Upward social comparison on standardized test performance in adolescents and adults

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The use of standardized testing and its effects on students has undergone increasing debate in recent years. We utilized experimentally induced upward social comparison to better performing peers, which refers to comparing oneself to someone perceived as superior, versus comparison to peers who performed similarly. We hypothesized that this type of comparison affects adolescents’ actual and perceived standardized test performance in a subsequent standardized test and their self-efficacy, their belief in their capacity to succeed, more severely as compared to adults. A sample of adolescents and adults completed ten questions from the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). Then, every participant regardless of their actual score received false feedback, indicating that they scored in either the 10th percentile or the 50th percentile. Following the feedback, their performance on a second set of ten SAT questions, perceived performance on the second test, and self-efficacy was assessed. Our results partially support the presumed effects. A lower performance in the second test and less confidence about one’s performance was associated with comparing negatively in adolescents. This was not the case for self-efficacy. Fisher’s Z-test suggests that the correlation between negative comparisons and test performance, as well as between negative comparisons and perceived competency, was more negative in adolescents than in adults, suggesting that adolescents respond worse to negative comparisons. No such difference was found for self-efficacy. These results demonstrate the potential for unfavorable social comparisons by adolescents regarding standardized testing, and future studies are needed to investigate broader implications like how standardized testing impacts student mental health.