The similarity hypothesis: a test of the moderating role of social comparison orientation

Abstract

The purpose of the present experiment was to demonstrate how the classical similarity hypothesis (Byrne, 1971;Festinger, 1954) can be moderated by an individual difference variable called social comparison orientation (Gibbons & Buunk, 1999). This variable distinguishes people who exhibit different degrees of uncertainty about reality and self-knowledge. Based on prior studies on ability and opinion comparisons, we predicted that attitudinal similarity would not affect interpersonal attraction in high-comparison orientation individuals. Because of uncertainty and confusion about their selfknowledge, these people should be attracted to both similar and dissimilar others. In contrast, we expected an effect of attitude similarity in low-comparison orientation individuals because they do not exhibit this type of uncertainty. They should be only attracted to similar others who agree with them. The results con®rmed this prediction and suggested some directions for future studies.

Social Comparison Orientation Moderates the Effects of Group Membership on the Similarity-Attraction Relationship

“…Thus, high-SCO individuals seem to be more concerned with "being evaluated"than low-SCO individuals, and they can be affected differently by social comparisons (Buunk & Gibbons, 2006;Buunk et al, 2007). With regard to attitudes and opinions, Michinov and Michinov (2001) found that the similarity-attraction relationship did not appear among high-comparison orientation individuals. Because high-SCO individuals were uncertain about their attitudes and beliefs, they were attracted to both similar and dissimilar others to gain a clear assessment of reality and selfconcept (e.g., Butzer & Kuiper, 2006;Taylor & Mettee, 1971).…”

“…In these studies, the treatment of social comparison information by individuals has not yet been explored systematically. However, a number of studies have demonstrated that individual difference variables may influence the processing of social comparison information (Michinov & Michinov, 2001;Smith & Kalin, 2006;Wheeler, 2000). For instance, Wheeler (2000) noted that many inconsistent results in the literature on the effects of social comparison may be explained by individual difference variables (self-esteem, level of prejudice, neuroticism, agentic traits, social comparison tendencies).…”

“…Generally, individuals high in social comparison orientation have been defined by a combination of: (a) a high accessibility and awareness of the self (Stapel & Tesser, 2001), (b) an interest in what others feel and think (Buunk & Gibbons, 2006), and (c) some degree of negative affectivity and chronic uncertainty about the self (Butzer & Kuiper, 2006;Buunk & Gibbons, 2006). Several studies have demonstrated that individuals differ in their need for social comparison and that this individual orientation influences responses to social comparison information (Buunk & Gibbons, 2006;Buunk, Groothof, & Siero, 2007;Michinov & Michinov, 2001). Buunk and Gibbons (2006) pointed out that the consequences of social comparison information are more pronounced among high than low SCO individuals.…”

“…The main moderating factors studied in the literature include the group membership of the target under evaluation (e.g., Chen & Kenrick, 2002;Novak & Lerner, 1968), measures of attraction and context of interaction (e.g., Michinov & Monteil, 2002;Montoya & Insko, 2008), and individual variables related to differences in the processing of social comparison information (e.g., Michinov & Michinov, 2001;Smith & Kalin, 2006).…”

Psychographic measures and sensory consumer tests: When emotional experience and feeling-based judgments account for preferences

“…''I always pay a lot of attention to how I do things compared with how others do things"). We used the French version validated by Michinov and Michinov (2001). Items were rated on a 5-point agreement scale.…”