A field study of social comparison processes in ability evaluation*

Foddy, Margaret; Crundall, Ian

doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1993.tb01002.x

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The BFLPE hypothesis is based on the assumption that social comparison is situationally imposed, and the standard of comparison is the average ability or achievement of the peer group. However, in a study of spontaneous social comparison behaviors of firstyear college students, Foddy and Crundall (1993) found most students compared themselves with either similar or better-off students. There was a distinct lack of interest in downward comparison, regardless of ability levels, presumably because downward comparison is not informative for performance evaluation, albeit its self-enhancing effect, a finding consistent with Ruble and Flett's (1988) suggestion that students' social information seeking is an active process, rather than a passive one.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

The Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here?

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The big-fish-little-pond effect (BFLPE) refers to the theoretical prediction that equally able students will have lower academic self-concepts in higher-achieving or selective schools or programs than in lower-achieving or less selective schools or programs, largely due to social comparison based on local norms. While negative consequences of being in a more competitive educational setting are highlighted by the BFLPE, the exact nature of the BFLPE has not been closely scrutinized. This article provides a critique of the BFLPE in terms of its conceptualization, methodology, and practical implications. Our main argument is that the BFLPE, while having added to our understanding of the origins of self-concepts, disproportionately emphasizes one aspect of social comparison to the exclusion of many other intervening factors. In light of our critique, we suggest a broader conception of social comparison effects on academic self-concept that emphasizes a more active role of individuals in regulating their social cognition and motivation, as well as a more distinct effect of social-contextual influences. We also suggest alternative research designs that would incorporate contextual, developmental, and individual differences as potential moderators or mediators of the BFLPE. What is the BFLPE?The big-fish-little-pond effect (BFLPE) was proposed by Marsh and Parker (1984;Marsh 1984Marsh , 1987 based on the assumption that students use a local "frame of reference" to form their self-concepts on a relevant dimension of the self. Marsh and Parker operationalized the frame of reference or standard of comparison to be school-average ability level 1 . Thus, the general theoretical prediction based on the BFLPE is that equally able students will have lower academic self-concepts in higher average-ability schools but higher self-concepts in comparatively lower average-ability schools. In plain language, whether one perceives oneself as a big fish depends on the size of the other fish (more accurately, the average size of the other fish) in the pond. The stronger the peer group as a frame of reference, the lower one's academic self-concept. By the same token, weaker peer groups lead to higher academic self-concepts.Since Marsh and his colleagues proposed the BFLPE model, numerous studies have been conducted to date (see Marsh and Hau 2003;Marsh et al. 2005;Marsh et al. 2007, for most recent studies), and the areas where the BFLPE is investigated have also been extended from academic to artistic and athletic, among others (e.g., Chanal et al. 2005). The research interest generated by the BFLPE model is largely due to its practical implications. Marsh (1987;Marsh et al. 2004) has repeatedly warned that parents who are eager to send their children to selective schools should be aware of possible negative consequences associated with the BFLPE. Moreover, based on the fact that people are constantly working in social settings that potentially provide social comparative information and salient cues for social comparison, the BFLPE shoul...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 95%

The Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here?

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although non-comparison has been virtually ignored by researchers (Foddy and Crundall, 1993), Breakwell suggested that it might be a valid route for maintaining self-esteem. She hypothesized that multiply disadvantaged groups had learned that social comparisons`bring nothing but grief ' (1986a, p. 176).…”

Section: Still Negative Identity?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Homelessness and strategies of identity maintenance: a participant observation study

Farrington

Robinson

1999

J. Community. Appl. Soc. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to investigate identity maintenance strategies used by a low status group, a covert participant observation study was conducted in a shelter for the homeless. From Social Identity Theory and previous research on the homeless, it was hypothesized that the identity maintenance strategies used would dier as a function of longevity of homelessness: the shortterm homeless (52 years) would be less likely to identify themselves as homeless (social mobility), while the longer-term homeless (42 years) would identify themselves as homeless but engage in various types of social creativity to mitigate their situation. In addition to the strategies described in SIT, it was conjectured that some of the longest-term homeless would have given up making any intergroup or other social comparisons. Of the various strategies found, some were beyond SIT. The pattern of strategy use was best interpreted mainly as a function of longevity of homelessness, but this was moderated by both experience and personality. A trajectory of change in identity strategies with longevity of homelessness was oered as a plausible frame of reference for further research. Methodological limitations, implications for Social Identity Theory and recommendations for improving the situation of the homeless were discussed.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, in keeping with the original Festinger (1 954) theoretical statement, most of this research has been non-specific with respect to the particular ability question being asked by the comparer. What there is of this research has produced inconsistent results, some studies showing heightened certainty from comparison with similarly performing others (Foddy & Crundall, 1993;Wilson, 1973), other studies showing no effect for similarity of own and other's performance (Gastorf & Suls, 1978). One study in which participants were specifically requested to assess the level of their ability relative to that of a comparison other, based on relative performance information, indicated that those who compared with a similarly performing other were actually le~s confident in their relative ability appraisals than were those who compared with others whose performance was different from their own (Schwartz &Smith, 1976).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…In general, research on the impact of social comparison information upon aspects of ability evaluation has been relatively uncommon (Foddy & Crundall, 1993;Wood & Taylor, 1991). Research targeted on the impact of relativeperfmmance information (as opposed to relative standing on performance-related characteristics such as sex and major in collegesee Goethals & Darley, 1977) is even rarer.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social comparison and task prediction: Ability similarity and the use of a proxy

Smith¹,

Sachs²

1997

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is argued that an important aspect of the self-appraisal of ability involves a person's prediction of his or her own performance level on untried tasks through acquisition of knowledge about how other people have fared at the task. These others are treated as substitutes for a person's own participation in the task--as proxies. It is further argued that social comparison plays a significant role in both the selection of proxies and the impact of proxy information on task prediction. The first experiment, following earlier research on comparison preference in the context of performance prediction, showed that participants interested in performance prediction chose a proxy who had performed at about the same level as they had on a reference task, while those interested in improving their performances chose to see the performances of someone who had done far better than they on the reference task. The second study indicated that participants made more confident predictions for themselves from a similar proxy's task outcome than from that of a proxy whose ability was unknown to them. Participants predicted they would do worse than a more able proxy and better than a less able proxy, but were less confident in their predictions than were those with a similar proxy. Ratings of usefulness of the proxy followed the patterns of confidence ratings closely.

show abstract

A field study of social comparison processes in ability evaluation*

Cited by 20 publications

References 13 publications

The Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here?

The Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here?

Homelessness and strategies of identity maintenance: a participant observation study

Social comparison and task prediction: Ability similarity and the use of a proxy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About