Method matters: effects of explicit versus implicit social comparisons on activation, behavior, and self-views

The authors investigated the impact of explicit versus implicit social comparisons. Simply being primed with a superior or inferior standard (implicit comparison) produced contrast as evidenced by accessibility of self-knowledge (Study 2), intellectual performance (Study 3), and self-ratings (Study 4), inconsistent with the standard. However, when participants were explicitly asked to compare, increased accessibility of a similarity focus (Study 1) and self-knowledge, behavioral performance, and self-ratings congruent with the standard were obtained more easily, indicative of assimilation. Explicit comparisons produced assimilation when the self was seen as mutable (rather than immutable; Study 4), when behavioral consequences were measured immediately after the comparison (rather than later; Study 3), and when the participants described (rather than ranked) their intelligence (Study 5). These findings support the interpretation comparison model. Implications for resolution of empirical inconsistencies in the social comparison literature are discussed.