Three Kinds of Opinion Comparison: The Triadic Model

This article introduces the triadic model, which proposes that the social comparison of opinion is best considered in terms of 3 different evaluative questions: preference assessment (i.e., “Do I like X?”), belief assessment (i.e., “Is X correct?”), and preference prediction (i.e., “Will I like X?”). Each evaluative question is associated with a different comparison dynamic. The triadic model proposes that comparisons with persons similar in related attributes have special importance for preference assessment. For belief assessment, comparisons with persons of more advantaged status (or “expert”) are most meaningful, although comparison targets also should hold certain basic values in common (the “similar expert”). Finally, in preference prediction, the most meaningful comparisons are with a person who has already experienced X (a proxy) and who exhibits either consistency (but not necessarily similarity) in related attributes or past preferences. Prior research and 4 new studies are described that support the theory.

[1]  René Martin,et al.  "Can I Do X?" Using the Proxy Comparison Model to Predict Performance , 2000 .

[2]  P. R. Sachs,et al.  Social comparison and task prediction: ability similarity and the use of a proxy. , 1997, The British journal of social psychology.

[3]  R. Ralph,et al.  Social Pressures in Informal Groups. , 1951 .

[4]  P. Wason On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task , 1960 .

[5]  T. Wills Downward Comparison Principles in Social Psychology , 1981 .

[6]  J. Hampton,et al.  The people's choice. , 2001, Plastic surgical nursing : official journal of the American Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgical Nurses.

[7]  Arie W. Kruglanski,et al.  Classic and current social comparison research: Expanding the perspective. , 1990 .

[8]  Chezy Ofir,et al.  Context Effects on Judgment under Uncertainty , 1984 .

[9]  William Allen,et al.  The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness , 1953 .

[10]  Bernard,et al.  A Study of the Anti-Scientific Attitude , 1955 .

[11]  S. E. Taylor,et al.  Social comparison activity under threat: downward evaluation and upward contacts. , 1989, Psychological review.

[12]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Classic and Current Social Comparison Research : Expanding the Perspective , 1990 .

[13]  George R. Goethals,et al.  Similarity in the influence process: The belief-value distinction. , 1973 .

[14]  Z. Kunda,et al.  The case for motivated reasoning. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  S. Asch Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. , 1956 .

[16]  B. Latané Gregariousness and fear in laboratory rats , 1969 .

[17]  H. Kelley Attribution theory in social psychology , 1967 .

[18]  M. Rothbart,et al.  Social categorization and memory for in-group and out-group behavior. , 1980 .

[19]  F. Heider The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[20]  P. Black The American People. A study in national character. , 1949 .

[21]  Sabine A. Einwiller,et al.  Accuracy Motivation, Consensus Information, and the Law of Large Numbers: Effects on Attitude Judgment in the Absence of Argumentation , 1998 .

[22]  A. A. Lumsdaine Communication and persuasion , 1954 .

[23]  S. Schachter Deviation, rejection, and communication. , 1951, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[24]  B. Mausner Studies in social interaction. III. Effect of variation in one partner's prestige on the interaction of observer pairs. , 1953 .

[25]  H. Tajfel Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology , 1981 .

[26]  Brian Mullen,et al.  The false consensus effect: A meta-analysis of 115 hypothesis tests , 1985 .

[27]  S. Schachter The Psychology Of Affiliation , 1959 .

[28]  D. Byrne The Attraction Paradigm , 1971 .

[29]  B. Mausner,et al.  The effect of one partner's success in a relevant task on the interaction of observer pairs. , 1954, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[30]  T H CHOO,et al.  COMMUNICATOR CREDIBILITY AND COMMUNICATION DISCREPANCY AS DETERMINANTS OF OPINION CHANGE. , 1964, The Journal of social psychology.

[31]  J. Klayman,et al.  Confirmation, Disconfirmation, and Informa-tion in Hypothesis Testing , 1987 .

[32]  J. Suls Notes on the Occasion of Social Comparison Theory's Thirtieth Birthday , 1986 .

[33]  R. Zajonc Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

[34]  G. S. Sanders The Interactive Effect of Social Comparison and Objective Information on the Decision to See a Doctor , 1981 .

[35]  M. W. Riley Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications.Elihu Katz , Paul F. Lazarsfeld , 1956 .

[36]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Theory and Research Concerning Social Comparisons of Personal Attributes , 2001 .

[37]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. , 1999 .

[38]  J. Suls,et al.  Social comparison: Contemporary theory and research. , 1991 .

[39]  D. Campbell,et al.  Conformity to groups as a function of group success. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[40]  T. Newcomb The acquaintance process , 1961 .

[41]  H. Gerard,et al.  The Dynamics of Opinion Formation , 1987 .

[42]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Source factors and the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion , 1984 .

[43]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[44]  D. Bem Self-Perception Theory , 1972 .

[45]  A. Vinokur,et al.  Persuasive argumentation and social comparison as determinants of attitude polarization , 1977 .

[46]  G. S. Sanders,et al.  Is social comparison irrelevant for producing choice shifts , 1977 .

[47]  T. Brock,et al.  COMMUNICATOR-RECIPIENT SIMILARITY AND DECISION CHANGE. , 1965, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[48]  I. Sarnoff Identification with the aggressor: some personality correlates of anti-Semitism among Jews. , 1951, Journal of personality.

[49]  W. Crano,et al.  Judgmental subjectivity/objectivity and locus of choice in social comparison , 1989 .

[50]  Michael A. Hogg,et al.  Self-Categorization and Leadership: Effects of Group Prototypicality and Leader Stereotypicality , 1997 .

[51]  E. Stotland,et al.  Identification and changes in prejudice and in authoritarianism. , 1961 .

[52]  L. Festinger A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[53]  G. Goethals Consensus and Modality in the Attribution Process: The Role of Similarity and Information. , 1972 .

[54]  J. Coleman,et al.  The Diffusion of an Innovation Among Physicians , 1957 .

[55]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications , 1956 .

[56]  L. Wheeler,et al.  The Proxy Model of Social Comparison for Self-Assessment of Ability , 1997, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[57]  S. Chaiken Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[58]  Charles L. Gruder,et al.  Factors determining choice of a comparison other , 1969 .

[59]  Ralph E. Cooper,et al.  Examination of Newcomb's extension of structural balance theory. , 1973 .

[60]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Motivational effects in the social comparison of opinions. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[61]  J. Krueger On the Perception of Social Consensus , 1998 .

[62]  C. Carver,et al.  Havana daydreaming: A study of self-consciousness and the negative reference group among Cuban Americans. , 1981 .

[63]  L. Doob The psychology of social norms. , 1937 .

[64]  Elliot Aronson,et al.  Communicator credibility and communication discrepancy as determinants of opinion change. , 1963 .

[65]  B. Latané Studies in social comparison , 1966 .

[66]  B. Ryan The diffusion of hybrid seed corn in two Iowa communities , 1943 .

[67]  C. Crandall,et al.  Social contagion of binge eating. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[68]  L. Ross,et al.  The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes , 1977 .

[69]  J. V. Wood,et al.  Social comparisons among cancer patients: Under what conditions are comparisons upward and downward? , 1997 .

[70]  Deviancy and Group Orientation as Determinants of Group Composition Preferences , 1973 .

[71]  J. A. Bayton,et al.  Racio-National Stereotypes Held by Negroes , 1947 .

[72]  William J. McGuire,et al.  Some Contemporary Approaches , 1964 .

[73]  H. Hyman,et al.  The psychology of status , 1980 .

[74]  Daryl J. Bem,et al.  Beliefs Attitudes and Human Affairs , 1970 .

[75]  J. Suls The Importance of the Question in Motivated Cognition and Social Comparison , 1999 .

[76]  Jerry Suls,et al.  Social comparison processes: Theoretical and empirical perspectives , 1977 .