Previous research on self-other similarity judgments has demonstrated that perceived similarity between self and other depends on the focus of comparison. Based on the Selective Accessibility model, which assumes that comparisons with similar others yield assimilation, whereas comparisons with dissimilar others yield contrast, the author hypothesized that the focus of a social comparison would influence its consequences. Specifically, comparing the standard to the self (focus of comparison other → self) should increase perceived similarity so that self-evaluations are assimilated to the standard. Comparing the self to the standard (focus of comparison self → other), however, should reduce perceived similarity so that contrast ensues. This pattern was obtained in two studies. Moreover, Study 2 demonstrates that the occurrence of assimilation versus contrast as a consequence of manipulating the focus of comparison is mediated by the perceived similarity to the standard.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1993). Effects of social comparison direction, threat, and self-esteem on affect, self-evaluation, and expected success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 708-722.
2.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3.
Biernat, M., Manis, M., & Nelson, T. E. (1991). Stereotypes and standards of judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 485-499.
4.
Brewer, M. B., & Weber, J. G. (1994). Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 268-275.
5.
Brown, J. D., Novick, N. J., Lord, K. A., & Richards, J. M. (1992). When Gulliver travels: Social context, psychological closeness, and self-appraisals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 717-727.
6.
Buunk, B. P., Collins, R. L., Taylor, S. E., VanYperen, N. W., & Dakof, G. A. (1990). The affective consequences of social comparison: Either direction has its ups and downs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1238-1249.
7.
Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 51-69.
8.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
9.
Gibbons, F. X., & Gerard, M. (1989). Effects of upward and downward social comparison on mood states. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 8, 14-31.
10.
Goethals, G. R., & Darley, J. M. (1977). Social comparison theory: An attributional approach. In J. M. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes: Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 259-278). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
11.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.
12.
Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York: Guilford.
13.
Holyoak, K. J., & Gordon, P. C. (1983). Social reference points. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 881-887.
14.
Karylowski, J. J. (1990). Social reference points and accessibility of trait-related information in self-other similarity judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 975-983.
15.
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 91-103.
16.
Morse, S., & Gergen, K. J. (1970). Social comparison, self-consistency, and the concept of self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 148-156.
17.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (1999a). Comparing is believing: A selective accessibility model of judgmental anchoring. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 10). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
18.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (1999b). Hypothesis-consistent testing and semantic priming in the anchoring paradigm: A selective accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 136-164.
19.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000a). Consequences of social comparison: Selective accessibility, assimilation, and contrast. In J. Suls & L. Wheeler (Eds.), Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research (pp. 253-270). New York: Plenum.
20.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000b). The “relative self”: Informational and judgmental consequences of comparative self-evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 23-38.
21.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000c). The use of category and exemplar knowledge in the solution of anchoring tasks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1038-1052.
22.
Pelham, B. W., & Wachsmuth, J. O. (1995). The waxing and waning of the social self: Assimilation and contrast in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 825-838.
23.
Reis, T. J., Gerard, M., & Gibbons, F. X. (1993). Social comparison and the pill: Reactions to upward and downward comparison of contraceptive behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 13-20.
24.
Seta, J. J. (1982). The impact of comparison processes on coactors’ task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 281-291.
25.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26.
Srull, T. K., & Gaelick, L. (1983). General principles and individual differences in the self as a habitual reference point: An examination of self-other judgments of similarity. Social Cognition, 2, 108-121.
27.
Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 437-446.
28.
Taylor, S. E., Wayment, H. A., & Carrillo, M. (1996). Social comparison, self-regulation, and motivation. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (pp. 3-27). New York: Guilford.
29.
Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 181-227). New York: Academic Press.
30.
Tesser, A., Millar, M., & Moore, J. (1988). Some affective consequences of social comparison and reflection processes: The pain and pleasure of being close. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 49-61.
31.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, A. (1996). Social hypothesis testing: Cognitive and motivational factors. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 239-270). New York: Guilford.
32.
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327-352.
33.
Tversky, A., & Gati, I. (1978). Studies in similarity. In E. Rosen & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 79-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271.
35.
Wills, T. A., & Suls, J. (1991). Commentary: Neo-social comparison theory and beyond. In J. Suls & T. A. Wills (Eds.), Social comparison: Contemporary theory and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36.
Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 231-248.
