Despite the increasing evidence that social comparison may play a significant role in people's self-evaluations and in the way they may evaluate their close relationship, participants in social comparison research frequently display a reluctance to admit that they actually compare themselves with others. Sometimes, participants may even deny that they consider their own characteristics relative to those of others (see for instance, Helgeson & Taylor, 1993; Schoeneman, 1981; Schulz & Decker, 1985; Taylor, Aspinwall, Giuliano, Dakof, & Reardon, 1993; Wayment & Taylor, 1995; Wood, Taylor, & Lichtman, 1985; Van der Zee, 1996; and Wood, 1996, for a review).

Consistent with the logic of the introduction, a possible reason for the aforementioned reluctance is that explicit downward social comparisons may lead to negative responses on the part of those who observe others engaging in social comparison behaviors. For instance, someone who engages in downward social comparison may take advantage of encounters with inferior comparison targets or, according to Wills (1987), may cognitively construct downward comparison targets. This person thus perceives that his or her own situation differs in some respects and is better than that of someone else.

Accordingly, when the person openly discusses his or her conclusion of such social comparison with worse-off others (i.e. one perceives oneself as superior), he or she risks disapproval of fellow-discussants. Observers may feel that this person is bragging about his or her own relative success by making explicit mention of less fortunate others. The observers, in turn, may feel bad about themselves as the conclusion of the overt downward comparison may also refer to the observers' situation that is considered as inferior.

Thus, overt downward social comparison behavior might cause pleasure for the individual who engages in social comparison but pain in the observer of such behavior when the observer feels that his or her achievements are devalued by the comparisons (cf. Brickman & Bulman, 1977; also Tesser, Millar, & Moore, 1988). Apparently, such a painful and stressful experience may even evoke a desire to avoid social comparison with superior others if possible (cf. Brickman & Bulman, 1977; see also Friend & Gilbert, 1973; Nosanchuk & Erickson, 1985; Smith & Insko, 1987). Thus, downward social comparison may not be appreciated by others who observe it as it shows a lack of appropriate empathic concern for the other in the given circumstances, and as a consequence may sometimes lead to quite uncomfortable situations.

Indeed, as outlined by Wood (1996), several researchers have suggested that downward social comparison is viewed as socially undesirable (e.g., Brickman & Bulman, 1977; Hemphill & Lehman, 1991; Wills, 1981; Wood, 1996). For instance, Brickman and Bulman (1977) suggested that social norms may restrict and prohibit social comparison. Especially when an individual is exhibiting the self in a superior manner, and taking a pleasure in the inferiority of someone else, the impression made will not be favorable.

Hence social comparison in general, and downward comparison in particular, will not be considered as socially appropriate. In conformity with this line of reasoning, Van der Zee, Buunk, and Sanderman (1996) found that individuals' tendency to give socially desirable responses was related to a lower need to compare themselves with others (Studies 1 and 2) and to assess how they were doing relative to others (Study 1).

In view of the fact that normative considerations may play a part in people's social comparison activities, it is noteworthy that little research has addressed the responses to the way other people overtly concede their social comparison activities and publicly claim their superiority over others. Therefore, as the evidence on this issue is limited, the current thesis will explore the reactions to others who display downward social comparison.

As noted previously in this thesis, the tendency towards self-enhancement appears to extend well beyond the self to psychologically close others. That is, people in general seem to be inclined to evaluate their own intimate partner as superior to others, sometimes even including themselves, thus engaging in partner-enhancement rather than in self-enhancement (e.g., Bradbury & Fincham, 1990; Hall & Taylor, 1976; Murray & Holmes, 1997; Schütz & Tice, 1997; Taylor & Koivumaki, 1976).

Moreover, circumstantial evidence suggests that most people see it as normal and desirable to present their own relationship, and especially their intimate partner, in a positive light (for instance, see Fitness & Fletcher, 1993; Fehr, 1988, 1993; Shaver, Schwartz, Kirson, & O'Connor, 1987; Argyle, Henderson, & Furnham, 1985). It was presumed that a social norm exists that specifies what most people do (i.e. descriptive norm) and what ought to be done (i.e. injunctive norm; see Cialdini, Kallgren, & Reno, 1991; Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren, 1990).

Assuming that people will be motivated to conform to the prevailing social norms by displaying a socially desirable self-image (Baumeister, 1982), it can be anticipated that it will be more acceptable and desirable to publicly describe one's own intimate partner as superior than to describe oneself (as a partner) as above average. Therefore, it was explored whether partner-enhancing downward comparison will be considered as more socially desirable than self-enhancing downward comparison.