Personalized and Generalized Comparisons: Causes and Consequences of Variations in the Focus of Social Comparisons

Abstract

When people compare with another person they can focus on how they compare either with just that target (a personalized comparison) or with others more generally (a generalized comparison). Four studies (two event-contingent diary studies, one study of comparisons during a triathlon, and one controlled experiment) showed that personalized comparisons were more likely when the target’s attribute was distinctive or there was an interaction or a close or emotional relationship with the target. Perhaps because these conditions that increase interest in the target as a distinct individual were less common during the triathlon than in everyday life, personalized comparisons were relatively uncommon during the triathlon but relatively common in everyday life. Across studies, generalized comparisons magnified the impact of upward comparisons on overall feelings (but not on interpersonal feelings about the self-target relationship), presumably because generalizing broadens the implications of comparisons, whereas personalizing restricts their relevance to the self-target relationship.

Transcribing and Transcending the Ego

“…Comments about "constantly rating, judging, comparing, or sizing people up," during and, retrospectively, before the diary period, were commonplace. These data contrast sharply with reports of approximately one to two comparisons per day, on average, provided by participants in other diary studies (Antony et al, 2005;Bogart et al, 2004;Locke, 2007;Patrick et al, 2004). The discrepancy may be accounted for by the possibility that individuals in the present study were more motivated to follow the study procedure (because this was a voluntary part of the course curriculum) and more introspectively sophisticated (because they were largely psychology majors who also received brief mindfulness training) than those in other studies.…”

Social Comparison in Physical Education: An Examination of the Relationship Between Two Frames of Reference and Engagement, Disaffection, and Physical Self-Concept

“…In addition, the results suggest that the generalized other (the class) has a more significant influence on students than do comparisons with individuals. These findings support the work of Locke () and suggest that the generalized other produces a broader understanding of the self rather than comparing with an individual, which may reflect a more restricted view of the self. These results supported our prediction that the higher the PRSC was, the higher individuals’ PSC was (Chanal & Sarrazin, ).…”

“…The importance of different frames of reference has been investigated in other areas of psychology as well. In an examination of personalized and generalized comparisons, Locke () found that the emotional consequences of generalized comparisons were greater (when an upward comparison was engaged in) than those of personalized comparisons. Locke suggests that this is due to the restrictive nature of personalized comparisons, whereas those comparisons that are more generalized expand the relevance of comparison information and, therefore, have a bigger impact on an individual.…”

Interpersonal Moderators of the Effects of Upward Comparisons on Ability Judgments

“…Such comparisons are not representative of the spontaneous comparisons people make in the course of their everyday lives (Locke & Nekich, 2000). Of particular relevance to the current investigation is the finding that in at least two thirds of naturally occurring social comparisons the targets are known others, and most of these known targets are friends and relatives (Locke, 2003(Locke, , 2007. Findings from studies of constrained comparisons with strangers may not always generalize to these more complicated comparisons with known targets-people with whom there are preexisting feelings and interdependencies-that populate everyday life.…”

“…Studies of naturally occurring social comparisons have shown that more than two thirds of comparisons are personalized comparisons in which the comparer's main concern is ''How do I compare particularly with this one person'' rather than ''How do I compare with others in general'' (Locke, 2007). Personalized comparisons occur more often when the comparer feels close to or strongly about the target and when the target's attribute is distinctive, presumably because these conditions prompt the comparer to focus on the target as a distinct individual (Locke, 2007). Alicke et al (1997) proposed that ''exaggerating the outperformer's ability is a construal mechanism that negates the potentially negative implications of unfavorable social comparisons by allowing inferior performers to discount the relevance of the comparison'' (p. 782).…”