Literature DB >> 14674818

Myopic social prediction and the solo comparison effect.

Don A Moore1, Tai Gyu Kim.   

Abstract

Four experiments explored the psychological processes by which people make comparative social judgments. Each participant chose how much money to wager on beating an opponent on either a difficult or a simple trivia quiz. Quiz difficulty did not influence the average person's probability of winning, yet participants bet more on a simple quiz than on a difficult quiz in the first 3 experiments. The results suggest that this effect results from a tendency to attend more closely to a focal actor than to others. Experiment 4 directly manipulated focusing; when participants were led to focus on the opponent instead of themselves, the effect was reversed. The discussion relates the results to other literatures including overly optimistic self-evaluation, false consensus, overconfidence, and social comparison.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14674818     DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1121

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol        ISSN: 0022-3514


  6 in total

1.  People Believe That They Are Prototypically Good or Bad.

Authors:  Michael M Roy; Michael J Liersch; Stephen Broomell
Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process       Date:  2013-11-01

2.  Temporal view of the costs and benefits of self-deception.

Authors:  Zoë Chance; Michael I Norton; Francesca Gino; Dan Ariely
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  I Am a Better Driver Than You Think: Examining Self-Enhancement for Driving Ability.

Authors:  Michael M Roy; Michael J Liersch
Journal:  J Appl Soc Psychol       Date:  2013-08-01

Review 4.  The Upside to Feeling Worse Than Average (WTA): A Conceptual Framework to Understand When, How, and for Whom WTA Beliefs Have Long-Term Benefits.

Authors:  Ashley V Whillans; Alexander H Jordan; Frances S Chen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-04-08

5.  The Joint Effects of Hubris, Growth Aspirations, and Entrepreneurial Phases for Innovative Behavior.

Authors:  Carlos Poblete
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-02-25

6.  Inflated applicants: attribution errors in performance evaluation by professionals.

Authors:  Samuel A Swift; Don A Moore; Zachariah S Sharek; Francesca Gino
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.