How high is up? Calibrating social comparison in the real world.

Research generated by social comparison theory has been criticized for its deficiencies in conceptual clarity and mundane realism. In the present study, Ss were 544 competitive bridge players engaging in a form of the "you-hold" game, a social comparison activity common to this subculture. Because this game is played seriously, with real and meaningful comparators, mundane realism should be heightened. Clarification of some key concepts, notably "comparison upward," was anticipated because the setting permitted valid assessments of the abilities of the various players. The method involved use of nominational responses to scenarios in which comparison motive was varied with outcome valence and locus of control. Ability scores of nominations were regressed against those of the choosers', a similar strategy was employed using various sociometric nominations both to validate the method and provide a baseline for comparison. Results suggest that information seeking induced the greatest degree of upward comparison. Ego enhancement was lower and ego defense lowest, though even here comparison was found to be reliably upward. Items describing "fixes" where ability was not implicated were found to give results similar to those for ego enhancement. Events with negative outcomes were unexpectedly found to generate greater comparison upward than ones with positive outcomes. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)