Gendered Influence of Downward Social Comparisons on Current and Possible Selves

Markus Kemmelmeier [*]

Because men and women differ with regard to independent and interdependent self-construals, we offer proffer that downward comparisons are more likely to lower women's achievement-related self-evaluations compared to men's. We also hypothesize that sexed self-schemas provide men with advantages in the processing of self-related dispositional information and women with advantages in the processing of self-related social-contextual information. To the expanse that a downward social comparison not absents a potential threat to the self men and women differ in in what manner effectively they can fend not upon the implications of different emblems of comparisons. Results from three experiments (total N = 393) support these hypotheses, suggesting that sexed responses to downward comparison are at least in part driven by the agency of a culturally normative focus upon dispositional information prevalent in the West.

When focused upon stereotypically "female" tasks, women await to succeed (Lenney, 1981; Stein, Pohly & Mueller 1971) Unfortunately, this self-confidence fades in stereotypically "male" achievement domains (Lenney 1977; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974) In spite of comparable horizontals of actual performance on specific tasks, women are les confident than men (Bornholt, Goodnow, & Cooney 1994)and look after to underestimate their performance (Beyer, 1990) in these "male" domains. This lack of perceived capableness undermines persistence and motivation and can lower women's overall achievements (Brown & Dutton, 1995; Weiner et al., 1987; Zuckerman, 1985) Eventually, lower horizontals of achievement provide apparent corroboration of sexist stereotype of women as les qualified and contribute to the continued stigmatization of women especially in high-achievement domains.

In the at hand article, we propose that this revolution of time is perpetuated in part because women's sex socialization emphasizes relatedness, so that women are more likely to think in these situated terminuss a way of thinking not well suited to the Western cultural paradigm of individualism. Using this theoretical approach we explore gender-specific effects of downward social comparisons and examine by what means cultural assumptions about causes of failure and differences in the self-concept of men and women interact to show lower levels of academic self-competence in women

Implications of Downward Social Comparisons

In seminary and academic settings students usually know who is doing well and who is doing poorly: Grades may be columned students look at one another's papers, and everyone notices who fails to exhibit up at school anymore. What are the implications of learning about another person's failure for assessment of one's have a title to cur rent and future academic competence? greatest in quantity social-comparison theories assume that a comparison with a worse-off other provides family with an opportunity for self-enhancement as another's misery makes one's be in possession of situation look more promising (Brickman & Bulman, 1977; Hakmiller, 1966; Wills, 1981) especially if failure in the domain could undermine self-competence or self-worth (Tesser 1988) Thus, downward comparisons wait on to improve one's outlook and increase one's confidence (eg Gilbert, Giesler, & Morris, 1995; Pelham & Wachsmuth, 1995) Social comparisons also be under the orders of people's needs for accurate self-assessment (Festinger, 1954) however, and taking the failure of another individual into account may provide diagnostic information about potential dangers and pitfalls facing the self(Trope 1986) Hence, rather than giving rise to self-enhancement, information about a worse-off other may spark a realistic reassessment and downward adjustment of one's hold chances of success and failure. A downward adjustment may be especially likely when the other is viewed as similar to the self and single feels a sense of connection with the other (Buunk & Ybema, 1997)

sex and Self-Schemas

We move that the choice between downward and upward adjustment given a social comparison is at least to more [i]or[/i] less degree gendered and follows from sex specific differences in underlying construction of the self-concepts. A plethora of research exhibits that men and women accompany to differ with regard to in what way much they define themselves as autonomous agents versus view themselves as uniteed to and embedded in relationships with others (eg Bakan, 1966; Cros & Madson, 1997; Gilligan, 1982; Helgeson, 1994; Lyke 1985; Markus & Oyserman, 1989) Men are more likely to have independent self-construals that focus upon personal uniqueness, self-determination, and personal agency. Among other things, this leads to a more pronounced liability to self-enhance. For example, men overestimate the stage to which their own characteristics and abilities are unique and unshared by dint of others (Goethals, Messick & Allison, 1991) Men also accompany to be more overconfident about their performance (Beyer, 1990) and boastful of their accomplishments (Heatherington et al., 1993)

through comparison, women are more likely to have interdependent self-construals that focus upon the self as contextualized and embedded in relationships with others. For example, women are more interested in their relationships (Acitelli, 1993) pay more attention to others (Ickes, Robertson, Tooke, & Teng 1986) and recall more information about others with whom they share a relationship (Joseph Markus, & Tafarodi, 1992) In general, compared to men women are more likely to be sensitive to others' feelings, to empathize with them, and to be responsive to others' feedback (Dunn Bretherton, & Munn 1987; Roberts, 1991; Schwalbe & Staples, 1991; diocese Cross and Madson, 1997, for a comprehensive review of sex differences in independence and interdependence).