 |
Downward comparison in close relationships
A blessing in disguise? |
|
||||||
Thesis, University of Groningen, June 1999
© Frans Oldersma, Groningen, The Netherlands, |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Chapter 3: Reactions to others engaging in overt downward comparison activities
Study 6b
Reactions to other's comparative and Kasin (as a partner) and the partner
A laboratory study
Method
Sample and participants
Participants were 166 undergraduates attending the University of Groningen (118 women, and 48 men). The mean age of the sample was 19.8 years, with a range from 18 to 25 years (19.6 years for women, 20.1 years for men). Seventy-eight (47%) participants at the time of the study were involved in relationships (69 dating relationships, 9 cohabitating, none married). The average duration of relationships was 1.8 years (ranging from 1 month to 7.2 years; 2.1 years for women, 11 months for men). All participants were paid 5 Dutch guilders (approximately $3 in U.S. currency) for their participation in the study.
Design and procedure
A 2 x 2 factorial design was used in this study. Two levels of Target under Evaluation (self vs. partner) and two levels of Type of Evaluation (comparative versus noncomparative) constituted between-participants factors. Likewise, the experimental procedure was similar to that used in Study 5, with the following exceptions. A new set of four scenarios were developed to serve as the basis for varying the target under evaluation and the type of evaluation. In the comparative self-evaluation condition, the participants read the following fragment:
I'm proud of myself as a partner (.....) Hm, well, when I look around, I feel that I'm doing many things better than most others. I listen to my partner much better and not only dare to talk to my partner about everything, but am also more honest with my partner than others are with their partners (.....) compared to others, I have less difficulty accepting my partner and give the other sufficient room to go one's own way (.....) also, I share many interests with my partner and have the same sense of humor (.....) So, yes, I believe that as a partner, I am doing better than others.
In the comparative partner-evaluation condition, references to the self were replaced by references to the partner. The participants read the following statements: |
|
I'm proud of my partner (.....) Hm, well, when I look around, I feel that my partner is doing many things better than most others. My partner listens to me much better and not only dares to talk to me about everything, but is also more honest with me than others are with their partners (.....) compared to others, my partner has less difficulty accepting me and gives me sufficient room to go my own way (.....) also, my partner shares many interests with me and has the same sense of humor (.....) So, yes, I believe that my partner is doing better than others.
In the noncomparative conditions, by contrast, references to social comparison were omitted. Thus, in the noncomparative self-evaluation condition participants read the following fragment:
I'm proud of myself as a partner (.....) Hm, well, when I think about it, I feel that I'm doing many things well. I listen to my partner very well and not only dare to talk to my partner about everything, but am also very honest with my partner (.....) I have no difficulty accepting my partner and give the other sufficient room to go one's own way (.....) also, I share many interests with my partner and have the same sense of humor (.....) So, yes, I believe that as a partner, I am doing good.
In the noncomparative partner-evaluation condition, reference to the self were changed to be referencing to the partner. In this manner, the scenario in this condition stated:
I'm proud of my partner (.....) Hm, well, when I think about it, I feel that my partner is doing many things well. My partner listens to me my very well and not only dares to talk to me about everything, but is also very honest with me (.....) my partner has no difficulty accepting me and gives me sufficient room to go my own way (.....) also, my partner shares many interests with me and has the same sense of humor (.....) So, yes, I believe that my partner is doing good.
As in Study 5, the participants were informed that after carefully reading the statements as reproduced in the verbatim fragment they were to continue with the questions regarding the social desirability of the statements. In Study 6, participants were asked to answer additional questions that were designed to assess how they felt after reading the statements and to assess the supposed extent of relationship satisfaction that the discussant may experience.
Social comparison orientation10 was measured by the INCOM, an 11-item scale that was developed by Gibbons and Buunk (1999; see also Study 2 of the current dissertation for a more thorough discussion). The items were measured using 5-point scales, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). All ratings were averaged to form a single index, resulting in a INCOM-score with the higher score indicating stronger social comparison orientation (Cronbach's alpha = .80).
Finally, when all the data were collected, participants were thoroughly informed about the purpose of the study, and after being paid they were thanked for their assistance and dismissed.
Dependent Variables
The items on the social desirability measure were taken from the questionnaire used in Study 5 (Cronbach's alpha = .84). Also, the assessment of sympathy was identical to that used in Studies 4 and 5. In addition, participants were asked on a 5-point scale whether they experienced feelings of annoyance about the discussant's statements. The scale ranged from Not at all to Very much.
Furthermore, participants were asked to indicate the extent to which the discussant would be satisfied with his or her relationship. They did have the opportunity to evaluate the presumed relationship satisfaction on a 10-point scale ranging from 1 (extremely unsatisfied) to 10 (extremely satisfied).
10. It can be supposed that participants might suspect the true purpose of the study and would be less candid if they first answered questions about social comparison than if the social comparison items are answered after the assessment of the dependent variables. To test this possibility, an order manipulation was employed. Half of the participants first completed the INCOM scale followed by the scenario and the successive items of the dependent variables, whereas for the remaining half of the participants the order was reversed. Analyses revealed that order did not qualify any of the reported effects in the current study, and will thus not be further considered in the analyses. Put in other words, the assessment of individuals' orientation toward social comparison did not affect their reactions to someone else's social comparison activities. |
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
© Frans Oldersma. Mail: Frans Oldersma
Painting: L'Autunno by Laurens Boersma Webdesign: Smeets & Graas | Een Groninger Website  top of page |
|||||