Purpose
Aversive appearance-related comparisons (i.e., threatening one’s own motives) show stronger associations with depression, psychological well-being, and self-esteem than appetitive comparisons (i.e., consonant with or challenging one’s motives). However, the relevance of their congruent (i.e., equal) and incongruent (i.e., unequal) presence remains unknown.
Methods
By using response surface analysis, we investigated differential associations of congruent high levels of aversive and appetitive comparisons with depression, well-being, and self-esteem relative to incongruent high levels of aversive (or appetitive) comparisons. Participants (N = 1112) responded to measures of depression, psychological well-being, self-esteem, and the Comparison Standards Scale for Appearance. The latter assesses aversive and appetitive social, temporal, counterfactual, criteria-based, and dimensional comparisons regarding their frequency, discrepancy to the standard, and affective impact.
Results
Results confirmed our preregistered hypotheses. First, higher levels of congruent frequency, discrepancy, or affective impact were associated with higher depression, and lower well-being and self-esteem. Second, a greater predominance of aversive over appetitive comparisons was associated with higher depression, and lower well-being and self-esteem. Third, a predominance of appetitive over aversive comparison was associated with lower depression, and higher well-being and self-esteem.
Conclusions
The distinct patterns of the (in-)congruence of aversive and appetitive comparisons have important research and clinical implications.
