It’s Different when I Do it: Feature Matching in Self-Other Comparisons

Abstract

Two studies explored the application of feature-matching and cancellation models to self-other comparisons. College participants completed a questionnaire about their religious behaviors and saw another questionnaire supposedly completed by another student. Participants in Study 1 (N = 114) who were explicitly provided direction of comparison instructions showed a direction of comparison effect, rating the person whose questionnaire they saw last as more religious. Participants in Study 2 (N = 103), who were not given explicit direction of comparison instructions, did not. Most important, in both studies, the extent to which self and other overlapped on shared features affected self- and other judgments asymmetrically. Participants appeared to cancel out behaviors shared by the self and other when rating the other person (i.e., they gave lower ratings when there was more overlap) but not when rating themselves.

Evaluative contrast in social comparison: the role of distinct and shared features of the self and comparison others

“…As expected, the tendency to show contrastive evaluative reactions was undermined when participants were attuned to shared characteristics, despite the fact that the manipulation of perceived similarity was only partially successful. This finding is consistent with other research showing that shared and unique features are adjusted to each other in comparative evaluations (Hodges et al, 2002;Houston & Sherman, 1995) and also with research showing that assimilation and contrast can be simultaneous effects (e.g. Manis et al, 1991;Mussweiler & Strack, 2000b).…”

Self–other similarity judgment asymmetries reverse for people to whom you want to be similar

“…One consequence of self-construal may thus be to influence the choice of focal hypothesis in a self-other similarity judgment. Hodges et al (2002) focus on religious identity, for example, may have primed an interdependent self-construal in American participants, causing a reversed asymmetry. Religious identity emphasizes connectedness to others, and interdependence is a hallmark of religious communities, as Markus and Kitayama noted (1991, p. 228).…”

“…One study (Hodges, Bruininks, & Ivy, 2002; Study 1) found an unpredicted significant reversal of the self-other similarity asymmetry for American students. Hodges et al first had participants judge how religious they and a comparison other were.…”

The order effect in self–other predictions: considering target as a moderator

“…Because social comparison involves a comparison between a familiar entity, the self, and less familiar entity, a similar other, it is not surprising, that researchers have examined feature-matching effects in social comparison (e.g., Hodges et al, 2002;Mussweiler, 2001;Srull & Gaelick, 1983). Indeed, Srull and Gaelick's (1983) reasoning for explaining order effects in social comparison in perceived similarity by applying feature-matching theory, inspired our theoretical reasoning for explaining order effects in social prediction.…”

“…For example, it is possible that the use of the self in social prediction is an implicit process, but making the self explicit interrupts that implicit process from occurring. Additionally, one could investigate whether the similarity of self and other increases as a function of their common features and decreases as a function of their distinctive features (e.g., Hodges et al, 2002) or whether and how self-other correspondence in social prediction varies as a function of desirable and undesirable traits in self and others (Stapel & Koomen, 2001). …”