Social Comparison Theory: Self-Assessment and Self-Improvement
This paper applies social comparison theory to a first-person examination of self-improvement, using a workplace mentor as the standard of comparison. Drawing on Festinger's foundational work on informal social communication and social comparison processes, the author explores why individuals compare themselves to others, how comparison targets are selected, and how such comparisons shape attitude, belief systems, motivation, and behavior. The paper also addresses gender dynamics in comparative life outcomes and the role of professional distance in maintaining healthy interpersonal relationships. Together, these threads illustrate how upward social comparison can serve as a practical tool for personal and professional development.
- Introduction: Author background and paper purpose
- Social Comparison: Why, with whom, and how we compare
- Attitude and Belief Systems: Changing beliefs to improve attitude and productivity
- Social Communication and Norms: How social norms shape attitudes and behavior
- Gender Issues: Gender power dynamics in comparative life outcomes
- Interpersonal Relationships: Professional distance and career-focused relating
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds abstract psychological theory in concrete personal experience, making Festinger's social comparison framework immediately relatable and easy to follow.
- Each section maps onto a distinct dimension of social comparison (attitudes, communication, gender, relationships), giving the argument clear thematic coherence.
- The author demonstrates intellectual humility by openly acknowledging areas for self-improvement rather than simply validating existing behavior, which strengthens the reflective credibility of the piece.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper exemplifies applied theoretical reflection: it introduces a theoretical framework (Festinger's social comparison theory), identifies its core propositions, and systematically uses those propositions as an analytical lens on first-person experience. This technique is common in psychology and social science courses where students are asked to connect course theory to lived experience, and it works here because the author cites specific hypotheses and studies rather than paraphrasing theory vaguely.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief personal introduction establishing the comparison target, then devotes its longest section to the mechanics of social comparison — why we compare, with whom, and to what effect. Subsequent sections are shorter and topical, each applying one conceptual lens (attitude/belief, social norms, gender, interpersonal relations) to the same personal scenario. The paper closes without a formal conclusion section, ending instead after the interpersonal relationships discussion, which gives the piece a reflective rather than argumentative feel — appropriate for this genre.
Introduction
This paper is written from the perspective of a twenty-nine-year-old female from Ghana in West Africa who moved to the United States fourteen years ago and is currently employed as a bookkeeper. The paper seeks to compare the author's life with that of another person, utilizing fundamental social comparison theories. The person chosen for comparison is the author's employer — a smart, kind, and diligent man who serves as both mentor and role model. The paper draws on several theories and considers what changes might be adopted as part of an ongoing effort at self-improvement. Different types of relationships are also discussed, including those related to attitude and belief systems, interpersonal relationships, gender issues, and social communication (Social Comparison Based on Attitude and Belief Systems, Interpersonal Relationships, Gender Issues, and Social Communication, 2012).
Social Comparison
Social comparison is the assessment of self against another, utilizing psychological principles that influence the behavior, experience, and judgment of individuals. As human beings, we are constantly comparing ourselves with others. For instance, whenever we hear news about other people — their failures or their achievements — we tend to compare those situations to our own.
In the same way, the author makes a consistent effort to stay informed about her employer's achievements and his way of life in general, so that she can assess whether she is moving in a similar direction. He serves as a standard for self-assessment; comparing her life to his helps reveal areas where she falls short, thereby motivating her to improve. Awareness of one's weaknesses and strengths can drive a person to compare their traits with those of others (Festinger, 1954).
For most individuals, social comparisons are guided by three questions: why we compare ourselves with others; with whom we compare ourselves; and how these comparisons affect us. Festinger's social comparison theory addresses most of these questions (Festinger, 1954).
The primary motivation behind the author's social comparisons is enthusiasm — a human drive to assess her own capabilities and beliefs. According to the theory of informal social communication, the capabilities of other individuals play a significant role in shaping our own beliefs (Festinger, 1950, 1954). The urge to compare oneself with others becomes stronger when, upon considering the theory's first through fourth hypotheses, one cannot find answers using references in the physical or tangible world.
This need is sustained by one's basic drive to develop and maintain an accurate self-concept, which often requires informative feedback from those we compare ourselves to. In this case, that feedback came from the characteristics of the author's employer, particularly since no objective standards were readily available against which to perform such evaluations (Festinger, 1954). Other studies have confirmed that individuals compare themselves with others even when objective standards are present (Social Comparison Based on Attitude and Belief Systems, Interpersonal Relationships, Gender Issues, and Social Communication, 2012).
The decision to choose her employer as the standard for comparison was deliberate. Choosing someone too different would have produced uncertain or confusing outcomes, whereas choosing someone in a similar situation — or at a higher level — within the workplace yields better self-assessments. Lateral social comparisons are important for self-assessment; however, self-improvement can only be achieved through vertical, or upward, comparisons (Taylor et al., 1996).
It is important to choose a comparison model carefully, given that there are often many candidates to consider but limited time available (Mussweiler & Ruter, 2003). Efficiency in the selection process was achieved by applying the concept of routine as a guiding tool. Among the individuals considered — both the employer and the author's mother — the employer best fit the selection criteria.
Social comparisons have wide-ranging effects on self-assessment, and they played a key role in shaping the author's self-concept before the formal comparison process began. By closely following the "self-construal" system, it became possible to see how individuals could view intelligence as something flexible rather than fixed. Ultimately, social comparisons influence behavior, motivation, and cognition, and are in turn shaped by those same factors (Social Comparison Based on Attitude and Belief Systems, Interpersonal Relationships, Gender Issues, and Social Communication, 2012).
Attitude and Belief Systems
According to William James, by changing one's attitude, one can change one's life. In seeking a kind of social well-being, the author was aware of the positive impact that constructive thinking could have. She recognized that replacing negative attitudes with positive ones could open up new opportunities. Where she once held negative attitudes toward others, replacing those attitudes with affection for herself and others — and forgiving past harm — allowed her to begin cultivating a more positive outlook.
By changing her belief system, she was able to shift her attitude at the spiritual, emotional, behavioral, and intellectual levels. When she compared herself socially with her employer, she could focus on his admirable qualities: he was hardworking, efficient, and a quick learner — traits she aspired to develop in herself. Attitude is generally described as one's disposition toward something — whether a skill, a person, an event, or a place — which informs the judgments one makes. An attitude can be negative, positive, or a mixture of both. Attitudes develop over time from an inner belief system comprising cognitive, behavioral, and affective components, according to the ABC model.
By changing the beliefs and assumptions that had informed her attitudes, the author was able to become more positive and productive at work. This led to the realization that her success was directly tied to the belief systems and attitudes she held regarding her work and her colleagues — particularly her employer (Social Comparison Based on Attitude and Belief Systems, Interpersonal Relationships, Gender Issues, and Social Communication, 2012).
References
Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271–282.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
Mussweiler, T., & Ruter, K. (2003). What friends are for! The use of routine standards in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 467–481.
Social Comparison Based on Attitude and Belief Systems, Interpersonal Relationships, Gender Issues, and Social Communication. (2012). Retrieved November 17, 2015, from
Taylor, S. E., Wayment, H. A., & Carrillo, M. (1996). Social comparison, self-regulation, and motivation. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 3). Guilford Press.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.