Leon Festinger formulated a theory in 1954 referred to as social comparison theory, which has played a major role in understanding the behavior of individuals in the current society. People rarely accomplish their tasks without actually comparing their abilities with those of friends, age-mates, work-mates, and close family members.
Through comparison, people are able to distinguish their abilities, attitudes, beliefs, and principles. Studies show that people would most probably compare themselves with those close to them socially and culturally. This means that comparison has is influenced by some variables, including age and social status.
Comparison takes two major forms, which in include upward comparison and downward comparison (Littlepage, Perdue, & Fuller, 2012). In an upward scenario, an individual compares his abilities, values, sets of beliefs, and achievements with those of another person who is above him or her in age or social status.
As the name suggests, upward evaluation entails contrasting oneself with those in high positions. On the other hand, downward assessment takes place when an individual compares him or herself with people below his social ladder. The theorist noted that people compare themselves with others mainly to determine their strength in society or the level of respect in society.
Existing body of knowledge shows that researchers have conducted extensive studies on the subject of social comparison. Their findings are sometimes conflicting while at times converging.
One of the studies conducted by Muller, Bushman, Subra, and Ceaux (2012) established that those who are better off in life tend to shout more on those who are perceived to be dwarf. Their study proved that a less capable individual could not shout at an individual he or she knows is above the social status of his or her class.
There study set out a hypothesis asking whether a student who performs dismally in class could shout the loudest when given an opportunity to compete with the best student in class. Here is their research question, “Who is more likely to behave aggressively? Is it someone outperformed by others or is it someone who outperformed others?
They established the answer to their question by setting conducting an experiment using two students. In the experiment, the best student was selected in class, as well as an averagely performing student. They were then asked to shout who among them was the best (Mussweiler, 2001). The best student shouted the most, with confidence while the average student lacked the vigor and confidence.
The findings of the study confirmed that comparison helps an individual to do better in the future in order to avoid embarrassment and shame. Those with high results in life have high self-esteem as compared to those performing dismally or averagely. From the findings of these scholars, individuals performing well will always dominate a group because they are believed to be strong.
This applies both in the economic and social life because those with high economic statuses are handled with care while those with low levels of economic development are simply mistreated. In school, students with good grades are believed to be better leaders as compared to those with poor grades.
Pinel and Long (2010) conducted an extensive study to determine the influence of subjective experiences on the unity of members of an in-group. The study sought to find out why members of one group would mingle easily as compared to members of a different group. They also sought to find out whether the I-sharing idea facilitates unity among members of a salient out-group.
The scholars conducted three experiments, with each test being performed using different samples. The results of the first test established that the I-sharing encourages the unity with members of the opposite sex from the opposite group, but not all members of the opposite group. This was the trend even for the individuals perceived to be with salient social identities.
The second experiment was not so different from the first test because it also showed that members of different groups based their liking on sex of the opponent, even though it was about sexual orientation, but not simply biological sex. Those with similar sexual orientations would definitely go together as opposed to those with dissimilar sexual orientations.
The results of the third test were very different because members expressed their liking based on the race of the other member from the opposite group. The third test revealed that an individual tends to admire the race of the opposite member because of certain qualities and strengths associated with certain races.
However, the study concluded that for top managers, race and biasness are not some of the factors that lead an individual to admire the other member from the opposite group. Executives admire other people based on their professional achievements and success. A professional would only want to associate with an individual believed to have achieved a lot in his or her career.
In this regard, he or she compares him or herself with achievers and winners, not people from his race or those from the opposite sex. Their conclusion also suggested that I-sharing idea has a way of improving the performance of an individual at the work place. People are able to express their social identities through I-sharing idea.
Bauer (2011) conducted a longitudinal study in Canada among adults to establish their levels of emotional reactions once they go through a traumatizing event or failure. The study concluded that adults tend to compare themselves with people from low social status once they fail to convene their goals in life.
They resort to downward comparison as a defense mechanism because they have no choice. In the study, separate tests involving adults with varying ages were conducted. The results were uniform for all tests meaning that age does not prevent an individual from comparing him or herself with people from low status once he or she fails to achieve the desired goals.
If an individual seems to be achieving his or her ambitions, he or she would definitely compare him or herself with those in high status (Fragale, Overbeck, & Neale, 2011). The findings of the first experiment showed that people compare themselves with those in low status mainly to prevent regretting.
The results of the second test proved that resorting to comparison after failure helps people in preventing the occurrence of serious psychological disorders.
In fact, separate studies have shown that those who prefer comparing themselves with people from low class are likely to live the same life after failure or occurrence of a disastrous event as compared to those who mourn and complain after the event. Those who complain and mourn would most probably suffer from other disorders such as depression and stress.
VĂ©ronneau (2011) conducted a study in one of the most controversial subjects, which is adolescence. Studies on adolescence have failed to generate uniform results because of the changes in the behavior of adolescents. She underscored the fact that adolescence stage is one of the most important stages in the growth and development of human beings mainly because it is a stage where the behavior of an individual changes drastically.
An individual experiences the development of new features, such as the genitals, which changes his or her socialization. At the stage, individuals are expected to achieve best results, both academically and socially. The school management and parents have a role to play in molding the future of an individual at this stage.
In this regard, the school should consider all aspects that are critical to the success of the individual. However, the above scholar notes that the school has never appreciated the influence of peers and friends to the academic life of an individual.
The above scholar suggests that the peer plays an extremely important role during the middle schooling stage of an individual. She undertook a study to establish the effects of friends and peers in the sixth to eighth grade. She also observed that the characteristics of students could influence their performance in class.
The social students can easily form relationships, which are very important to their studies while those with antisocial behavior would be avoided. The researcher undertook a quantitative study by utilizing a sample of 1278 students, 698 being girls. She employed the regression method as a method of data analysis.
The regression results showed that students with many friends would perform well by the time they reach grade 8, as opposed to those with few friends. However, students with unproductive friends would still perform dismally because they cannot receive any form of academic help.
The study revealed that girls who had friends while in grade six would perform so poorly by the time they reach grade eight in case they drop friends. Girls who retained friends from grade six to grade eight would perform excellently. The study showed that friends play a significant since they are used as models.
Just as Véronneau had earlier commented, Molloy, Gest and Rulison launched a study to establish the role of friends and peers in an individual’s life at the adolescence stage. However, their study was a bit different because it focused on establishing the effects of various types of peer relations.
The scholars came up with three types of peer relations, which are known to influence the behavior of peers in academics and social life. Reciprocated friendship, frequent interactions, and shared group membership are some of the relationships. These relationships are acquired once an individual attains the age of adolescence and are expected to persist until adulthood.
They play an important role because they encourage the development of self-concept and a positive attitude towards education. The above scholars employed a similar method as the one that VĂ©ronneau utilized in her study, including the method of data analysis. The regression results in this study proved that the socialization of the adolescent relies on his or her ability to form friends.
Academic self-concept was high in adolescents who engaged in academics quite often as opposed to those whose interactions were based on other things. In other words, adolescents who related in terms of academics could easily achieve high results.
In the study, it was concluded that each youth has a role to play as far as the strengthening of interactions is concerned. Youths with an ability to compliment their talents would probably do well in class.
Jordan, Mullen, and Murnighan (2011) made their contribution in the field of social comparison by observing that people’s desire is to see that they are viewed as moral individuals in society. In case they are viewed as moral people, they would easily achieve their ambitions, even if it might be so difficult.
The desire to be moral develops a sense of completeness, which encourages people to work hard. The above scholars introduced an additional theory referred to as the self-completion theory, which they used to explain the behavior of individuals as far as comparison is concerned. The first step towards achieve recognition as a moral person entails recalling the meaning of moral before acting in any interaction or relationship.
They argue that people who recall their negative behaviors before acting would most likely behave in a positive way (Camille, & Lammers, 2012). They conducted three experiments independently to validate their claims. The first study proved that people are tempted to behave in accordance with the provisions of the societal rules and regulations once they recall the immoral behavior that they have even executed.
The second experiment showed that people tend to develop a pro-social behavior or attitude once they recall the negative behavior. Through the third study, it was clear that people cheat less once they recall a negative behavior.
This study shows that self-evaluation is an important component of social comparison because an individual could recall an event that might have let him or her down. This would definitely prevent him or her from repeating the same mistake.
References
Bauer, I. (2011). Sequential Effects in Essay Ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(1), 68-79.
Camille, S., & Lammers, J. (2012). The powerful disregard social comparison information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 329-334.
Fragale, A., Overbeck, J., & Neale, M. (2011). Resources versus respect: Social judgments based on targets’ power and status positions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 767-775.
Jordan, J., Mullen, E., & Murnighan, K. (2011). Striving for the Moral Self-: The Effects of Recalling Past Moral Actions on Future Moral. Behavior Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(1), 701-713
Littlepage, G., Perdue, E., & Fuller, D. (2012). Choice of Information to Discuss: Effects of Objective Validity and Social. Validity Small Group Research, 43(1), 252-274.
Molloy, L., Gest., & Rulison, K. (2011). Peer Influences on Academic Motivation: Exploring Multiple Methods of Assessing Youths’ Most “Influential” Peer Relationships. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31(1), 13-40.
Muller, D., Bushman, B., Subra B., & Ceaux, E. (2012). Are People More Aggressive When They Are Worse Off or Better Off Than Others? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(1), 754-759.
Mussweiler, T. (2001). Focus of Comparison as a Determinant of Assimilation Versus Contrast in Social Comparison. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(1), 38-47.
Pinel, E., & Long, A. (2010). When I-sharing meet: Sharing Subjective Experience with someone from the out-group. Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1), 296-307.
VĂ©ronneau, M. (2011). Middle School Friendships and Academic Achievement in Early Adolescence: A Longitudinal Analysis. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31(1), 99-124.