Evaluating a sex-related ability: Comparison with same-, opposite-, and combined-sex norms

Abstract

A study was conducted to replicate and extend Zanna, Goethals, and Hill's ( Zanna, M. P., Goethals, G. R., & Hill, J. F. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1975 , 11, 86–93) experiment investigating social comparison choices for evaluating a sex-related ability. In a 2 × 3 design male and female undergraduates received ambiguous feedback about their performance on a test. The test was described as one in which either males typically excel or females typically excel, or no sex differences for performance were mentioned. Subjects were then given the opportunity to select normative comparison information in order to evaluate their performance. Information about same-sex, opposite-sex, and combined (male and female) norms was available. The results showed that interest in same-sex and combined information was high on both first and second choices. Opposite-sex comparisons were of low priority. Same-sex comparisons were of high priority even when sex differences were not made salient. Males and females differed to some extent in their comparison choices. The results suggest that while persons prefer to compare with similar (same-sex) others, they are also interested in making broader kinds of comparisons (with combined-sex norms). The results are discussed in terms of Wilson's ( Wilson, S. R. Sociometry, 1973 , 36, 600–607) two-process analysis of ability comparison and Goethals and Darley's ( Goethals, G., & Darley, J. In J. M. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes; Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Washington, D. C.: Hemisphere/Halsted/Wiley, 1977 ) related attribute hypothesis.