Affective Consequences of Social Comparisons by Women With Breast Cancer: An Experiment - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jun 11:11:1234.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01234. eCollection 2020.

Affective Consequences of Social Comparisons by Women With Breast Cancer: An Experiment

Affiliations

Affective Consequences of Social Comparisons by Women With Breast Cancer: An Experiment

Katja Corcoran et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Objective: People with severe illness often meet and compare themselves with other patients. Some of these comparison standards do well, others do poorly. Such comparisons could have positive as well as negative consequences depending on whether people identify or contrast from the standard. In the present study, we examine whether patients with breast cancer can benefit from comparisons by engaging in favorable comparison processes.

Design: 102 women diagnosed with breast cancer were randomly assigned to read a (fictitious) self-report from a well or poorly adjusted breast cancer patient.

Main outcome measures: Participants reported their affective reaction (mood, anxiety, depression) and specified their comparison process (identification or contrast).

Results: In general, participants engaged in favorable comparison processes by contrasting predominantly with poorly adjusted patients, and identifying with well-adjusted ones.

Participants’ mood assimilated to the standard: Participants reported more positive mood after having been exposed to the well-adjusted than the poorly adjusted standard.

Anxiety and depression varied with the type of comparison process: It was lower the more they avoided unfavorable comparisons (contrasting with the well-adjusted patient and identifying with the poorly adjusted one).

Conclusion: Patients adjust their comparison processes to the standard to experience favorable comparisons. Especially avoiding unfavorable comparison processes reduces the risk of negative consequences after encountering other patients. Thus, patients may profit from comparisons as long as they engage in the right process.

Keywords: breast cancer; contrast; depression; identification; mood; self-efficacy; self-esteem; social comparison.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Mean comparison (contrast and identification) by type of standard (poorly vs. well-adjusted). Error bars represent confidence intervals (95%) and were calculated as proposed for within-subject designs by Cousineau and O’Brien (2014).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Mood by time (pre- and post-comparison) and type of standard (poorly vs. well-adjusted). Error bars represent confidence intervals (95%) and were calculated as proposed for within-subject designs by Cousineau and O’Brien (2014).
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Upper panel: Predicted mood difference (“mood after”—“mood before reading the self-report”). Lower panel: Anxiety/depression by standard (well or poorly adjusted) and contrast/identification.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Alicke M. D., Sedikides C. (2011). Handbook of Self-enhancement and Self-protection. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
    1. Arigo D., Smyth J. M., Suls J. M. (2015). Perceptions of similarity and response to selected comparison targets in type 2 diabetes. Psychol. Health 30 1206–1220. 10.1080/08870446.2015.1040018 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arigo D., Suls J. M., Smyth J. M. (2014). Social comparisons and chronic illness: research synthesis and clinical implications. Health Psychol. Rev. 8 154–214. 10.1080/17437199.2011.634572 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bandura A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84 191–215. 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baumeister R. F. (1982). Self-esteem, self-presentation, and future Interaction: a di-lemma of reputation. J. Pers. 50 29–45. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1982.tb00743.x - DOI