CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,705Social and Intergroup PsychologyEmotions and Moral BehaviorPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Downward comparison principles in social psychology

Wills, Thomas A.·1981·Psychological Bulletin
DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The literature of social psychology contains a number of phenomena that appear to be paradoxical. For example, persons who face a threatening experience prefer to affiliate with threatened others rather than with nonthreatened others (Schachter, 1959), and persons in groups in which reward is equally distributed are less satisfied compared with persons in groups that include one particularly unfortunate member (Brickman, 1975). The purpose of this article is to show that these phenomena are best construed as social comparison processes and that various phenomena derive from one basic process termed downward comparison; the essence of this process is that persons can enhance their own subjective well-being by comparing themselves with a less fortunate other. In this article I show that downward comparison is a process evoked by negative affect, that there is considerable evidence for self-enhancing comparison processes, and that downward comparison effects are involved in several areas of social-psycho logical research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When individuals are exposed to social comparison information, they prefer to compare themselves with others who have performed worse on a salient dimension than with others who have performed better.

    “It has also been found that when individuals are exposed to social comparison information, they prefer to compare themselves with others who have performed worse on a salient dimension than with others who have performed better (see Wills, 1981, for a review).”

    From The Causes and Consequences of a Need for Self-Esteem: A Terror Management Theory (1986) · cites this paper as Wills, 1981

  • When people have a vulnerable or easily threatened self-image, they generally respond with downward social comparisons.

    “When people have a vulnerable or easily threatened self-image, they generally respond with downward social comparisons (Taylor & Lobel, 1989;Wills, 1981).”

    From The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory (2006) · cites this paper as Wills, 1981

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wills, T. A.
Corresponding author
Wills, Thomas A.
ORCID
Wills, Thomas A.
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1981-09
Volume
90
Issue
2
Pages
245-271
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
DOI
10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245
OpenAlex
W2156796359
Semantic Scholar
93e1ba7c88523e39e841218830a09828e97b5ffa
Cited by
2,705
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 74 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 99 · 2023: 98 · 2022: 101 · 2021: 121 · 2020: 121 · 2019: 106 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 94 · 2016: 82 · 2015: 87 · 2014: 105 · 2013: 82 · 2012: 79
FWCI
36.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
downward social comparison, self-enhancement, subjective well-being, negative affect

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review