Personal contact, individuation, and the better-than-average effect.

Abstract

Research in which people compare themselves with an average peer has consistently shown that people evaluate themselves more favorably than they evaluate others. Seven studies were conducted to demonstrate that the magnitude of this better-than-average effect depends on the level of abstraction in the comparison. These studies showed that people were less biased when they compared themselves with an individuated target than when they compared themselves with a nonindividuated target, namely, the average college student. The better-than-average effect was reduced more when the observer had personal contact with the comparison target than when no personal contact was established. Differences in the magnitude of the better-than-average effect could not be attributed to the contemporaneous nature of the target's presentation, communication from the target, perceptual vividness, implied evaluation, or perceptions of similarity

Cites (7)

1. A theory of social comparison processes
   Festinger, Leon · 1954 · Human Relations
2. Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure
   Zajonc, Robert B. · 1968 · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
3. Unrealistic optimism about future life events
   Weinstein, Neil D. · 1980 · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
4. Downward comparison principles in social psychology
   Wills, Thomas A. · 1981 · Psychological Bulletin
5. The totalitarian ego: Fabrication and revision of personal history.
   Greenwald, Anthony G. · 1980 · American Psychologist
6. Some Conditions of Obedience and Disobedience to Authority
   Milgram, Stanley · 1965 · Human Relations
7. Public Self and Private Self
   1986

Show all 7 references

Cited by (38)

1. Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments
   Kruger, Justin, Dunning, David · 1999 · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
2. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
   Kahneman, Daniel, Frederick, Shane · 2002 · Heuristics and Biases
3. Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconfidence and the market's reaction☆
   MALMENDIER, U, TATE, G · 2008 · Journal of Financial Economics
4. The Affect Heuristic
   Slovic, Paul, Finucane, Melissa, Peters, Ellen, MacGregor, Donald G. · 2002 · Heuristics and Biases
5. The bias blind spot: perceptions of bias in self versus others
   Pronin, Emily, Lin, Daniel Y., Ross, Lee · 2002 · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

See all 912