Festingers Social Comparison Theory Psychology Essay

Festingers cordial equation Theory Psychology EssayIn this essay we be asked to go out at Festingers tender relation possibility and its findings, applications, methodologies and theoretical approaches since its birth. We be asked to garnish our understandings with reference to literature.Social par surmisal assumes that great deal tend to label their successes, failures and opinions in relation to separates (Festinger, 1954). This may occur with reference to a natural reality what is happening at a particular moment in time relative to ones perceptions of a nonhers abilities. Take for example if someone stinker exercise a 6 minute mile he or she cannot receipt this is good or large(p) without comparing this time with other runners. It may as well take place with reference to an objective paygrade, for example a simile between two assignments with similar grades. Festinger (1954) postulates that thither is an innate grow within human beings to contrast themse lves with outside images and evaluate their abilities in arguing with their assessments of others who are similar on the same tasks. Following on from Festingers (1954) accredited theory according to Kruglanski Mayseless (1990) nation prefer to compare themselves with commonwealth who are similar to themselves as it tends to result in a more faithful evaluation. For example the runner would take into account age and sex of other runners and make comparisons based on this knowledge.Social comparisons are defined as comparative judgements made nearly a stimulus from the environment. They are circumstance dependent (Kruglanski Mayseless, 1990). There are three levels of analysis to Social comparative Theory. Firstly a judgemental process must exist before comparisons can be made. Social comparisons are made up of categorisations and comparative judgements about the self. The third level is the most specific of the three and is composed of the contented of the comparison whe ther it is in the domain of comparison for example in uninfected competition levels of achievement with reference to age and gender may be taken into consideration, as outlined by the runner example(Kruglanski et al., 1990).There are two main kinds of companionable comparison upward and downwards kind comparisons. Upwards comparisons occur when an individual compares itself to someone who they believe to be bettor off than themselves. Downwards kind comparisons occur when good deal compare themselves to the great unwashed they believe to be worse off than themselves. Festinger (1954) paint a pictures that people who engage in downwards neighborly comparisons do so in order to oppose their self regard as and buffer their self evaluations. Upwards kindly comparisons purportedly exhibit more negative do such as let down levels of self- prise. These processes will be discussed later. There bring in been many another(prenominal) components to Festingers authoritative th eory that still remain intact but the scope of fond comparison theory has been extended to a vast array of psychological domains and its implications suffer been applied to a variety of settings.How SCT findings, methodologies and theorising has evolved since Festingers 1954 publicationFestingers original theory has undergone a number of changes over the years particularly in relation to its wing towards cognitive psychology. Since its implanting the theory has been accepted to be more labyrinthine than originally thought. For example new dimensions of the theory have been suggested. Revisions include en empirical emphasis on motivations and drives, self enhancement, perceptions of self esteem, self esteem buffering, comprehend target closeness, components of closure to name but a hardly a(prenominal) (Kruglanski et al., 1987 Corning, 2002, Gerrard, Gibbibs, Lane Stock, 2005).According to Suls, Martin bicycler (2002) social comparisons serve as a defence mechanism to prote ct ones self evaluation. Self enhancement depends on a number of variables such as whether the individual compares upwardly or down. If a psyche compares his or her own abilities in relation to people comprehendd to be lower than the individual this may act as a buffer to maintain the person sense of self price and esteem. In the educational domain, people that are less academically operate prefer downwards social comparisons to prevent them from felling bad about bad results (Blankton et al., 1999). interrogation suggests that people have varying responses to social comparisons and these depend upon the perceived closeness of the target and the perceiver, and the importance of the particular domain of categorisation or expertise owned by the perceiver (Tesser, 1988 Suls et al., 2002).Several other models have been introduced to extend Festingers (1954) original theory. Social comparisons proxy model as proposed by Wheeler, Martin Suls (1997) refers to a situation in which peop le use social comparisons to assess their abilities in relation to an unfamiliar task. To illustrate, Wheeler et al., (1997) offers the example of a person considering pursuing a university degree. Social comparisons are made between the person and others who are currently in university. If the proxy (experienced other) is similar to how they perceive themselves on average they are more the likely to pursue the goal. Amount of driveway needed to pursue goal is an key indicator of the outcome and a good deal other related attributes are perceived irrelevant (Suls et al., 2002). There seems to be sufficient evidence to support this theory.A model that has been derived from SCT is the Relative red Theory as proposed by Davis (1959). This model provides a conceptual example for personal perceptions of discrimination and deprivation. Davis (1959) postulates that this process helps people cope with social deprivation, people tend to assess their levels of deprivation by comparing th eir situation with those rough them. In India because of the inflexibility of the Caste system people often compared themselves downwardly in order to deal with their present state of poverty, for example those animation in the slums would compare themselves to the sewage dwellers or pavement people. This acts as a buffer for people to cope better with their unchangeable circumstances.The applications of Festingers (1954) theory are vast. The implications have many important effects particularly for health psychology. Research suggests that when a panic is involved downward social comparisons help people cope better. For breast cancer patients it was tack together that patients who preferred downwards social comparisons dealt with their illness much better (Taylor, Wood Lichman, 1983). Likewise, according to Meta analysis, comparisons of the self to others in relation to appearance can lead to body dissatisfaction which correlates strongly with take disorders (Myers Crowther, 2009). In conjunction with Meta Analysis Corning, Kruum Smithans (2006) find out looking at social comparisons and eating disorder symptoms found that women who engage in everyday social comparisons were more likely to exhibit eating disorder symptoms, and also found that self esteem was also a previseor of disorders. Research reveals that social comparisons can also predict success in cessation of green goddess demeanors (Gerrard, Gibbons, Lane Stock, 2005). People that dissociate themselves from other smokers or the target behaviour are more likely to give up ingest in comparison to those who do not. When a decrease in downwards comparisons to smoking exists, smokers are more likely to quit.Social comparison theory has also been applied to an academic setting. Research suggests that upwards social comparisons can predict success in an academic environment. Gibbons, Benbow Gerrard (1994) found that gifted students preferred to compare themselves with those who did the best in the class on receiving a high grade. Conversely, if students current a poor mark they preferred downwards comparisons. This inconsistency is considered by the researchers to represent a form of buffering of the self concept and esteem. Research conducted by Blankton, Buunk, Gibbons Kuyper (1999) found that overall those who preferred upwards social comparisons did better in end of term grades.Interaction between affect and social comparisonComparisons may involve affective and cognitive components. The Wheeler Miyake (1992) study that structured the Rochester Social Comparison Record (RSCS) scale found several important findings conveying the importance of the cognitive and affective component. Firstly the comparison direction, all upwards or downwards depended on the perceivers relationship with the target. It also found evidence for a cognitive component to the theory, that is to say, priming clime effects the directional movement of social comparisons. Schacter (1959) pr oposes that people make comparisons by evaluating emotions. In a number of experiments he found that fear evoked participants to take to be in a situation where someone else was experiencing the same feelings. This has been explained as a self evaluative component similar to what Festinger outlines in his original theory (Schacter, 1959). Conversely, Goethals Darley (1977) suggest that values are a component people make social comparisons based upon. Priming of a negative mood led to more upward social comparisons. Wills (1981) found that inducing threat leads to more downwards social comparisons this is explained as downwards comparisons serve to growth locateive affect, mood, boost esteem and may reduce anxiety. Another study found that comparisons can lead to an induction of a positive or negative feeling (Buunk, Collins, Taylor, VanYperen Dakof, 1990). Downwards social comparisons increased peoples subjective offbeat and an opposite effect was found for the upwards compari son (Wheeler et al., 1992). Being prime with either a threatening ego or self-esteem suspensor condition has a significant effect on individual social comparisons. When an ego boost is induced people tend to prefer upwards social comparisons and can this can predict behaviour i.e. individuals exhibited increased tycoon on a task. The opposite effect was found for an induced threat, withal to Buunk et als. (1990) findings. Thus it has been concluded that motivations to maintain a positive self evaluation reflects performance on tasks (Johnson Stapel, 2007). Lastly people who exhibited high self esteem tended to engage in more self-enhancement comparisons (Wheeler et al., 1992).There seems to be a present consensus that SCT exists but the exact dimensions of the theory are contested. The methodologies used tended to be loosely qualitative and really not applicable to the natural world. According to Wheeler Myiake (1992) existing methodologies for studying social comparisons hav e focused primarily on retrospective accounts and specify that an experience sampling measure should be fitted to account for social comparisons as they occur in naturalistic settings. In their 1992 study they describe a qualitative method of measuring SCT called the Rochester Social Comparison Record (RSCR) (Wheeler et al., 1992).Discussion ConclusionIt has been assumed that social comparison theory is a pervasive and ubiquitous phenomenon in everyday life. However, there still needs to be a lot of ready conducted in this area particulary in relation to directional comparisons and their implications (Buunk et al., 1990). Albeit, despite revisions on social comparison theory the fundamental building blocks of Festingers (1954) original theoretical fashion model remains the same. The self evaluative component is important for this theory (Suls et al., 2002). As proposed by Festinger (1954) people make evaluations of their own behaviours in relation to others that they perceive ar e similar, this aspect has remained untainted. There seems to be evidence for this drive like ambition for humans to compare themselves in relation to others (Festinger, 1954).There seems to be a distinct cognitive component to social comparison theory. Suls et al. (2002) propose that comparisons are made uniformly across all domains and are not exponentially context driven. Priming can effect comparative judgements (Wills, 1992 Schacter, 1959). electric current research in this domain outline that comparative knowledge depends on the motivations of the comparator and are dependent upon a number of situational, cultural and personality facets. Kruglanski et al., (1990) posit that motivational factors, perceived relevance, and availability heuristics all have an important design in whether the evaluative dimension relates to similar or different others. The work on social comparison theory has been extended to practical applications to health, discuss psychology and educational ps ychology. Over all social comparison theory has had a major impact in Psychology. Its implications and applications have been extended to many branches of psychology and undoubtedly the full extent of its pervasiveness have yet to be uncovered.