Social Comparison, Self-Consistency and the Presentation of Self (original) (raw)
Related papers
SOCIAL COMPARISON, SELF-CONSISTENCY, AND THE CONCEPT OF SELF
The social comparison process presents a potential source of instability in self-conception. In this study, job applicants casually encountered a stimulus person whose characteristics were either socially desirable or undesirable. Half the subjects in each of these conditions found the other was competing with them for the same position, and half did not. Preliminary assessments were also made of the subjects' level of self-consistency. The major dependent variable was self-esteem change. As predicted by comparison theory, the socially desirable stimulus person produced a significant decrease in self-esteem, while the undesirable other significantly enhanced subjects' self-estimates. Subjects low in self-consistency were most affected by the presence of the other, while extent of competition had no effect. It was also found that similarity between subject and stimulus person tended to enhance self-esteem, while dissimilarity tended to reduce it.
Studies in social comparison—Introduction and overview
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1966
Studies in Social Comparison-Introduction and Overview From the simple assumption that humans have a drive to evaluate themselves, Leon Festinger in his theory of social comparison processes (1954) derived a coherent and extensive theoretical structure from which predictions concerning a wide range of social phenomena can be drawn. Within this theoretical structure such problems as social attraction and rejection, competition and cooperation, group formation and structure, and communication and attitude change can all be treated. The power
Classic and current social comparison research: Expanding the perspective
Psychological Bulletin, 1990
This article assumes that social comparisons (a) constitute comparative judgments governed by the general process that applies to all judgments, (b) possess a common comparative structure including simple judgments of comparison stimuli and their juxtaposition, and (c) possess unique contents that determine the subjective meanings of comparison outcomes and their psychological implications. Examined in these terms, classical social comparison theory is found wanting in two respects: (a) It conveys a relatively fixed notion of social comparison in which people are generally driven to compare and do so mostly with respect to similar others and predominantly for the sake of evaluative accuracy. (b) Its narrow scope excludes numerous significant issues of interest to social comparison research today. It is proposed that the present, multilevel approach is useful for ordering past social comparison research and provides a heuristically rich paradigm for future work. Although interest in social comparison phenomena has waxed and waned over the years, Festinger's (1954a, 1954b) theory of social comparison processes has remained the most influential conceptual framework to guide this domain of study (Goethals, 1986). The theory of social comparison rests on the assumption that people Possess a drive to evaluate their opinions and abilities. This may take place by reference to physical reality (as in assessing one's ability to lift a weight by actual attempts to do so), or, where objective means of evaluation are unavailable, by comparison with other people. A major tenet of the theory has been that similar rather than dissimilar others provide the more desirable standard for comparison. Consequently, in order to precisely evaluate their opinions and abilities, persons were assumed to generally prefer comparisons with individuals who are similar to themselves. Over the years, Festinger's theory has undergone a number of revisions and extensions. In particular, new domains of comparison have been proposed (e.g, emotions, see Schachter, 1959; and values, see Goethals & Dadey, 1977). Similarly, additional motives relevant to comparison processes have been enumerated, such as the needs for self-enhancement (Gruder, 1971), validation (Goethals & Darley, 1977), maintenance of a positive self-evaluation (Tesser & Campbell, 1982), closure, and the avoidance of closure (Kruglanski & Mayseless, 1987). Furthermore, situations have been identified where dissimilar rather than similar others are preferred as targets of comparison
Introduction: social comparison processes and levels of analysis
Social Comparison and Social Psychology, 2005
''I do not know how far I differ from other people. That is another memoir writer's difficulty. Yet to describe oneself truly one must have some standard of comparison; was I clever, stupid, good looking, ugly, passionate, cold-? Owing partly to the fact that I was never at school, never competed in any way with children of my own age, I have never been able to compare my gifts and defects with other people's'' (Virginia Woolf, A sketch of the past, autobiographical writings of 1939) Fifty years ago, Festinger (1954) published a Theory of social comparison processes. Today, thirty-five social and cognitive psychologists who share a common interest in comparison processes combined their efforts to make this new book on the same topic a reality. Few theories in social psychology have stood the test of time as successfully as the theory of social comparison. Even today, major theoretical and empirical papers on social comparison processes are being published in the best scientific journals (for example,
Toward mindful social comparison: When subjective and objective selves are mutually exclusive
New Ideas in Psychology, 2007
This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy is furnished to the author for non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the author's institution, sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit:
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Past work has argued that comparison mindsets affect stereotyping: perceivers in a difference mindset stereotype less than those in a similarity mindset, contrasting their judgments of an individual away from their representation of the group. Here, we argue that the self can also act as a reference point, implying that the impact of comparison mindsets depends on what is focal.
Identity, Sexuality, and Relationships among Emerging Adults in the Digital Age, 2000
In this chapter, the author is interested in studying more about self-comparison through social media; especially in Jakarta, Indonesia. In Indonesia, social media are commonly used and widely used by various groups. As many as 93% of Internet users in Indonesia are accessing Facebook. Jakarta is even referred as the capital of a text-based social media. The use of social media can be influenced by the collective culture in Indonesia. In this case social media is not just a tool but also the social environment, in which social interaction occurs. This is also influences how individuals view themselves. The topic of the psychological effects of social media has been much discussed. A lot of research conducted on the effect of social on development of self-concept and including self-esteem. Social media becoming a place for comparing oneself to others and it turn out it has a great effect.