The big three of comparative judgment: on the effects of social, temporal, and dimensional comparisons on academic self-concept

Abstract

Students evaluate their domain-specific abilities by comparing their own achievement in one domain to that of others (social comparison), to their own previous achievement (temporal comparison), as well as their own achievement in another domain (dimensional comparison). The theories underlying these three comparison processes each assume an upward comparison with a better-off standard to lead to lower self-concept and a downward comparison with a worse-off standard to result in higher self-concept, instead. However, there is a lack of studies investigating the joint effects of simultaneously activated social, temporal, and dimensional comparisons. To close this gap, two experimental studies and one field study were conducted. In Studies 1 (N = 80) and 2 (N = 80), participants were asked to infer the mathematical self-concept of fictitious students after receiving experimentally manipulated social, temporal, and dimensional information about the fictitious students’ achievement in mathematics. In Study 3 (N = 225), participants were asked to report their own mathematical self-concept after rating their mathematical achievement in comparison to social, temporal, and dimensional standards. In all three studies, similar main effects for each of the three comparisons were found leading to lower self-concept following upward comparisons and higher self-concept following downward comparisons. Effect sizes differed, though, indicating social comparisons to have the largest effect, whereas the effects of temporal and dimensional comparisons were small to medium sized. No interaction effects were found. The findings therefore indicate that all three comparison processes are independent and have additive effects on academic self-concept.