Temporal Comparisons in a Social World

2019 ◽  
pp. 309-344
Author(s):  
Anne E. Wilson ◽  
Erin Shanahan
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Relative Frequency ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Social World ◽  
Appraisal Theory ◽  
Temporal Comparison ◽  
Active Selection ◽  
Future Selves

People evaluate themselves against a variety of standards. In addition to measuring themselves against relevant others (social comparisons), individuals often appraise their current selves by looking to their former and future selves (temporal comparisons). This chapter first considers temporal comparison in relation to social comparison and then describes processes of temporal self-appraisal in more detail. The authors first consider the relative frequency and impact of temporal comparison relative to social comparison and describe how comparison preference and impact depends on method, context, and self-appraisal goals. Both comparison types are meaningful, and people show considerable fluidity in their use of these self-appraisal standards. Next, the authors describe temporal self-appraisal theory, which unpacks the nuanced mechanisms underlying active selection and construction of temporal comparisons, drawing parallels to similar social comparative processes.

Comparisons Across Dimensions, People, and Time: On the Primacy of Social Comparison in Self-Evaluations

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 791-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ethan Zell ◽  
Jason E. Strickhouser
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
The Other ◽  
Affective Reactions ◽  
Past Performance ◽  
Temporal Comparison ◽  
Upward Comparison

People often consider how their performance in one domain compares to their performance in other domains, the performance of other people, and their past performance (i.e., dimensional, social, and temporal comparison). The present research is the first to test whether social comparisons have a significantly larger effect on self-evaluations than dimensional and temporal comparisons. Study 1 participants received downward versus upward dimensional, social, and temporal comparison feedback ( N = 393). Study 2 participants received downward versus upward comparison feedback for one type and lateral comparisons for the other two types ( N = 281). Dimensional and social comparison significantly influenced self-evaluations and affective reactions in both studies. As anticipated, however, social comparison had a significantly larger effect on self-evaluations and affective reactions than either dimensional or temporal comparison. These data provide novel, causal evidence for the primacy of social comparison when people receive three feedback types.

scholarly journals Do Superordinate Identification and Temporal/Social Comparisons Independently Predict Citizens’ System Trust? Evidence From a 40-Nation Survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Caricati ◽  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Chiara Bonetti
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Positive Function ◽  
System Justification ◽  
World Value Survey ◽  
Temporal Comparison ◽  
Time Points ◽  
National Identification ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Identity Approach

Do superordinate in-group bias as well as temporal and social comparisons offer standalone explanations for system justification? We addressed this question using the latest World Value Survey (7th Wave), combining the responses of 55,721 participants from 40 different nations. Results from a random slope multilevel model showed that superordinate (national) identification, temporal comparison (i.e., the outcomes of an individual relative to those of his/her parents at different time points), and social comparison (based on income levels) were independent and positive predictors of system justification. Specifically, system justification increased when national identification was high, when income increased (i.e., the socioeconomic comparison was positive), and when the outcomes of citizens improved relative to the outcomes of their parents at relevant time points (i.e., the temporal comparison was positive). Incidentally, we also observed an interaction between national identification and temporal comparison (but not with social comparison), indicating that positive temporal comparison seemed to have a reduced effect (but still significant) for highly identified citizens. These results are supportive of the social identity approach to system justification and suggest that support for societal systems is a positive function of people’s personal and group interests.

Envy and Social Comparison

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels van de Ven ◽  
Marcel Zeelenberg
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Past Work ◽  
Good Fortune ◽  
Malicious Envy ◽  
The Social ◽  
Upward Social Comparison

Upward social comparison can give rise to the emotion of envy: the pain caused by the good fortune of others. We explain what envy is, and what the possible function of envy is to an organism experiencing it. We provide an overview of past work on envy, the distinction between two subtypes (benign and malicious envy), possible antecedents of envy, possible consequences of envy, and the responses to being envied by others. In each of these areas there are clear links to research on social comparison, and research on envy has greatly benefitted from insights from the social comparison literature. Given the surge in research on envy in the last decade, we hope that the findings on envy can also inspire those investigating social comparisons.

scholarly journals Performance-based Social Comparisons in Humans and Long-tailed Macaques

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-350
Author(s):  
Stefanie Keupp ◽  
Farhan Abedin ◽  
Lena Jeanson ◽  
Carolin Kade ◽  
Josefine Kalbitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Task Type ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
Evolutionary Origins ◽  
Human Thinking ◽  
Human Participants ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Foraging Task

Social comparisons are a fundamental feature of human thinking and affect self-evaluations and task performance. Little is known about the evolutionary origins of social comparison processes, however. Previous studies that investigated performance-based social comparisons in nonhuman primates yielded mixed results. We report three experiments that aimed (a) to explore how the task type may contribute to performance in monkeys, and (b) how a competitive set-up affects monkeys compared to humans. In a co-action touchscreen task, monkeys were neither influenced by nor interested in the performance of the partner. This may indicate that the experimental set-up was not sufficiently relevant to trigger social comparisons. In a novel co-action foraging task, monkeys increased their feeding speed in competitive and co-active conditions, but not in relation to the degree of competition. In an analogue of the foraging task, human participants were affected by partner performance and experimental context, indicating that the task is suitable to elicit social comparisons in humans. Our studies indicate that specifics of task and experimental setting are relevant to draw the monkeys’ attention to a co-actor and that, in line with previous research, a competitive element was crucial. We highlight the need to explore what constitutes “relevant” social comparison situations for monkeys as well as nonhuman animals in general, and point out factors that we think are crucial in this respect (e.g., task type, physical closeness, and the species’ ecology). We discuss that early forms of social comparisons evolved in purely competitive environments with increasing social tolerance and cooperative motivations allowing for more fine-grained processing of social information. Competition driven effects on task performance might constitute the foundation for the more elaborate social comparison processes found in humans, which may involve context-dependent information processing and metacognitive monitoring.

Comparing One and Many

2019 ◽  
pp. 386-429
Author(s):  
Eleanor Putnam-Farr ◽  
Carey K. Morewedge
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Mental Processes ◽  
Comparison Research ◽  
Anchoring Bias ◽  
Comparison Standards ◽  
One And Many ◽  
Selection Of

Social comparisons are not only ubiquitous and influential but also represent a naturally occurring example of more general evaluative judgment. As such, they can be examined using the general types of mental processes that are used in the judgment and decision-making literature. While the direction of social comparison processes can be easily characterized as upward or downward, for instance, their specific calibration (e.g., sensitivity to absolute differences) is more difficult to determine. Insights gleaned from judgment and decision-making can inform research examining the calibration of social comparisons to different standards. In turn, the specific lessons gleaned from social comparisons, particularly with respect to how comparison targets are chosen, can inform judgment and decision-making. The chapter begins with a successful example of the integration of these literatures, research on anchoring bias. The authors then explain how social comparison research might benefit from judgment and decision-making research examining how calibration and sensitivity to absolute differences depend on the number of standards in the comparison set and their relative position on a continuum. The authors review different prototype, exemplar, and hybrid models explaining how people compare a target to distributions and sets of multiple standards, which could be of use to researchers examining social comparisons to multiple targets and groups. The chapter ends by noting how judgment and decision-making may benefit from the insight that social comparisons provide into the selection of comparison standards and directions for cross-pollination between these fields.

Envy and Social Comparison

2019 ◽  
pp. 226-250
Author(s):  
Niels van de Ven ◽  
Marcel Zeelenberg
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Past Work ◽  
Good Fortune ◽  
Malicious Envy ◽  
The Social ◽  
Upward Social Comparison

Upward social comparison can give rise to the emotion of envy: the pain caused by the good fortune of others. This chapter explains what envy is and what the possible function of envy is to an organism experiencing it. The authors provide an overview of past work on envy, the distinction between two subtypes (benign and malicious envy), possible antecedents of envy, possible consequences of envy, and the responses to being envied by others. In each of these areas, there are clear links to research on social comparison and research on envy has greatly benefited from insights from the social comparison literature. Given the surge in research on envy in the last decade, the authors hope that the findings on envy inspires those investigating social comparisons.

scholarly journals Kant be Compared: People High in Social Comparison Orientation Make Fewer—Not More—Deontological Decisions in Sacrificial Dilemmas

2020 ◽  
pp. 194855062094729
Author(s):  
Alexandra Fleischmann ◽  
Joris Lammers ◽  
Paul Conway ◽  
Adam D. Galinsky
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Moral Dilemmas ◽  
Dark Side ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Social Comparison Orientation ◽  
Harm To Others ◽  
Conventional Study ◽  
Consistent Support

The current work tests whether the dispositional tendency to compare oneself to others—social comparison orientation (SCO)—impacts decisions in moral dilemmas. Past research offers two competing predictions for how SCO impacts moral decision making: (a) SCO increases deontological judgments because people high in SCO care especially about social norms versus (b) SCO decreases deontological judgments because people high in SCO are competitive and thus unconcerned about causing harm to others. Four studies (two preregistered) find consistent support that SCO decreases deontological decisions. This relationship was robust in employing conventional (Study 1) and process dissociation (Studies 2–4) dilemma analytic techniques. Furthermore, we find that psychopathy uniquely mediates decreased deontological decisions among people high in SCO (Study 4). These results indicate that high-SCO people make fewer deontological decisions because they are less concerned with causing harm. Overall, the current research suggests that there is a dark side to making social comparisons.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document