Who’s more generous than me? Children’s self-evaluation of their prosociality in normative social comparisons

2021 ◽  
Vol 201 ◽  
pp. 104996
Author(s):  
Bar Levy ◽  
Hagit Sabato ◽  
Yoella Bereby-Meyer ◽  
Tehila Kogut
2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 426-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane P. Sheldon

One’s perceived competence relates to participation and effort and can vary depending on the self-evaluation sources that athletes value. Ruble and Frey (1991) theorized that phase of skill development may affect one’s preference for different sorts of competence information. The present study tested Ruble and Frey’s model using a sample of 466 adult tennis players. Skill level was athletes’ United States Tennis Association rating. Participants rated the personal importance of tennis and the importance of different sources of self-assessment information. Results showed that beginners were more likely to value temporal comparisons, and advanced players were more likely to value social comparisons. Players rating tennis as highly important were more likely to value temporal comparisons and effort for self-assessment. The findings support Ruble and Frey’s model.


Author(s):  
Vera Ćubela

This paper presents a review of some basic theories and empirical findings about the social comparison processes. Festinger’s theory of social comparison processes was not just the first attempt to systematically elaborate the role of these processes in self-evaluation, but remains also one of the most cited references in social comparison literature. After Festinger’s pioneering work, two basic lines in the development of this research area could be distinguished. The first line, which is based on Festinger’s basic assumption that people compare to others primarily when objective standards for self- evaluation are unavailable, is characterised by the research focus on the preference for specific directions of self-evaluative social comparisons and the relative importance in self-evaluation of social comparison and other types of comparisons, such as temporal comparisons. The second, more recent one, focused more on the consequences and the motives of social comparison, especially on the self-enhancement motive. It was established that these comparison processes are related to other motives as well (e. g. self-protection, self-improvement etc), and that, in addition to comparison direction and motives, the consequences of social comparison also depend on some other factors, such as an individual’s self-esteem level, personal control, his/her perceived closeness and similarity with comparison target, the nature of the comparison dimension etc. The last part of this paper presents an overview of the main methodological approaches in social comparison research, including some useful suggestions for the researchers with regard to some particular procedures and techniques for the assessment of social comparisons.


2020 ◽  
pp. 194855062095653
Author(s):  
Ethan Zell ◽  
Tara L. Lesick

People evaluate themselves more favorably when they are a big fish in a little pond than a little fish in a big pond. The present research demonstrates that this tendency is exacerbated in extreme social comparison conditions, explains why, and highlights practical implications. Study 1 participants were told that they were a big (little) fish in a little (big) pond or a huge (tiny) fish in a tiny (huge) pond. Results provided evidence for a huge-fish-tiny-pond effect and showed that it is significantly larger than the big-fish-little-pond effect. Study 2 demonstrated that the huge-fish-tiny-pond effect reflects a neglect group rank information and Study 3 suggests that it inflates self-views. These experiments are the first to document the huge-fish-tiny-pond effect, which was highly robust (overall d = 2.05) and suggest that extreme social comparisons magnify self-evaluation tendencies.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 797-822 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Freedman

International Relations scholars concerned with explaining status-seeking behavior in the international system draw heavily from social comparison theory and its observations that individuals judge their worth, and accordingly derive self-esteem, through social comparisons with others. According to this logic, states become status seekers because, like individuals, they have an innate desire for favorable social status comparisons relative to their peers. Thus, the great power status literature is often framed in the language of accommodation, and adjustment, which presupposes that status insecurities develop from unfavorable social comparisons and can be resolved through relative social improvements. This article challenges these assumptions by noting, as psychology has acknowledged for some time, that individuals use both social and temporal forms of comparison when engaging in self-evaluation. Where social comparisons cause actors to ask “How do I rank relative to my peers?” temporal comparisons cause actors to evaluate how they have improved or declined over time. This article advances a temporal comparison theory of status-seeking behavior, suggesting that many of the signaling problems associated with status insecurity emerge from basic differences in how states evaluate their status, and whether they privilege temporal over social comparisons. The implications are explored through China’s contemporary struggle for status recognition, situating this struggle within the context of China’s civilizational past and ongoing dispute over Taiwan.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document