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

ABSTRACT 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 effects for positive (but not for negative) future events und traits than participants comparing another to themselves, demonstrating a self-other asymmetry effect. 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.     

Saving for a Rainy Day? Comparative Optimism About Disability in Old Age

This study examined young (n = 40) and middle‐aged (n = 30) adults' susceptibility to comparative optimism and comparative pessimism regarding disability in old age and their willingness to save for long‐term care. Participants rated their risk of diverse levels of disability in old age, compared to another similar person, and indicated the amount of money they would be willing to save for future long‐term care. While middle‐aged participants showed the same level of comparative optimism for diverse disability levels, younger participants showed increasing levels of comparative optimism with increasing disability. Participants' comparative optimism levels and age both predicted their intentions to save. The findings are discussed in terms of theories of judgment and behavioral decision making.     

Comparative optimism and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic

Past research suggests that being comparatively optimistic about one's risk for disease is associated with benefits to mental health, such as lowered stress and anxiety. However, few studies have longitudinally examined whether comparative optimism has the same protective benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic. The current study examined levels of comparative optimism, changes in comparative optimism over time, and the association between comparative optimism and COVID-related mental and physical health outcomes among a US adult sample during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants completed online surveys at four timepoints, over the course of four weeks in May and June of 2020. Results from paired-samples t-tests revealed that comparative optimism was present, such that participants estimated their risk for COVID-19 as being significantly lower than that of others their age and sex. Results from linear mixed models suggested that people who were more comparatively optimistic reported lower anxiety, depression, and stress. However, at times when people were more comparatively optimistic, they also reported greater depression and poorer sleep quality. Together, the findings suggest that the relationship between comparative optimism and health may be more complex than previously anticipated and further research is needed to examine the potential pathways through which comparative optimism affects health.     

The Effect of Reducing Opportunities for Downward Comparison on Comparative Optimism

Comparative optimism is a pervasive tendency for people to rate personal future prospects more favorably than those of comparable others. This may be caused by deliberately choosing targets on the basis of vulnerability. Restricting the range of comparison targets reduces the opportunity to make downward comparisons and should reduce comparative optimism. We asked 100 undergraduates to assemble a list of other students known to them. Participants estimated their personal risk of being victim of a road crash and skin cancer, and estimated the risk of 2 targets from the list. The participant selected one target, while the experimenter randomly chose the other target. Comparative optimism was greater in the participant-selected target condition, and this effect was almost exclusive to participants who reported making downward comparisons. We concluded that downward comparison processes could affect comparative optimism when targets are individual people.     

Risk perception,fuzzy representations and comparative optimism

Rather than a unitary value, individuals may represent health risk as a fuzzy entity that permits them to make a number of specific possible estimates. Comparative optimism might be explained by people flexibly, using such a set to derive optimistic risk estimates. Student participants were asked to rate the likelihood of eight harmful alcohol‐related outcomes occurring to themselves and to an average student. Participants made either unitary estimates or estimates representing the upper and lower bounds of a set denoting ‘realistic probability’ estimates. Personal risk estimates were lower when they were made as unitary estimates than those calculated from the mid‐points of the bounded estimates. Unitary estimates of personal risk made after the bounded estimates were lower than initial unitary estimates. There were no effects for estimates made with regard to the average student. Risk may be internally represented as a fuzzy set, and comparative optimism may exist partly because this set allows people the opportunity to make optimistic unitary estimates for personal risk within what they see as realistic parameters.     

Premise Acceptability and Message Effectiveness

Previous research shows inconsistent evidence in regard to gender differences in optimism for experiencing a happy marriage or avoiding divorce depending on whether optimism is measured as comparative optimism (thinking you are better off than your peers) or as personal optimism (estimating your own chances). Results from four samples of unmarried college students (N = 814) indicated that men exhibited greater comparative optimism than women for having a happy marriage but not for getting divorced. For having a happy marriage and avoiding divorce, men exhibited greater personal optimism relative to women. Experience (with parental divorce) moderated the gender difference in personal optimism and perceived control partially mediated the gender difference in comparative optimism (but only for having a happy marriage) and in personal optimism (for both having a happy marriage and avoiding divorce). Results are discussed as they relate to the existing literatures on risk perception and gender differences in romantic relationships.     

Perception of health risks: How smoker status affects defensive optimism

Abstract

People generally underestimate their risk to come down with a life-threatening disease when comparing themselves to similar others. However, to some extent they do take objective risk status or actual risk behavior into account. The present study examined specific conditions of this phenomenon. It was found that smoker status was associated with a somewhat higher perceived risk of getting lung cancer or smoker's cough or having a heart attack, but not of coming down with other diseases. Still, smokers did not admit that they had an above-average risk for these maladies, thus reflecting defensive optimism. In addition, smokers characterized the behavior of an abstract person, a “risk stereotype”, by estimating the number of years of smoking, the daily number of cigarettes, and the cigarettes' nicotine content necessary to be at high risk for lung cancer. There was evidence that smokers used these risk stereotypes as a reference point for evaluating their own relative risk. Smokers also made higher risk estimates if their own behavior approached that of the risk stereotype. On the whole, the results suggest that people use subjective risk factor theories when estimating their own personal health risks.     

Perceptions of comparative optimism and perceptions of career success: Experimental evidence for a bidirectional effect

ABSTRACT

Audiences generally view people who display more (versus less) comparative optimism more favorably. We explored whether audiences view a target who displays comparative optimism as more professionally successful, and conversely, whether they view a target who is more professionally successful as more comparatively optimistic. In Study 1, participants estimated the career success of a target that varied in level of comparative optimism. In Study 2, participants estimated the level of comparative optimism of a target that varied in career success. The results revealed that observers rated comparative optimists as likely to have successful careers, and rated people with successful careers as likely to display comparative optimism. Inferences about personal agency account for the bidirectional relationship.     

The effect of competitive and cooperative contexts on comparative optimism

Several common characteristics are shared by competition and comparative optimism; and comparative optimism has often been observed in competitive environments like entrepreneurial fields or areas that require skills. Competitive context could be an explanatory factor for comparative optimism neglected to date. The aim of this article is to test the links between competition (vs. cooperation) and comparative optimism. In Study 1, participants in different academic majors with a more or less competitive nature (respectively, medical studies and human sciences studies) answered questions about their future and that of others. In Study 2, for the participants in the less competitive course of study (human sciences studies), we presented their studies as being either competitive or cooperative. The impact of this context was tested as a function of the closeness or distance between the participants and the comparison targets. The results of both studies showed that competition increased the expression of comparative optimism. In Study 2, this effect emerged more when the comparison target was distant than when it was close, with proximity hindering the competitive relationship between the self and others. The feeling of competition with others contributed to a better understanding of comparative optimism and initiated new explanations for its emergence.     

Biases in social comparisons: Optimism or pessimism?

Social comparisons typically lead to two kinds of biases: A comparative optimism bias (i.e., a tendency for people to view themselves as more likely than others to be the beneficiaries of positive outcomes) or a comparative pessimism bias (i.e., a tendency for people to view themselves as less likely than others to be such beneficiaries); rarely are people fully calibrated in terms of how they compare to others. However, there is little systematic research on the factors that determine when a comparative optimism versus pessimism bias will occur, how they can be attenuated and whether such attenuation is always desirable. In this paper, we report four studies which demonstrate the following key results: First, we show that perceived level of control over the outcome drives whether a comparative optimism or pessimism bias will occur (Study 1). Second, an increase in perceived similarity between self and a comparison target person attenuates the comparative optimism bias in domains that people view as highly controllable (Study 2a) and attenuates the comparative pessimism bias in domains that people view as less controllable (Study 2b). Finally, we show that people are willing to work harder when they experience more comparative optimism in higher control scenarios and when they experience less comparative pessimism in lower control scenarios, illustrating that motivating people to strive harder for positive outcomes can result from exacerbated or attenuated bias, depending on the context (Study 3).     

Optimisme comparatif dans le milieu professionnel : l'influence de la fréquence et de la gravité sur la perception des risques d'accident du travail

The aim of this study is to test if people express comparative optimism when they evaluate their risk of being confronted to various work accidents compared to their colleagues. We also test the assumption according to which individuals are as much more optimistic as the event is threatening. Thus, an accident which is serious and probable (and consequently more threatening) should generate a maximum of comparative optimism. Our population is composed by employees of a mirror manufacture company. The latter evaluated their personal risk and that of one of their colleagues to be confronted with a severe /rare, severe/frequent, non severe/rare or non severe/frequent accident. Our results reveal the presence of an optimistic bias and this particularly for the severe and frequent accident. These data are discussed in terms of defensive bias and self esteem maintenance.     

Skin cancer: Assessing perceived risk and behavioural attitudes

Abstract

Measures of attitude concerning exposure to the sun, and judgements of risk and other beliefs concerning skin cancer and four other problems (stomach cancer, deafness, AIDS and sunstroke) were obtained from a questionnaire completed by 176 university students. Subjects also estimated the incidence of each problem using one of three response formats. The highest incidence estimates were obtained when subjects were asked to guess at an absolute number, and the lowest when they used a scale which differentiated between lower frequencies, while grouping higher frequencies into a single response category. The effect of the response scale format, however, did not generalize to other ratings of personal risk. Subjects' ratings of their personal risk, compared with their peers, showed an optimistic bias over the five problems as a whole, particularly for AIDS, but not reliably so in the case of skin cancer. Optimism was inversely related to the amount of thought given to each problem. Men and women did not differ overall in their optimism regarding their own risk of skin cancer. However, differences as a function of gender and optimism were found on various behavioural attitudes. The results are discussed in relation to a tendency of disregard base-rates in subjective risk judgements, unrealistic optimism, and implications for health education.     

Objectivity in the eye of the beholder: divergent perceptions of bias in self versus others

Important asymmetries between self-perception and social perception arise from the simple fact that other people's actions, judgments, and priorities sometimes differ from one's own. This leads people not only to make more dispositional inferences about others than about themselves (E. E. Jones & R. E. Nisbett, 1972) but also to see others as more susceptible to a host of cognitive and motivational biases. Although this blind spot regarding one's own biases may serve familiar self-enhancement motives, it is also a product of the phenomenological stance of naive realism. It is exacerbated, furthermore, by people's tendency to attach greater credence to their own introspections about potential influences on judgment and behavior than they attach to similar introspections by others. The authors review evidence, new and old, of this asymmetry and its underlying causes and discuss its relation to other psychological phenomena and to interpersonal and intergroup conflict.     

Testing the limits of optimistic bias: event and person moderators in a multilevel framework

N. D. Weinstein (1980) established that optimistic bias, the tendency to see others as more vulnerable to risks than the self, varies across types of event. Subsequently, researchers have documented that this phenomenon, also known as comparative optimism, also varies across types of people. The authors integrate hypotheses originally advanced by Weinstein concerning event-characteristic moderators with later arguments that such optimism may be restricted to certain subgroups. Using multilevel modeling over 7 samples (N = 1,436), the authors found that some degree of comparative optimism was present for virtually all individuals and events. Holding other variables constant, higher perceived frequency and severity were associated with less comparative optimism, higher perceived controllability and stereotype salience with more comparative optimism. Frequency, controllability, and severity were associated more with self-risk than with average-other risk, whereas stereotype salience was associated more with average-other risk than with self-risk. Individual differences also mattered: comparative optimism was related negatively to anxiety and positively to defensiveness and self-esteem. Interaction results imply that both individual differences and event characteristics should jointly be considered in understanding optimistic bias (or comparative optimism) and its application to risk communication.     

Risk perception and behavior: Pessimism,realism, and optimism about aids-related health behavior

Abstract

This study investigates the perceived risk of becoming infected with HIV for heterosexuals with multiple sexual partners, examines cognitive and motivational antecedents of biases in risk perception, and relates these biases to behavior. We obtained a moderate degree of optimism in a longitudinal study based on a sample of 535 visitors of a STD clinic. Further analyses—after classifying subjects as “pessimists”, “realists”, or “optimists”—revealed that pessimists were extremely pessimistic and optimists remarkably optimistic. Optimism increased with perceived control and decreased with prior experience, supporting a cognitive explanation of optimism. The data also provided some support for a motivational explanation: optimists who scored higher on a defensive coping style were more optimistic about their risks. Contrary to other findings, we found a positive relation between optimism and intentions to reduce risks. Furthermore, results revealed that optimists showed lower levels of subsequent behavioral risk. It was concluded that optimists were not unrealistically optimistic about their personal vulnerability. but rather that pessimists were unrealistically pessimistic. Previous behavior was found to be the best predictor of subsequent behavior. Although measures of perceived risk were also related to subsequent behavior, their predictive power was rather modest.     

The hubris hypothesis: The downside of comparative optimism displays

According to the hubris hypothesis, observers respond more unfavorably to individuals who express their positive self-views comparatively than to those who express their positive self-views non-comparatively, because observers infer that the former hold a more disparaging view of others and particularly of observers. Two experiments extended the hubris hypothesis in the domain of optimism. Observers attributed less warmth (but not less competence) to, and showed less interest in affiliating with, an individual displaying comparative optimism (the belief that one’s future will be better than others’ future) than with an individual displaying absolute optimism (the belief that one’s future will be good). Observers responded differently to individuals displaying comparative versus absolute optimism, because they inferred that the former held a gloomier view of the observers’ future. Consistent with previous research, observers still attributed more positive traits to a comparative or absolute optimist than to a comparative or absolute pessimist.     

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

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.     

Perceptions of goal-directed activities of optimists and pessimists: a personal projects analysis

In this research the authors examined the relationship between optimism and personal projects in a community sample. Three hundred twenty-five community volunteers completed the Personal Projects Analysis (PPA; B. R. Little, 1983) and measures of self-reported optimism and sociodemographic information. Participants who reported high levels of optimism rated their idiosyncratic personal goals significantly higher on PPA factors reflecting Positive Identity Fulfillment and Mastery-Control and significantly lower on the factor reflecting Perceived Strain than did participants who reported low levels of optimism. After the impact of age and education on optimism were statistically controlled, the Perceived Strain and Mastery-Control factors made significant contributions to the prediction of self-reported optimism in both initial and cross-validation samples. Findings indicate that highly optimistic individuals can be differentiated from their less optimistic peers on the basis of their perceptions of idiosyncratic goals. From an expectancy valence perspective, such differences have a direct bearing on individuals' behavior and may be associated with outcomes such as learned helplessness and procrastination.     

Gender differences in unrealistic optimism about marriage and divorce: are men more optimistic and women more realistic?

Two studies (n = 497) examine gender differences in "unrealistic optimism" in beliefs of marriage using a Taiwanese population. Unrealistic optimism is defined as the beliefs that positive (negative) events are more (less) likely to happen to one's self versus others. Although the bias is robust, it has been shown to be lower among people with an interdependent orientation, specifically those from a collectivist culture (e.g., Taiwan). We find that the unrealistic optimism bias is stronger (Study 1) and more resilient to change when base rates are provided (Study 2) for men as compared to women. Results are consistent with the interpretation that men have a less relationally interdependent self-construal than women. Theoretical implications for unrealistic optimism, cross-cultural psychology, as well as gender differences are discussed.