Self-prioritization effects (SPE; Sui et al., 2012) and related phenomena like we-prioritization effects (WPE; Constable et al., 2019) are generally discussed as being genuinely based on prioritized processing of self-related stimuli. Here, we assume that these types of prioritization effects can (at least partially) be explained by the Polarity Correspondence Principle (PCP, Proctor & Cho, 2006). This principle states that in binary classification tasks participants arrange the stimulus and response alternatives on plus and minus poles, respectively. Responses are faster if stimulus and response poles correspond. Applied to the SPE, in self-related matching trials all plus polarities meet (i.e., self-label, self-shape, yes response). To test this assumption, participants learned to associate geometric shapes with a self-relevant and one other-relevant label (Experiment 1) or two different other-relevant labels (i.e., the more common version of the paradigm; Experiment 2). In a between-design, participants were instructed to affirm either “mono-combinations” (label-shape combinations where label and shape refer to the same person) or “duo-combinations” (label-shape combinations where the label refers to one and the shape to another person). Thus, according to the polarity rationale, matching self-related trials are still “+++” in the “mono” condition, but “++–” in the "duo” condition. In the “mono”-block we found a clear SPE in both experiments. In the “duo” block, however, the SPE disappeared (Experiment 1) or was significantly reduced (Experiment 2). We applied the same logic to WPEs and found similar results. These results suggest that a substantial part of prioritization processes can be explained by the PCP.