نه چندان بالاتر از حد متوسط بعد از همه: هنگامی که مردم بر این باورند که بدتر از متوسط هستند و پیامدهای آن برای نظریه های تعصب در مقایسه اجتماعی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|36955||2007||17 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 102, Issue 1, January 2007, Pages 42–58
Abstract Recent research calls into question the generally accepted conclusion that people believe themselves to be better than average. This paper reviews the new theories that have been proposed to explain the fact that better-than-average effects are isolated to common behaviors and abilities, and that people believe themselves to be below average with respect to rare behaviors and uncommon abilities. These new theories are then used to revisit prior findings of better-than-average effects. When viewed in light of recent work, the evidence suggests that prior findings overstated the degree to which people engage in self-enhancement by believing that they are better than others when in fact they are not. Prior studies have often confounded desirability with commonness and have used subjective measures of comparative judgment that capitalize on people’s tendency to conflate relative with absolute self-evaluation.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Conclusion What is to become of the important theories that were based on BTA evidence? The evidence reviewed here suggests that we ought to view them with more skepticism. The assumptions and empirical findings upon which these theories have been built have been called into question. It is clearly not the case that people always view themselves as better than others. People believe that they are less likely than average to exhibit rare abilities and behaviors and more likely than average to exhibit common abilities and behaviors. Previous studies have exaggerated the generality of BTA effects because they have focused on common abilities and behaviors that also happened to be desirable. Chambers and Windschitl (2004, p. 834) point out the parallels between BTA effects and the “risky shift” phenomenon. There once was a time when group discussion was believed to produce a risky shift in which group members emerged from discussion with riskier preferences than when they went in (Stoner, 1961). However, later research revealed that under certain conditions, group interaction could produce a cautious shift. The more general phenomenon is now known as group polarization (Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969). Similarly, recent research demonstrating WTA effects calls into question the generality of the conclusions of a great deal of research on above-average and comparative optimism effects. The unidirectional measures, manipulations, and theories employed in research on BTA effects deserve to be re-examined using the new insights arising from more recent work.