered to them. The scales were later scored as per the authors norms. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Data was analysed using descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviation and “t” test was computed to know the significant difference between the groups. SPSSS software was used to find the statistical data RESULT AND DISCUSSION The data was scored appropriately as per the author’s norms. The mean, standard deviation and‘t’ test were used to analyze if there was significant differences in the self concept level among male and female corporate employees. Table 1 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the physical area of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean physical scores male 50 8.7200 1.42914 .20211 female 50 9.7400 1.10306 .15600 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper physical scores Equal variances assumed 5.794 .018 -3.995E0 98 .000 -1.02000 .25531 -1.52666E0 -.51334 Equal variances not assumed -3.995E0 9.209E1 .000 -1.02000 .25531 -1.52706E0 -.51294 Discussion for physical area The table 1 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the physical area of self concept. In the physical area of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 8.72 and 1.42 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 9.74 and 1.10. The obtained‘t’ value is 3.99 which indicates that there is a significant difference with regard to physical area of self concept among male and female corporate employees. Table 2 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the social area of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean social scores male 50 8.2200 2.13130 .30141 female 50 8.3000 1.85439 .26225 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper social scores Equal variances assumed .954 .331 -.200 98 .842 -.08000 .39953 -.87285 .71285 Equal variances not assumed -.200 9.616E1 .842 -.08000 .39953 -.87304 .71304 Discussion for social area The table 2 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the social area of self concept. In the social area of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 8.22 and 2.13 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 8.30 and 1.85. The obtained‘t’ value is 0.20 which indicates that there is no significant difference with regard to social area of self concept among male and female corporate employees. Table 3 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the temperamental area of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean temperamental scores male 50 8.9200 1.32234 .18701 female 50 8.4800 1.38858 .19638 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper temperamental scores Equal variances assumed .142 .707 1.623 98 .108 .44000 .27117 -.09813 .97813 Equal variances not assumed 1.623 9.777E1 .108 .44000 .27117 -.09815 .97815 Discussion for temperamental area The table 3 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the temperamnetal area of self concept. In the temperamental area of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 8.92 and 1.32 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 8.48 and 1.38. The obtained‘t’ value is 1.62 which indicates that there is no significant difference with regard to temperamental area of self concept among male and female corporate employees. Table 4 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the educational area of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean educational scores male 50 8.7000 1.40335 .19846 female 50 8.4000 1.69031 .23905 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper educational scores Equal variances assumed 3.287 .073 .966 98 .337 .30000 .31069 -.31656 .91656 Equal variances not assumed .966 9.479E1 .337 .30000 .31069 -.31682 .91682 Discussion for educational area The table 4 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the educational area of self concept. In the educational area of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 8.7 and 1.40 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 8.4 and 1.69. The obtained‘t’ value is 0.96 which indicates that there is no significant difference with regard to educational area of self concept among male and female corporate employees. Table 5 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the moral area of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean moral scores male 50 8.7800 1.75301 .24791 female 50 9.0400 1.53809 .21752 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper moral scores Equal variances assumed 2.513 .116 -.788 98 .432 -.26000 .32981 -.91450 .39450 Equal variances not assumed -.788 9.637E1 .432 -.26000 .32981 -.91464 .39464 Discussion for moral area The table 5 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the moral area of self concept. In the moral area of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 8.78 and 1.75 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 9.04 and 1.53. The obtained‘t’ value is 0.78 which indicates that there is no significant difference with regard to moral area of self concept among male and female corporate employees. Table 6 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the intellectual area of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean int scores male 50 9.0000 1.77281 .25071 female 50 9.4200 1.12649 .15931 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. T df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper int scores Equal variances assumed 8.425 .005 -1.414 98 .161 -.42000 .29705 -1.00948E0 .16948 Equal variances not assumed -1.414 8.302E1 .161 -.42000 .29705 -1.01081E0 .17081 Discussion for intellectual area The table 6 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the intellectual area of self concept. In the intellectual area of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 9.0 and 1.77 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 9.42 and 1.12. The obtained‘t’ value is 1.41 which indicates that there is no significant difference with regard to intellectual area of self concept among male and female corporate employees. Table 7 shows the mean, standard deviation and‘t’ value for the total score of the self concept. Group Statistics male female N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean total male 50 52.3400 4.55627 .64435 female 50 53.3800 4.42115 .62524 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper total Equal variances assumed .571 .452 -1.158 98 .250 -1.04000 .89784 -2.82174E0 .74174 Equal variances not assumed -1.158 9.791E1 .250 -1.04000 .89784 -2.82176E0 .74176 Discussion for total score The table 7 shows the obtained values of mean, standard deviation and the‘t’ value for the total score of self concept. In the total score of self concept the mean and S.D obtained for male corporate employees is 52.3 and 4.55 respectively, the mean and S.D for female corporate employees is 53.5 and 4.42. The obtained‘t’ value is 1.15 which indicates that there is no significant difference with regard to the total score of self concept obtained by the male and female corporate employees. CONCLUSION 1. The obtained result indicates that there are no significant differences in the level of self concept among male and female corporate employees, which is not according to the hypothesis stated as “there is a significant difference in the level of self concept among male and female corporate employees”. 2. There is a signficant difference in the physical area of self concept among male and female corporate employees is according to the hypothesis. 3. There is no significant difference in the social area of self concept among male and female corporate employees is not according to the hypothesis stated as “there is a significant difference in the social area of self concept among male and female corporate employees”. 4. There is no significant difference in the temperamental area of self concept among male and female corporate employees is not according to the hypothesis stated as “there is a significant difference in the temperamental area of self concept among male and female corporate employees”. 5. There is no significant difference in the educational area of self concept among male and female corporate employees is not according to the hypothesis stated as “there is a significant difference in the educational area of self concept among male and female corporate employees”. 6. There is no significant difference in the moral area of self concept among male and female corporate employees is not according to the hypothesis stated as “there is a significant difference in the moral area of self concept among male and female corporate employees”. 7. There is no significant difference in the intellectual area of self concept among male and female corporate employees is not according to the hypothesis stated as “there is a significant difference in the intellectual area of self concept among male and female corporate employees”. LIMITATION 1. The size of the sample was restricted to 100 only. 2. The employees who were residents of bangalore were only considered 3. The employees whoses academic study boards were state syllabus were only considered 4. The employees working for non voice process were only considered. REFERENCES Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 263-295. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-esteem. In J. Robinson, P. Shaver, & L. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 115-160). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Burns, R. B. (1979). The self-concept: Theory, measurement, development, and behavior. New York: Longman. Byrne, B. M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54, 427-456. Byrne, B. M. (1990). Methodological approaches to the validation of academic selfconcept: The construct and its measures. Applied Measurement in Education, 3, 185-207. Byrne, B. M. (1996). Measuring self-concept across the life-span. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Chattopadhay, P., & George, E. (2001). Examining the effects of work externalization through the lens of social identity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 781- 788. Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593-623. Hansford, B. C., & Hattie, J. A. (1982). Self-measures and achievement: Comparing a traditional review of the literature with a meta-analysis. Australian Journal of Education, 26, 71-75. http://www.zenithresearch.org.in/images/stories/pdf/2012/May/ZIJMR/5_ZIJMR_Vol2_Issue5_May%202012.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315101634_Mini_Literature_Review_of_Self-Concept https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281175780_Role_of_Self-Concept_in_Organizations http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ijhrs/article/view/1119 Harter, S. (1990). Causes, correlates, and the functional role of global self-worth: A lifespan perspective. In R. Sternberg & J. Kolligan, Jr. (Eds.), Competence considered (pp. 67-97). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations in behavioral research (4th ed.). New York: Harcourt. Kramer, R. (1991). Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of categorization processes. In L. Cummings & B. Shaw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 13, pp. 191-228). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Labouvie-Vief, G., Orwell, L., Murphey, D., Chiodo, L., Krueger, C., Goguen, L., et al. (1994). Self and others in emotional development: A coding manual. Unpublished manuscript, Wayne State University at Detroit, MI. Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (2001). Identification in work, war, sports, and religion: Contrasting the benefits and risks. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31, 192-222. Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337. Marsh, H. W. (1986). Global self-esteem: Its relation to specific facets of self-concept and their importance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1224- 1236. Marsh, H. W. (1998). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 77-172. Marsh, H. W., & Young, A. (1998). Top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal models: The direction of causality in multidimensional, hierarchical self-concept models [Electronic version]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 509-527. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic. Serksnyte, L. (1999). Identities and organizations. New York: New School for Social Research, Department of Political and Social Science. Shamir, B. (1991). Meaning, self, and motivation in organizations. Organization Studies, 3, 405-424. Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Recent developments in theory and method. New Directions for Testing and Measurement, 7, 25-43. Steele, C. M. (1998). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261-302). New York: Academic. Wells, L. E., & Marwell, G. (1976). Self-esteem: Its conceptualization and measurement. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Zirkel, P. A. (1971). Self-concept and the “disadvantage” of ethnic group membership and mixture. Review of Educational Research, 41, 211-225.

self-concept,male and female corporate employess

"“GENDER DIFFERENCES IN SELF-CONCEPT LEVEL AMONG CORPORATE EMPLOYEES”", International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (www.jetir.org), ISSN:2349-5162, Vol.6, Issue 6, page no.801-813, June-2019, Available :http://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR1907112.pdf

"“GENDER DIFFERENCES IN SELF-CONCEPT LEVEL AMONG CORPORATE EMPLOYEES”", International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (www.jetir.org | UGC and issn Approved), ISSN:2349-5162, Vol.6, Issue 6, page no. pp801-813, June-2019, Available at : http://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR1907112.pdf