Social comparisons influence self-evaluations in multiple ways. Sometimes self-evaluations are assimilated toward a given standard. At other times, they are contrasted away from the standard. On the basis of the selective accessibility model (T. Mussweiler, 2003a), the authors hypothesized that assimilation results if judges engage in the comparison process of similarity testing and selectively focus on similarities to the standard, whereas contrast occurs if judges engage in dissimilarity testing and selectively focus on differences. If these alternative comparison mechanisms are indeed at play, then assimilative and contrastive social comparisons should be accompanied by diverging informational foci on similarities versus differences. Results of 5 studies support this reasoning, demonstrating that assimilation results under conditions that foster similarity testing, whereas contrast occurs under conditions that foster dissimilarity testing. Furthermore, assimilative social comparisons are accompanied by a general informational focus on similarities, whereas contrastive comparisons are accompanied by a focus on differences.

Life confronts people with an endless stream of social comparison opportunities. No matter whether they go to school, church, or the Oktoberfest, the other people who surround them exhibit vast amounts of information indicating how smart, wealthy, or brave they are. Neighbors may brag about the amount of money they earn, or—more subtly—convey this information by buying a gas-guzzling sport utility vehicle. High school friends may show off with their grades, or—more subtly—mention the Ivy League colleges that have offered them scholarships. No matter how shrewdly such intimidating details are conveyed, people as egocentric social information processors tend to process, comprehend, and evaluate such news by relating the details to themselves (Dunning & Hayes, 1996). In evaluating the bravery of a 16-year-old who is...