Social Comparison and Illusions of Invulnerability to Negative Life Events

Perloff, Linda S.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-9865-4_9

Cited by 80 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…. 1987 or of becoming the victim of critiie (e.g.. Perloff. 1987) are lower, and that Iheir own chances of buying a house (e.g., Weinstein,19S0) or developing a successful career (e.g.. Larwood & Whittaker.…”

Section: Hoorensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Favoring Biases, Self‐Presentation, and the Self‐Other Asymmetry in Social Comparison

Hoorens

1995

Journal of Personality

221

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between self-favoring biases in social comparison, favorable self-presentation, and well-being and the self-other asymmetry effect was examined. Participants gave comparative chance estimations and trait ratings for positive and negative future events and traits. One-half of the participants compared themselves to the average other, while the remainder compared the average other to themselves. All participants completed measurements of two types of desirable responding (self-deception and impression management) and of subjective well-being. Participants who compared themselves to another showed stronger unrealistic optimism and illusory superiority etTeets for positive (but not for negative) future events and traits than participants comparing another to themselves, demonstrating a self-other asymmetry eftect. Unrealistic optimism and illusory superiority concerning positive attributes were related to self-deception, while unrealistic optimism and illusory superiority concerning negative attributes were related to impression management. The relative independence of "positive" and "negative" self-favoring biases was further demonstrated by their differential relationship with self-esteem and subjective well-being.Most people believe that they are better and more competent than others (e.g., Alicke. 1985;Codol, 1975). For instance, lower levels of hostility (Kuiper & McDonald, 1982) and higher levels of responsibility The author wishes to thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier draft of this article. Special thanks arc due to Peter Harris for proofreading the final draft for linguistic errors.

show abstract

Section: Hoorensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Favoring Biases, Self‐Presentation, and the Self‐Other Asymmetry in Social Comparison

Hoorens

1995

Journal of Personality

221

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People tend to be overly positive about future events, often to the point of being unrealistically optimistic (Weinstein, ). Over the past several decades, various labels have been applied to this tendency of overestimating the likelihood of experiencing positive outcomes and underestimating the likelihood of experiencing negative outcomes (e.g., optimistic bias, positive illusions, unique invulnerability; Klein & Helweg‐Larsen, ; Perloff, ; Taylor & Brown, ; Weinstein & Klein, ; Weinstein & Lyon, ). However, a recent pivotal review (Shepperd, Klein, Waters, & Weinstein, ) advocated for consistency in labelling this phenomenon as unrealistic optimism and reviewed two main types of unrealistic optimism: Absolute and comparative.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concurrently examining unrealistic absolute and comparative optimism: Temporal shifts, individual‐difference and event‐specific correlates, and behavioural outcomes

Ruthig

Gamblin

Jones

et al. 2016

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers have spent considerable effort examining unrealistic absolute optimism and unrealistic comparative optimism, yet there is a lack of research exploring them concurrently. This longitudinal study repeatedly assessed unrealistic absolute and comparative optimism within a performance context over several months to identify the degree to which they shift as a function of proximity to performance and performance feedback, their associations with global individual difference and event-specific factors, and their link to subsequent behavioural outcomes. Results showed similar shifts in unrealistic absolute and comparative optimism based on proximity to performance and performance feedback. Moreover, increases in both types of unrealistic optimism were associated with better subsequent performance beyond the effect of prior performance. However, several differences were found between the two forms of unrealistic optimism in their associations with global individual difference factors and event-specific factors, highlighting the distinctiveness of the two constructs.

show abstract

“…Health-related 'unrealistic optimism', i.e. the tendency to underestimate own probabilities for negative life events compared to the probabilities of other people (Weinstein, 1980; see also Jungermann, Schutz, Theiaen and Doefke, 1991;Perloff, 1987) however, was unrelated to the mood induction procedure. Healthy subjects, in contrast, displayed mooddependent unrealistic optimism.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mood influences on health‐related judgments: Appraisal of own health versus appraisal of unhealthy behaviours

Abele

Hermer

1993

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Social Comparison and Illusions of Invulnerability to Negative Life Events

Cited by 80 publications

References 48 publications

Self‐Favoring Biases, Self‐Presentation, and the Self‐Other Asymmetry in Social Comparison

Self‐Favoring Biases, Self‐Presentation, and the Self‐Other Asymmetry in Social Comparison

Concurrently examining unrealistic absolute and comparative optimism: Temporal shifts, individual‐difference and event‐specific correlates, and behavioural outcomes

Mood influences on health‐related judgments: Appraisal of own health versus appraisal of unhealthy behaviours

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About