TY - JOUR
T1 - Dare to compare
T2 - Fact-based versus simulation-based comparison in daily life
AU - Summerville, Amy
AU - Roese, Neal J.
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Jim Olson for comments on an earlier draft. This research was supported National Institute of Mental Health Grant R01-MH55578, awarded to Neal Roese.
PY - 2008/5
Y1 - 2008/5
N2 - We examined the relative frequency of social, counterfactual, past-temporal, and future-temporal comparison in daily life using an experience-sampling method, in which participants were randomly prompted to record thought samples using palmtop computers carried for two weeks. Comparative thought accounted for 12% of all thoughts, and all four comparison types occurred with equivalent frequency. Comparisons may be either fact-based (i.e., based on actuality, as in social and past-temporal comparison) or simulation-based (i.e., based on imagination, as in counterfactual and future-temporal comparison). Because the latter are more "unbounded," and because greater perceived opportunity invites greater self-improvement, we predicted and found that counterfactual and future-temporal comparison were more likely to be upward (vs. downward) than social and past-temporal comparison. All comparison types focused on approach more than avoidance motives, except for counterfactuals, which showed equivalent focus on both. These findings reveal the prominence of comparative thought in daily life, and underscore the value of an integrative theory that describes social, counterfactual, or temporal comparison using a common theoretical platform.
AB - We examined the relative frequency of social, counterfactual, past-temporal, and future-temporal comparison in daily life using an experience-sampling method, in which participants were randomly prompted to record thought samples using palmtop computers carried for two weeks. Comparative thought accounted for 12% of all thoughts, and all four comparison types occurred with equivalent frequency. Comparisons may be either fact-based (i.e., based on actuality, as in social and past-temporal comparison) or simulation-based (i.e., based on imagination, as in counterfactual and future-temporal comparison). Because the latter are more "unbounded," and because greater perceived opportunity invites greater self-improvement, we predicted and found that counterfactual and future-temporal comparison were more likely to be upward (vs. downward) than social and past-temporal comparison. All comparison types focused on approach more than avoidance motives, except for counterfactuals, which showed equivalent focus on both. These findings reveal the prominence of comparative thought in daily life, and underscore the value of an integrative theory that describes social, counterfactual, or temporal comparison using a common theoretical platform.
KW - Affect
KW - Approach
KW - Avoidance
KW - Counterfactual
KW - Motivation
KW - Regret
KW - Social comparison
KW - Temporal comparison
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=41549161479&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=41549161479&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.04.002
DO - 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.04.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 19412326
AN - SCOPUS:41549161479
SN - 0022-1031
VL - 44
SP - 664
EP - 671
JO - Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
JF - Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
IS - 3
ER -