Social Comparison Paper

Social Comparison Motives

In some instances upward social comparisons can result in a contrast effect such that following comparisons with a model, one would experience an increase in BD (see Myers & Crowther, 2009). On the other hand, upward social comparisons can results in an assimilation effect on self-evaluation such that after comparison to a model one would experience a decrease in BD (see Nikkelen et al., 2012). Experimental studies in the area of body image research provide support for the occurrence of contrast effects and assimilation effects in self-evaluation by manipulating similarities. In a study by Häfner (2004), participants’ perceived similarity to media ideal male models in various advertisements was manipulated by altering the headline of the advertisements to prime similarities (i.e., “same body-same feeling”) or differences (e.g., “feel the difference”). After the priming condition, participants showed a higher motivation to change their appearance when they had been primed with differences (i.e., they contrasted away from the model), but a
lower motivation to change their appearance when they had been primed with similarities (i.e., they assimilated to the model). Thus, these findings support the importance of assimilation and contrast effects which can be influenced by subtle external cues.
Experimental studies in evolutionary psychology have also examined the role of contrast effects on males’ BD and intrasexual competition. Wade and McCrea (1999) investigated the relationship of exposure to an attractive man versus an unattractive man on self-reported measures of social ascendency, physical attractiveness, and sexual attractiveness. The study utilized vignettes in which attractiveness of the man was manipulated by referring to the man as being either average or good looking. Results revealed that exposure to the attractive man compared to the unattractive man lead to decreased self-reported levels of social dominance, psychical attractiveness, and sexual attractiveness.
Intrasexual competition can be an important construct when investigating the relationship between media ideal social comparisons and BD due to its relationship with competitive behavior and social comparison.
Social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954) would suggest that when there is a discrepancy between the self and a comparison target, competitive behavior is generated. Research utilizing a mate-guarding prime found increased attention to attractive members of one’s own sex among men who were concerned with the threats posed by intrasexual competitors (Maner, Gailliot, Rouby, & Miller, 2007). Furthermore, research has shown that intrasexual competition through the use of a mating prime increased competitiveness among males (Buunk & Massar, 2012). Finally, in a correlational study, measures of intrasexual competition were significantly related to social comparison among males (Buunk & Fisher,
2009).
Although the impact of intrasexual competition between media ideal social comparisons and BD is seemingly novel, one study attempted to investigate such a relationship. In a study by Li, Smith, Griskevicius, Cason, and Bryan (2010) the relationship between intrasexual competition with BD and eating restriction was examined using written profiles of high-status and competitive same-sex individuals. Authors were clear to point out that the profiles used no language to infer mating, physical appearance, dieting, or eating. Results revealed that while both males and female had numerically higher scores on eating pathology and BD measures when placed in the intrasexual competitive prime group, statistical significance was only reached for females. The lack of significant findings for males could be founded in the explanation that intrasexual competition through exposure to high-status and competitive same-sex individuals does not impact eating attitudes or BD in male. Another plausible explanation, which would be consistent with findings by Wade and McCrea (1999), is that physical attractiveness of a potential mate is more important for males when considering measures of eating attitudes and BD. Furthermore, as with past studies, Li et al. (2010) failed to use a BD measure that taps into male specific concerns. Finally, intrasexual competition was inferred through exposure with the vignettes and not directly manipulated.