Social Comparison as a Self-regulatory Measuring Stick

McIntyre, Kevin P.; Eisenstadt, Donna

doi:10.1080/15298861003676529

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Essentially, the argument for a negative association between self-discrepancy and positive outcomes is similar to SDT in that less selfdiscrepancy means that one is closely aligned with their ideal and/or ought self, which promotes positive outcomes and selfassurance (Renaud & McConnell, 2007). Consistent with this supposition, empirical work has shown that lower levels of actual: ideal and actual:ought discrepancy are related to greater selfesteem and more positive affect (e.g., happiness, cheerfulness; e.g., McIntyre & Eisenstadt, 2011;Moretti & Higgins, 1990).…”

Section: Extending Beyond the Original Sdtmentioning

confidence: 87%

Self-discrepancy theory as a transdiagnostic framework: A meta-analysis of self-discrepancy and psychopathology.

Mason

Smith

Engwall

et al. 2019

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-discrepancy theory (SDT) is a model of the relations between the self and affect which has been applied to the study of different types of psychopathology including depression, anxiety, and eating disorders. Although the theory itself is compatible with a transdiagnostic perspective on psychopathology, to date no systematic review of the literature has examined that possibility. We conducted a meta-analysis that synthesized the literature on self-discrepancy and psychopathology across a heterogeneous range of 70 studies. Results showed a small-to-medium association between self-discrepancy and psychopathology that was highly robust and similar in magnitude across domains. Furthermore, self-discrepancy was related to higher levels of a range of negative emotions and lower levels of a range of positive emotions. Meta-regression models showed that the effects were greater for actual:ideal discrepancy compared with actual:ought discrepancy for both depression and anxiety, which was contrary to the tenets of SDT which suggests specific associations between actual:ideal discrepancy and depression and actual:ought discrepancy and anxiety. Measurement type (i.e., idiographic vs. nomothetic) was a significant predictor of the effects for depression and anxiety, such that nomothetic measures evidenced greater associations compared with idiographic measures. Our findings could suggest that self-discrepancy represents a contributory factor related to a number of psychiatric disorders. However, the tenet of SDT suggesting unique associations between actual:ideal and actual:ought discrepancy and anxiety and depression respectively was not supported. Implications are discussed for future research on self-discrepancy and psychopathology including the study of mechanistic frameworks.

show abstract

Section: Extending Beyond the Original Sdtmentioning

confidence: 87%

Self-discrepancy theory as a transdiagnostic framework: A meta-analysis of self-discrepancy and psychopathology.

Mason

Smith

Engwall

et al. 2019

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, research on the self has shown that social comparisons can also heighten other comparative processes, such as self-comparisons to important personal standards (McIntyre & Eisenstadt, 2011). Because self-comparisons that evoke discrepancies between one’s ideal and ought self can induce negative feelings about the self (Higgins, 1987; Michalos, 1985), heightened self-comparisons could also impact one’s SWB (Diener, Lucas, & Oishi, 2002).…”

Section: The Relationships Between Subjective Ses Objective Ses and Swbmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association between objective and subjective socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: A meta-analytic review.

Tan¹,

Kraus

Carpenter³

et al. 2020

Psychological Bulletin

311

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analysis tested if the links between socioeconomic status (SES) and subjective well-being (SWB) differ by whether SES is assessed objectively or subjectively. The associations between measures of objective SES (i.e., income and educational attainment), subjective SES (i.e., the MacArthur ladder SES and perceived SES), and SWB (i.e., happiness and life satisfaction) were synthesized across 357 studies, totaling 2,352,095 participants. Overall, the objective SES and subjective SES measures were moderately associated (r = .32). The subjective SES-SWB association (r = .22) was larger than the objective SES-SWB association (r = .16). The income-SWB association (r = .23) was comparable with the ladder SES-SWB association (r = .22) but larger than the perceived SES-SWB association (r = .196). The education-SWB association (r = .12) was smaller than the associations with both measures of subjective SES. The subjective SES-SWB association was partially explained by common method variance. The subjective SES-SWB association, particularly with the ladder SES measure, also mediated the objective SES-SWB association. In moderation analyses, the objective SES-SWB associations strengthened as samples increased in wealth and population density. The subjective SES-SWB associations strengthened as samples increased in population density, decreased in income inequality, and decreased in relative social mobility. The role of common method variance, social comparisons, and other processes in explaining the SES-SWB links are discussed.

show abstract

“…In this new era, adopters have the dual task of establishing a stable and meaningful relationship with their adopted child while maintaining at the same time the child’s connection to their birth family (Jones and Hackett 2007 ). In addition, previous studies underline that adoption openness is considered beneficial for all parties (adoptees, adoptive parents, and birth parents; McIntyre and Eisenstadt 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adoption openness and adoption stigma: a retrospective study of adult adoptees

Grigoropoulos

2022

SN Soc Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explored adult adoptees’ experiences and challenges concerning their adoption and the extent to which adoption issues were openly discussed within the adoptive family. Listening to the perspective of adoptees is important as their experiences, and expectations can influence their well-being and the success of their placement. Fourteen adult adoptees participated in this study. Qualitative data were gathered using semi-structured interviews. Interviews took place between June 2020 and November 2020. The analysis of transcripts was conducted according to the interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) guidelines. Three themes related to the aims of the current research emerged from the data: (a) adoption secrecy, (b) adoptees' expectations for communication openness, and (c) adoption stigma. This study provides valuable insight into adoption communication openness, recognition of adoption stigma, and adoption microaggressions. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43545-022-00339-2.

show abstract

Social Comparison as a Self-regulatory Measuring Stick

Cited by 24 publications

References 54 publications

Self-discrepancy theory as a transdiagnostic framework: A meta-analysis of self-discrepancy and psychopathology.

Self-discrepancy theory as a transdiagnostic framework: A meta-analysis of self-discrepancy and psychopathology.

The association between objective and subjective socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: A meta-analytic review.

Adoption openness and adoption stigma: a retrospective study of adult adoptees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About