Improving productivity and creativity in online groups through social comparison process: New evidence for asynchronous electronic brainstorming

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Michinov ◽  
Corine Primois
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Comparison Process ◽  
Online Groups ◽  
Electronic Brainstorming ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Social Comparison Process

How Do Auditors Weight Informal Contrary Advice? The Joint Influence of Advisor Social Bond and Advice Justifiability

2013 ◽  
Vol 88 (6) ◽  
pp. 2061-2087 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Kadous ◽  
Justin Leiby ◽  
Mark E. Peecher
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Social Bond ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Comparison Process ◽  
Auditor Judgment ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Joint Influence ◽  
Advice Quality ◽  
Social Comparison Process

ABSTRACT: Auditors frequently seek informal advice from peers to improve judgment quality, but the conditions under which advice improves auditor judgment are poorly understood. We predict and find evidence of a trust heuristic among auditors receiving advice from advisors with whom they share a social bond. This heuristic is evident among non-specialists, who weight advice according to its justifiability when it is received from a weaker social bond advisor, but fail to objectively assess the quality of advice received and weight it heavily when it comes from a stronger social bond advisor, regardless of its justifiability. Specialists, while less prone to the trust heuristic in advice weighting, show inconsistencies in advice weighting and their assessments of advice quality. In particular, specialists discount better justified advice from stronger social bond advisors, despite rating this advice as being of relatively high quality. This defensiveness likely arises from an aversive social comparison process attributable to the high ego-relevance of a task within one's specialization. Future research is warranted to corroborate or refute this possibility.

It’s All Relative: A Team-Based Social Comparison Model for Self-Evaluations of Effectiveness

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 361-395
Author(s):  
Jaclyn A. Margolis ◽  
Scott B. Dust
Keyword(s):  
Social Comparison ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Target Selection ◽  
Social Comparisons ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Comparison Process ◽  
Comparison Theory ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Social Comparison Process

We apply social comparison theory (SCT) to the organizational context and develop a model explicating the social comparison process that occurs within organizational teams. In doing so, we highlight how individual, team, and managerial factors influence this process. First, we discuss how task-related (e.g., functional background and experience) and demographic-related (e.g., age, gender, and race) team characteristics affect social comparison target selection (i.e., the team as a whole, a subgroup, or a specific individual) and further explain the impact of metacognitive capacities on this referent selection process. Next, we explore how team norms of collaboration versus competition affect whether employees assimilate or contrast, respectively, during social comparisons. Subsequently, we highlight how managers influence the proposed social comparison process. Finally, we discuss how social comparisons can be productive or unproductive for team members’ organization-based self-esteem (OBSE). We conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of our model and offering avenues for future research.

Approaches to Comparison and Their Influence on Social Comparison

2019 ◽  
pp. 430-442
Author(s):  
Arthur B. Markman
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Computational Complexity ◽  
Social Comparison ◽  
Mental Representation ◽  
Spatial Models ◽  
Structural Models ◽  
Low Complexity ◽  
Comparison Process ◽  
Social Settings ◽  
Computationally Intensive

Cognitive psychology identifies different assumptions about the mental representations that form the basis of theories of comparison. Each representation requires a different process to generate a comparison, and both the computational complexity and the output of the different processes differ. Spatial models require a low-complexity process but only reveal the distance between points representing individuals. Featural models are more intensive than spatial comparisons but provide access to particular commonalities and differences. Structural models are more computationally intensive but support a distinction between alignable and nonalignable differences. Social comparison theories make assumptions about how knowledge is represented, but they are rarely explicit about the type of comparison process that is likely to be involved. The merging of work on social comparison with more explicit cognitive science theories of comparison science has the potential to both identify gaps in the literature and expand our knowledge about how comparison operates in social settings. This chapter first discusses the concept of mental representation and then addresses spatial models of comparison, featured models of comparison, structural models of comparison, transformation models. The chapter concludes with a discussion of similarity models and social comparison.

Motives for Secondary Social Sharing of Emotions

2008 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Véronique Christophe ◽  
Gérald Delelis ◽  
Pascal Antoine ◽  
Jean-Louis Nandrino
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Social Comparison ◽  
Emotional Support ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Negative Condition ◽  
Social Sharing ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Social Sharing Of Emotions

This study provides new evidence of motives of secondary social sharing of emotions. In a retrospective study, 140 female ( Mage = 29.4 yr., SD=12.8) and 116 male ( Mage = 29.5 yr., SD=13.1) participants were asked to recall a recent situation in which they had talked to a third person about a positive or negative, low or high intensity emotional narrative they had heard. 70% of the respondents reported having secondarily shared the reported event rapidly after the narration with several persons and at several times. Moreover, they not only described the event, the speaker's reaction and their own reactions, but also revealed the identity of their first confidant. Participants reported having spread the emotional narrative more widely in the high negative condition in order to seek emotional support and social comparison.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document