Concept Self-Possible: Content and Structural Aspects

Introduction. In the conditions of socio-economic uncertainty, changes in the usual way of life and life scenarios, the Self-Possible becomes particularly important as a way of understanding and planning the life perspective of an individual. Theoretical analysis shows that the content and structure of the Self-Concept, as well as its differences from other dimensions of the Self-concept, remain unevenly developed and require further clarification.

Objective. Generalization of the content and structural aspects of the Self-Possible on the basis of theoretical analysis.

Theoretical review. Since the introduction of the concept of "Self-Possible", and the study of the desired and avoided Self-Possible, it has been expanded by identifying additional types, which has strengthened the explanatory potential of this dimension. This, in particular, made it possible to explain the paradox of simultaneous stability and variability of the Self, as well as to clarify the complex and nonlinear nature of the relationship between the Self-concept and personal behavior.

It is noted that the Self-Possible correlates with various spheres of a person's life activity and can be updated both simultaneously and in different time periods.

Discussion. It is shown that the content of the Self-Possible is a multidimensional organization of the individual's ideas about himself in the perspective of a possible future, including cognitive and emotional components. These representations differ in their value-semantic orientation, time perspective, degree of realism, detail, and subjective significance. It is noted that the structure of the Self-Possible is revealed in the relationships between its components, relationships with other dimensions of the Self-concept, primarily with the Self-Future and the Self-Ideal, in the ratio of various types of Self-Possible, their connection with personal goals, behavioral regulation, individual psychological characteristics, levels of organization and psychological states. Along with this, the Self-Possible performs an integrative function, linking ideas about the future with the current experience and behavior of the individual.

Conclusion. The study of the Self-Possible is of practical importance, since it allows us to better understand how a person's ideas about the possible future are related to his motivation, choice of goals and behavioral characteristics. 

1. Altintas, E., Karaca, Y., Moustafa, A. A., & El Haj, M. (2020). Effect of best possible self-intervention on situational motivation and commitment in academic context. Learning and Motivation, 69, 101599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101599

2. Baranova, A. V., & Mustafina, L. Sh. (2023). Selection of possible "I's" in young people with different personality characteristics. Personality in a Changing World: Health, Adaptation, Development, 11(2), 117–128. (In Russ.)

3. Belinskaya, E. P. (1999). Temporal aspects of Self-concept and identity. World of Psychology, 3, 40–46. (In Russ.)

4. Cross, S., & Markus, H. (1991). Possible selves across the life span. Human Development, 34, 230–255. https://doi.org/10.1159/000277058

5. Efthymiadou, E., Gonida, E. N., & Kiosseoglou, G. (2025). Academic possible selves, motivational beliefs, and self-regulation among adolescents attending general and vocational schools. Behavioral Sciences, 15(2), 158. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15020158

6. Fevzieva, A. A. (2024). The Best Possible Self Intervention: the diversity of formats and the equality of effectiveness. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 13(1), 109–117. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2024130110

7. Golovin, S. Yu. (1998). Dictionary of practical Psychology. AST; Harvest. (In Russ.)

8. Grishina, N. V. (2018). "Self-changes" of personality: possible and necessary. Bulletin of the Saint Petersburg State University. Psychology and pedagogy, (2) (8), 126–138. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.202 (In Russ.)

9. Grishutina, M. M., & Kostenko, V. Yu. (2018). The Impossible Self: A preliminary study in the context of H. Markus' Theory. Penza Psychological Bulletin, 1(10), 126–148. (In Russ.)

10. Grishutina, M. M., & Kostenko, V. Yu. (2019). Possible and impossible Selves: refinement of constructs. Bulletin of the Saint Petersburg State University. Psychology, 9(3), 268–279. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu16.2019.304

11. Grishutina, M. M., & Kostenko, V. Y. (2022). Variety of possible selves: The role of agency and empirical evidence review. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 19(2), 405–423. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2022-2-405-423

12. Hershfield, H. E. (2011). Future self-continuity. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(3), 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06201.x

13. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319–340.

14. Horstmanshof, L., & Zimitat, C. (2004). The elaboration of the student self and persistence in higher education. In NZARE and AARE Conference 2003. NZARE and AARE.

15. Janerian, S. T. (2004). Professional Self-concept: system analysis. (In Russ.)

16. Karpenko, L. A., Petrovsky, A. V., & Yaroshevsky, M. G. (1998). A brief psychological dictionary. Phoenix. (In Russ.)

17. King, L. A. (2001). The health benefits of writing about life goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(7), 798–803. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201277003

18. King, L. A., & Mitchell, G. L. (2015). Lost possible selves and personality development. In K. Cherry (Ed.), Traumatic stress and long-term recovery (pp. 309–325). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18866-9_17

19. King, L. A., & Raspin, C. (2004). Lost and found possible selves, subjective well-being, and ego development in divorced women. Journal of Personality, 72(3), 603–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00274.x

20. Kostenko, V. Yu. (2016). Possible Self: The Hazel Marcus approach. Psychology. HSE Journal, 13(2). (In Russ.)

21. Leontiev, D. A. (2022). Toward the psychology of the Possible: anthropological, deterministic, axiological, and existential contexts. Bulletin of the Saint Petersburg State University. Psychology, 12(2), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu16.2022.201 (In Russ.)

22. Loveday, P., Lovell, G., & Jones, C. (2018). The best possible selves intervention: A review of the literature. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9824-z

23. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954

24. Minyurova, S. A., & Shcherbakova, K. M. (2011). Psychological content of the value perspective of the "possible Self" image. Pedagogical Education in Russia, 1, 198–205. (In Russ.)

25. Nekrasova, N. A., Nekrasov, S. I., & Sadikova, O. G. (2008). Content and form. MSURE (MIIT). (In Russ.)

26. Oyserman, D., & Horowitz, E. (2023). From possible selves and future selves to current action. Advances in Motivation Science, 10, 73–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adms.2022.11.003

27. Oyserman, D., Brickman, D., & Rhodes, D. (2007). School success, possible selves, and parent school involvement. Family Relations, 56, 479–489. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2007.00475.x

28. Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., Terry, K., & Hart-Johnson, T. (2004). Possible selves as roadmaps. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00057-6

29. Oyserman, D., Destin, M., & Novin, S. (2015). The context-sensitive future self. Self and Identity, 14(2), 173–188.

30. Peters, M. L., Flink, I. K., Boersma, K., & Linton, S. J. (2010). Manipulating optimism. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(3), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439761003790963

31. Philosophical Encyclopedia. (1983). Soviet Encyclopedia. (In Russ.)

32. Podenkov, A. O., & Avanesyan, M. O. (2026). Possible Selves and maintaining the integrity of the individual in a situation of broken expectations. National Psychological Journal, 21(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.11621/npj.2026.0106 (In Russ.)

33. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. Basic Books.

34. Schindler, I., Berg, C., Butler, J., Fortenberry, K., & Wiebe, D. (2010). Shared possible selves and well-being. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 65B(4), 416–424. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbq030

35. Schwartz, S. J., et al. (2011). Handbook of identity theory and research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_6

36. Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How to increase and sustain positive emotion. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760500510676

37. Sinchurina, M. G. (2012). Structure of the Self-concept: integration of scientific ideas. Siberian Pedagogical Journal, 2, 115–119. (In Russ.)

38. Spauls, J. (2021). Bolstering youth mental health and wellbeing (Doctoral thesis). University of East Anglia.

39. Stevenson, J. (2012). Possible selves and degree attainment. Higher Education Studies, 2(4), 103. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v2n4p103

40. Stoddard, S. A., Pierce, J., & Schmidt, C. J. (2016). Grade-level differences in future-oriented self-concept. Journal of School Nursing, 32(6), 390–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059840516649236

41. Stolin, V. V. (1983). Self-awareness of the individual. Moscow University Press. (In Russ.)

42. Strachan, S. M., Marcotte, M. M., Giller, T., Brunet, J., & Schellenberg, B. J. I. (2016). Increasing physical activity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 31, 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.05.001

43. Syroseva, E. A. (2024). Features of possible Self and value orientations in individuals with various manifestations of computer gaming activity. Penza Psychological Bulletin, 2(23), 56–67. (In Russ.)

44. Vasilevskaya, E. Yu., & Molchanova, O. N. (2016). Possible Selves: a review of foreign research. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 13(4), 801–815. (In Russ.)

45. Vick, R. M. (2011). Possible selves and academic self-regulation (Bachelor’s thesis). Mount Holyoke College.

46. Volchenkova, E. A., & Molchanova, O. N. (2019). Lost Possible Selves: content and relation to psychological well-being. Bulletin of the Saint Petersburg State University. Psychology, 9(3), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu16.2019.306 (In Russ.)

47. Wakslak, C. J., Nussbaum, S., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2008). Representations of the self in the near and distant future. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 757–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012939

48. Wilson, S. J., Barrineau, M. J., Butner, J., & Berg, C. A. (2014). Shared possible selves and perceived wellness. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(5), 684–691. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000015