View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Does Classroom Social Comparison Bias Students' Evaluation of Their Own Competence?

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Does Classroom Social Comparison Bias Students' Evaluation of Their Own Competence?
Language: English
Authors: Boissicat, Natacha (ORCID 0000-0002-3188-5951), Pansu, Pascal, Bouffard, Thérèse
Source: Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal. Oct 2020 23(5):1303-1326.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 24
Publication Date: 2020
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Descriptors: Competence, Self Concept, Comparative Analysis, Secondary School Students, Mathematics Education, Language Arts, French, Self Evaluation (Individuals), Bias, Identification (Psychology)
DOI: 10.1007/s11218-020-09582-y
ISSN: 1381-2890
Abstract: Overestimation and underestimation of students' own competence result from social comparison in the classroom. There is some evidence that secondary school students compare their results with those of one or two same-sex others who perform slightly better than themselves. The first objective of this study was to replicate these findings among younger students (9-11 years old) in mathematics and language arts (French). The second objective was to consider the identification with the target as a moderator factor, because findings have been divergent regarding the positive or negative influence of social comparison on students' academic self-evaluation. We expected firstly that absolute upward comparison to be beneficial for students' self-evaluation bias of competence provided they identified with their upward target. Secondly, we expected their perception of their target's competence (relative comparison) to contribute to students' self-evaluation bias of competence and to be negatively related to it. The results indicated a tendency to compare upward and revealed that absolute upward comparison was positively related to the students' self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French. This relationship was stronger when the students identified with their upward target. In contrast, relative comparison was negatively related to their self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French. To sum up, these results reveal the need to consider identification with the comparison target when studying the relationship between social comparison and academic self-evaluation and to consider relative and absolute comparison simultaneously in order to bring out the full contribution of social comparison in the classroom.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2020
Accession Number: EJ1273946
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFq6BFXV4Owa-HjDIYJoaYxAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDEE0Gj9PvIbAwOb3OQIBEICBmhyHjoqNMNOqYUxdkmNJft1tGNsfVwZGIC5-56fH0Uovk5jp87clD_wNfE8X-KYgTTviyiVwTryK9p1wlx7_muYzn0SLxlgugGPSEghmYOOSCypB0wXbevEYmwUXl_153ja2B3YQKkJvdqRKh2HwnRQi993njVxSe0VF8PTUsy_XPuYfX9VSE9uw6zRghok79BFY-Qae5-ZnOHM=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0146680870;luo01oct.20;2020Oct30.04:53;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0146680870-1">Does classroom social comparison bias students' evaluation of their own competence? </title> <p>Overestimation and underestimation of students' own competence result from social comparison in the classroom. There is some evidence that secondary school students compare their results with those of one or two same-sex others who perform slightly better than themselves. The first objective of this study was to replicate these findings among younger students (9–11 years old) in mathematics and language arts (French). The second objective was to consider the identification with the target as a moderator factor, because findings have been divergent regarding the positive or negative influence of social comparison on students' academic self-evaluation. We expected firstly that absolute upward comparison to be beneficial for students' self-evaluation bias of competence provided they identified with their upward target. Secondly, we expected their perception of their target's competence (relative comparison) to contribute to students' self-evaluation bias of competence and to be negatively related to it. The results indicated a tendency to compare upward and revealed that absolute upward comparison was positively related to the students' self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French. This relationship was stronger when the students identified with their upward target. In contrast, relative comparison was negatively related to their self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French. To sum up, these results reveal the need to consider identification with the comparison target when studying the relationship between social comparison and academic self-evaluation and to consider relative and absolute comparison simultaneously in order to bring out the full contribution of social comparison in the classroom.</p> <p>Keywords: Social comparison; Absolute and relative comparisons; Academic self-concept; Self-evaluation bias</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Feeling competent in a specific academic domain plays a major role in students' school success (Bandura [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref1">4</reflink>]). Numerous studies have shown that self-evaluation of one's competence or efficacy is positively related to academic achievement (Bandura [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>]; Brunot [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref3">13</reflink>]; Guay, Marsh and Boivin [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref4">31</reflink>]; Marsh and O'Mara [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref5">45</reflink>]; Susperreguy et al. [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref6">68</reflink>]) as well as to intrinsic motivation, self-regulation, commitment and perseverance (Pajares and Schunk [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref7">58</reflink>]). However, students are not always realistic when evaluating their own potential academic performance: some students overestimate their competence while others underestimate it. This phenomenon corresponds to a self-evaluation bias of academic competence, reflecting a discrepancy between students' academic competence, as assessed through standardized tests or their actual achievement, and their self-evaluation of this competence (Harter [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref8">34</reflink>]; Nicholls [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref9">56</reflink>]; Phillips [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref10">59</reflink>]; Phillips and Zimmerman [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref11">60</reflink>]). A positive academic self-evaluation bias reveals an overestimation of one's school competence (illusion of school competence) while a negative academic self-evaluation bias denotes an underestimation of one's school competence (illusion of school incompetence). To date, studies investigating this phenomenon have examined either the outcomes of a self-evaluation bias or its antecedents.</p> <p>First, many studies have focused on the adaptive outcomes of a positive or negative self-evaluation bias regarding academic performance and behavior (e.g. Bouffard and Narciss [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref12">8</reflink>]; Bouffard et al. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref13">9</reflink>]; Sticca et al. [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref14">65</reflink>]). A negative self-evaluation bias has been found to be related to less active self-regulation and lower participation in class (Bouffard et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref15">7</reflink>]), higher perfectionism (Miserandino [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref16">48</reflink>]) and more frequent attitudes of withdrawal (Bouffard et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref17">7</reflink>]). As for positive self-evaluation bias, recent findings have been more contrastive. For instance, some studies have shown a positive self-evaluation bias to be related to narcissism, decreasing levels of well-being and achievement, and increasing disengagement from the academic context (Robins and Beer [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref18">61</reflink>]; Sticca et al. [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref19">65</reflink>]). Other studies, however, have tended to support the adaptive nature of a positive self-evaluation bias at school. For instance, over a five-year period, children's self-evaluation was found to be positively related to their self-esteem and perception of social acceptance and negatively related to their school anxiety and feelings of impostorism (Bouffard et al. [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref20">11</reflink>]; Narciss et al. [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref21">54</reflink>]).</p> <p>Second, studies examining the antecedents of self-evaluation bias have brought out the influence of several factors, such as mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological arousal (e.g., Bandura [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref22">2</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref23">3</reflink>]). Our study specifically explored the influence of social comparison on self-evaluation bias of academic competence, which can be defined as a type of vicarious experience. Observing a peer at the same level succeeding or failing on a task provides information that may lead students to believe they are likely of doing the same.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-3">Social comparison in the classroom: with whom and why?</hd> <p>According to Festinger ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref24">27</reflink>]) human beings have a spontaneous tendency to evaluate their accomplishments in relation to those of others: we use social comparison to evaluate ourselves. This creates an almost inevitable social comparison mechanism and is the central focus of self-evaluation processes (Dijkstra et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref25">23</reflink>]; Festinger [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref26">27</reflink>]; Mussweiler et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref27">53</reflink>]; Wood [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref28">75</reflink>]). This is also true in classroom settings, where social comparison is omnipresent and provides information on which students judge their scholastic competence (Dijkstra et al. [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref29">24</reflink>]; Lohbeck [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref30">41</reflink>]). Festinger's theory proposes that there is a drive to evaluate one's abilities through upward comparison, that is, a tendency to compare oneself with those who perform better than oneself. Indeed, Gerber, Wheeler and Suls' meta-analysis ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref31">28</reflink>]) showed that when participants chose a target with whom to compare themselves, there was an overall preference for upward comparison. In classroom settings, Blanton et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref32">5</reflink>]) and Huguet et al. ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref33">37</reflink>]) found that secondary school students (12–14 years old) chose to compare themselves with same-sex others who performed slightly better than they did (upward comparison).</p> <p>To date, only a few studies have examined the direction of the comparison among elementary school students (e.g., Dickäuser and Galfe [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref34">21</reflink>]; Dumas et al. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref35">25</reflink>]). In their study, Dumas et al. ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref36">25</reflink>]) asked students to nominate for different subjects two classmates with whom they usually compared their grades. The results showed that second graders (7.5 years old) preferred for both choices and in each subject to compare themselves to a lateral target (a peer of similar ability). In Grade 3 (8 years), students used different comparison targets depending on the subjects: an upward target in first choice in math and second choice in reading, but a lateral target as first choice in reading and second choice in math, as well as first and second choice in writing. In Grades 4 and 5 (9–11 years old), students preferred upward target for their first choice across all subjects (math, science writing) and also for their second choice in math. They mentioned lateral target for their second choice in science and writing. In Grade 6 (11–12 years old), students systematically mentioned upward targets for both their first and second choices in science and French. To sum up, the tendency to use upward comparison mainly appeared at Grade 4 (at around 9 years old) and as previously shown by Blanton et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref37">5</reflink>]) and Huguet et al. ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref38">37</reflink>]), it increases by Grade 6. Dickäuser and Galfe ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref39">21</reflink>]) observed a similar pattern among third and fourth graders, who were more likely to engage in upward comparison (43.3%) and lateral comparison (44.4%) than downward comparison.</p> <p>There may be numerous reasons behind the need for deliberate comparison with better—or worse—others. Comparing themselves with a classmate who succeeds better than they do may allow students to assess their own abilities accurately (Suls et al. [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref40">67</reflink>]) and satisfy the need to perform well and/or take on new challenges (Lockwood and Kunda [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref41">40</reflink>]). In any case, observing a classmate who performs a task well gives students information on the abilities required to succeed, allowing them to judge whether or not they can do as well as their chosen target. In addition, comparing themselves with others who perform better than they do may heighten students' motivation to improve, leading them to set themselves higher standards (Diel and Hofmann [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref42">22</reflink>]). It may also lead them to make more of an effort to solve any problems they encounter (Lockwood and Kunda [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref43">40</reflink>]; Monteil and Michinov [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref44">49</reflink>]). Finally, observing classmates who are doing well may lead students to learn the best strategies to improve their academic performance (Bandura [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref45">4</reflink>]). On the other hand, while students generally prefer upward comparison, some students tend to compare themselves with downward targets in order to protect their self-image and enhance their sense of competence (Wills [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref46">71</reflink>]). This downward comparison serves an ego-protective function (Gibbons et al. [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref47">29</reflink>]). In a study involving 12–25 year old students, Wolff et al. ([<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref48">73</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref49">74</reflink>]) empirically tested the prevalence of social comparison as a function of the three comparison motivations: self-evaluation, self-enhancement and self-improvement. Their results indicated that when students were responding to a need for self-evaluation or self-improvement, social upward comparison was preferred to lateral and downward comparison. The reverse was observed when the motivation was self-enhancement: social downward comparison was preferred to social lateral comparison.</p> <p>These sets of findings regarding individuals' reasons for comparison raise the question of the contrast and assimilation effects on self-evaluation bias of academic competence.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-4">The influence of social comparison in the classroom setting on self-evaluation of academic co...</hd> <p>Social comparison may operate through reference (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref50">1</reflink>) to a group, where a student self-compares with the group average, or (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref51">2</reflink>) to another individual student.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Group comparison</item> </ulist> <p>When students are enrolled in a high- or low-ability class, the group operates as the reference against which the students compare their own abilities. In fact, the school context plays an important role in students' self-evaluation: their self-evaluation is likely higher in a low-achieving class than in a high-achieving class (Davis [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref52">20</reflink>]; Marsh and Parker [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref53">46</reflink>], Marsh [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref54">42</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref55">43</reflink>]; Marsh et al. [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref56">44</reflink>]; Bressoux and Pansu [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref57">12</reflink>]). This phenomenon, popularized and labeled by Marsh ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref58">42</reflink>]) as the Big Fish Little Pond Effect (BFPLE) stresses the relevance of considering this effect when studying self-evaluation of academic competence. However, Huguet et al. ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref59">36</reflink>]) and Seaton et al. ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref60">63</reflink>]) showed that after controlling for students' perceived relative standing in class, the BFPLE was canceled out: the direct link between class-average ability and academic self-evaluation disappeared.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Individual comparison</item> </ulist> <p>Individual comparison can occur in three ways: it can be uncouscious, forced or deliberate. Unconscious comparison occurs when people are not fully aware that they are making a comparison (Wood [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref61">76</reflink>]). The results of the few studies investigating the unconsciousness of social comparison are mixed: some studies have shown that social comparison can be unconscious (e.g., Mussweiler et al. [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref62">51</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref63">52</reflink>]) while other studies have not (e.g., Want et al. [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref64">69</reflink>]). A recent study by Wolff et al. ([<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref65">72</reflink>]) investigated the consciousness of social comparaisons in academic settings by testing the internal/external frame of reference model with implicitly measured self-concepts. They replicated the relationships in the E/I model with measures of implicit self-concepts, suggesting that social comparisons were performed unconsciously.</p> <p>Forced comparison occurs when students are asked to compare themselves with a pre-defined other student and can lead them to positive or negative interpretations (Boissicat et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref66">6</reflink>]; Buunk et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref67">16</reflink>]; Gerber et al. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref68">28</reflink>]). In an upward comparison, students may conclude that they are not as good as their target, or conversely, identify with the target and conclude that they may be able to improve and become as good as the target. Similarly, students who make a downward comparison may conclude that they are not as bad as their target, or conversely, identify with the target and conclude that they could possibly get worse and become as bad as the target (Buunk et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref69">14</reflink>]). Nonetheless, students appear to prefer upward identification and downward contrast, the two mechanisms that are not threatening to the self (Bouffard et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref70">10</reflink>]; Buunk et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref71">14</reflink>]; Buunk and Dijkstra [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref72">15</reflink>]). It has been shown that, after controlling for students' actual level of competence, the more they report using upward identification and downward contrast, the higher their self-evaluation of academic competence and the lower their feelings of imposturism (Chayer and Bouffard [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref73">18</reflink>]). Moreover, the more students report using downward identification and upward contrast, the lower their self-evaluation of academic competence (Boissicat et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref74">6</reflink>]). However, all the studies referred to here share the same limitation. The induction of social comparison was forced and hypothetical: students were asked to imagine how they would feel if they compared themselves to better or worse imagined others. This may differ from voluntary comparison in which students choose an actual classmate with whom to compare themselves.</p> <p>Deliberate comparison refers to comparison that students decide to engage in with chosen targets and as a forced comparison can lead them to positive or negative interpretations. Deliberate comparison with a chosen target classmate can be operationalized in two ways: as an absolute comparison (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref75">1</reflink>) or as a relative comparison (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref76">2</reflink>). To examine the direction of absolute comparison, most studies subtracted students' achievement (grades or standardized tests scores) from that of the mate with who they compared themselves. The higher the gap, the more upward the comparison. This means the students engaged in comparison with a target that was better than themselves. When the participants compared themselves with worse-others, it resulted in higher self-concepts, whereas comparison with better-others resulted in lower self-concepts (Wolff et al. [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref77">73</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref78">74</reflink>]). Conversely, Seaton et al. ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref79">63</reflink>]), reinvestigating both Blanton et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref80">5</reflink>]) and Huguet et al.'s studies (2001), found a positive and significant relationship between absolute comparison and students' self-evaluation of academic competence: the more upward the comparison, the more positive their self-evaluation. Since comparison with an upward target responds to a need for improvement (Buunk and Ybema [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref81">17</reflink>]), this positive relationship was understood to be the consequence of the students' identification with their more successful comparison targets (the tendency to regard their comparison target as their possible future self) (Seaton et al. [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref82">63</reflink>]; Huguet et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref83">36</reflink>]). However, these studies did not provide information on the interaction effect between the direction of the comparison and the degree of identification with the target on students' self-evaluation of academic competence. Yet, as noted above, comparison with others can produce opposite effects on self-evaluation depending on whether or not individuals identify with their target (Buunk et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref84">14</reflink>]; Buunk and Ybema [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref85">17</reflink>]; Lockwood and Kunda [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref86">40</reflink>]) or feel similar to their target (Collins [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref87">19</reflink>]; Mussweiler [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref88">50</reflink>]).[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref89">1</reflink>] Our study aims at better understanding the relationship between social comparison and self-evaluation of academic competence among students by considering the moderating role of identification with the comparison target.</p> <p>"Relative" comparison (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref90">2</reflink>) refers to the subjective gap between students' evaluation of their own competence and their perception of their target classmate's competence. Regarding relative comparison, only a few studies have examined the direction of comparison, subtracting students' perception of their own achievement from their perception of their target's achievement: the higher the gap, the more upward the comparison (e.g. Gibbons et al. [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref91">30</reflink>]). A positive score means that students engaged in comparison with a target they judged to be better than themselves.</p> <p>To date, a few studies have considered the impact of relative comparison simultaneously with that of absolute comparison (Gibbons et al. [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref92">30</reflink>]; Huguet et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref93">36</reflink>]; Marsh et al. [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref94">47</reflink>]). The results revealed that students comparison with an upward absolute target (which achievement is better than their own) was positively associated with self-evaluation of competence. Conversely, students comparison with an upward relative target (a target they perceive to be more competent than they are) was negatively related to self-evaluation of competence. These studies have highlighted the effect of both absolute and relative comparison on self-evaluation and the importance of considering them simultaneously to better understand their unique contribution.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-5">Objectives and hypotheses</hd> <p>This study pursued two main objectives and tested five hypotheses:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> The first objective was to understand how social comparison occurred in the classroom and describe the kind of targets that 9–10 year old students chose. To this end, we examined how many classmates the students chose to compare themselves with, the favored sex of the comparison target and the direction of this absolute comparison (upward, lateral or downward). Based on Dumas et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref95">25</reflink>]) and Huguet et al.'s findings, we expected the students to choose more than one comparison target (H<subs>1</subs>), to favor same-sex comparison targets (H<subs>2</subs>) and to engage in upward comparison, at least for their first comparison choice (H<subs>3</subs>).</item> <p></p> <item> The second objective was twofold:</item> <p></p> <item> To better understand the relationship between absolute comparison and self-evaluation bias of academic competence by examining the moderating role of identification with the first target. We predicted that under upward comparison, the higher the identification with the target, the more positive the self-evaluation bias would be, whereas under downward comparison, the higher the identification with the target, the more negative the self-evaluation bias would be (H<subs>4</subs>).</item> <p></p> <item> To examine the relationship between relative comparison and self-evaluation bias of academic competence after controlling for absolute comparison. We expected that, beyond the contribution of absolute comparison in self-evaluation bias of academic competence, relative comparison should contribute uniquely to this bias and be negatively related to it: the more students used relative upward comparison, the more negative their self-evaluation bias would be (H<subs>5</subs>).</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0146680870-6">Materials and Method</hd> <p>This study follows the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. It is defined as a non-interventional research, as outlined in the French Public Health code, and the authorization of school principals and parents was also required.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-7">Participants</hd> <p>136 students (65 girls and 71 boys, mean age: 9.7 years, 8 months, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.5 year) participated in this study. All participants were in Grade 5, from five classes in four elementary schools in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Region (France). They were all French speakers.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-8">Instruments and measures</hd> <p>All measures referred to two basic academic domains: mathematics and language arts (French).</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-9">Students' academic achievement</hd> <p>Students' grades provided by the teacher were used as a measure of their academic achievement (in France, grades range from 0 to 20, with a high grades indicating high performances). This corresponded to the average cumulative grade on their report cards (in the current trimester) for mathematics and French. Teachers' judgment is valid information about student ability as confirmed by strong links reported between such judgments and students' academic performance (Hoge and Coladarci [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref96">35</reflink>]; Südkamp et al. [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref97">66</reflink>]; Bressoux and Pansu [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref98">12</reflink>]). In the meta-analysis of 16 studies conducted by Hoge and Coladarci ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref99">35</reflink>]) the mean correlation between teacher judgment and students' performance was.66, when performance was measured by standardized tests. Bressoux and Pansu reported a correlation of.74 between teacher judgment and students' performance (see also meta-analysis of Südkamp et al. [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref100">66</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-10">Self-evaluation of academic competence</hd> <p>An adapted form of the French version (see Guilbert [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref101">32</reflink>]) of the academic self-evaluation subscale of the Perceived Competence Scale for Children (Harter [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref102">33</reflink>]) was used to assess the students' self-evaluation of competence, in mathematics and French separately. For each academic domain, each of the five items provided a description of hypothetical children, as in the following example: "Some children can often figure out answers in mathematics". Students were asked to indicate the extent to which the description applied to them on a scale from 1 (not at all true for me) to 4 (really true for me). Students' scores were averaged for each academic domain: the higher the score, the higher their self-evaluation of competence. The internal consistency of this five-item scale was satisfactory (<emph>α</emph> =.86 in mathematics and <emph>α</emph> =.73 in French).</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-11">Social comparison choices</hd> <p>As in previous studies on social comparison (Blanton et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref103">5</reflink>]; Huguet et al. [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref104">37</reflink>]), students were asked to nominate up to three classmates (labeled choice 1, choice 2 and choice 3) with whom they usually compared their grades in both mathematics and French. They were then asked to rank their choices by first designating the classmate with whom they compared themselves the most often, then the classmate who came second, and finally, the classmate who came third. They could also leave one or two of these items blank, or even all three items if they thought they never compared themselves with other classmates.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-12">Identification with their first comparison choice</hd> <p>The assessment of students identification was based on Buunk and Ybema ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref105">17</reflink>])'s identification-contrast model, which suggests that a clear sign of identification with comparison-others is to view the situation of the target as a potential future for oneself. The degree to which the students identified with their first comparison choice was measured using one item expressing the students' tendency to see this classmate's academic position as representing their own future. We used Huguet et al's measure (2001), for each academic domain, asking students to rate the extent to which they thought that, in the future, their grade would be closer to that of their first comparison classmate (choice 1), on a scale from 0 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). A high score indicates a high identification.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-13">Competence attributed to the first comparison choice and students' own perceived competence</hd> <p>To measure relative comparison, we used two items. The first assessed the competence students attributed to their first comparison choice. Students were asked to rate how good they thought their first comparison choice was on a single item separately in mathematics and French on a scale of 0 (not good at all) to 5 (very good). The second item assessed their own perceived competence: students rated how good they thought they were on a single item separately in mathematics and French on a scale from 0 (not good at all) to 5 (very good).</p> <p>All these measures (excepted the measure of identification) were used to compute three scores corresponding to the students' self-evaluation bias of academic competence, absolute comparison and relative comparison.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-14">Self-evaluation bias of mathematics/French competence</hd> <p>To calculate the students' self-evaluation bias of ompetence (Owens et al. [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref106">57</reflink>]), we used the residual scores of the regression of students' self-evaluation of competence on their actual academic achievement, in mathematics and French reported by teachers. A positive score indicated a positive self-evaluation bias while a negative score indicated a negative self-evaluation bias. A score close to zero corresponded to a rather realistic self-evaluation of own competence.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-15">Absolute comparison in mathematics/French</hd> <p>For both domains, to estimate whether students engaged in upward, lateral or downward comparison with each of their three comparison choices, we subtracted their average cumulative grade reported by teachers from that of their comparison choice. This was repeated for each of the three comparison choices. The higher the score, the greater the extent to which the students engaged in absolute upward comparison, whereas the lower the score, the greater the extent to which they engaged in absolute downward comparison.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-16">Relative comparison in mathematics/French</hd> <p>For both domains, to calculate whether relative comparison was upward, lateral or downward the students' perception of their own competence was subtracted from that they attributed to their first comparison target. As for absolute comparison, the higher is the resulting positive score, the more it indicates a relative upward comparison. A score of zero indicates a relative lateral comparison, while the higher is the resulting negative score, the more it indicates a relative downward comparison.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-17">Procedure</hd> <p>The data were collected at school during regular class hours. Students were given 30 min to complete the questionnaire. To help those with reading difficulties, the experimenter read all the items aloud and made sure that each participant understood the instructions. All parents provided consent for their child's participation. The children also participated willingly. Consent and permission were also obtained from all other appropriate authorities.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-18">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0146680870-19">How social comparison occurs in the classroom (Objective 1)</hd> <p>The first objective was to understand how social comparison occurred in the classroom and describe the kind of targets that 9–10 year old students chose. First, we expected the students to choose more than one comparison target (H<subs>1</subs>). Indeed, the majority of students chose to nominate at least two comparison targets. As shown in Table 1, nomination rates for the first choice were high: 96.3% in mathematics and 97.1% in French. For the second choice, the rate was 85.3% in both mathematics and French. For the third choice, the rates were weaker: 67.6% in mathematics and 61.8% in French.</p> <p>Rates of nomination (%)</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" /><th align="left"><p>None</p></th><th align="left"><p>One target</p></th><th align="left"><p>Two targets</p></th><th align="left"><p>Three targets</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p><italic>Courses</italic></p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Mathematics</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.7</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>96.3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>85.3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>67.6</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>French</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.9</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>97.1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>85.3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>61.8</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Second, as expected, students favored same-sex comparison targets (H<subs>2</subs>), this being true for all three choices: choice 1, 81.7% and 82.6% in mathematics and French respectively; choice 2, 88.8% and 89.6%; and choice 3, 79.8% and 80.8%. Third, we predicted that the students would engage in upward comparison, at least for their first comparison choice (H<subs>3</subs>). Table 2 reports the students' average cumulative grades (M<subs><emph>grade</emph></subs>) and their comparison choices' average cumulative grades (M<subs><emph>choice</emph></subs>), in mathematics and French. The students clearly preferred to compare their performance in both mathematics and French with that of more successful classmates. Indeed, the direction of the comparison for the first and second choices was upward. For the third choice, it was lateral. We also examined how many students engaged in downward, lateral and upward comparison. We remind that the absolute comparison score results from subtracting the student's average cumulative grade for the current trimester from that of their comparison choice. As a score higher than or equal to 1 reveals an upward and a score lower than or equal to − 1 a downward comparison, in math and French respectively, 28.2% and 33.3% of students engaged in downward comparison, 12.3% and 14.4% in lateral comparison, and 59.5% and 52.3% in upward comparison.</p> <p>Means (<emph>standard deviation</emph>) for students (M<subs><emph>grade</emph></subs>) and their choices of comparison (M<subs><emph>choice</emph></subs>)</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2" /><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Choice 1</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Choice 2</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Choice 3</p></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><p>M<italic>grade</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</p></th><th align="left"><p>M<italic>choice</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>t</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>df</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>M<italic>grade</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</p></th><th align="left"><p>M<italic>choice</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>t</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>df</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p>M<italic>choice</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</p></th><th align="left"><p>M<italic>grade</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>)</p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>t</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>df</italic></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Math</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>14.96</p><p>(3.45)</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>16.14</p><p>(3.01)</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.61***</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>130</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.04</p><p>(3.43)</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.84</p><p>(3.21)</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.22*</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>115</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.11</p><p>(3.46)</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>14.88</p><p>(3.41)</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>−.49</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>91</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>French</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>14.74</p><p>(3.00)</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.33</p><p>(2.90)</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.10*</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>131</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>14.80</p><p>(3.01)</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.44</p><p>(2.80)</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.34*</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>115</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.22</p><p>(2.86)</p></td><td char="(" align="char"><p>15.34</p><p>(2.70)</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.34</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>83</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Standard deviation (<emph>SD</emph>), degrees of freedom, and <emph>t</emph> values are from paired <emph>t</emph> tests to determine whether average cumulative grades of students (M<emph>grade</emph>) differ from their comparison choices (M<emph>choice</emph>). Positive <emph>t</emph> values indicate a tendency toward upward social comparison *<emph>p</emph> < 0.05, **<emph>p</emph> < 0.01, ***<emph>p</emph> < 0.001 (<emph>paired t-tests</emph>)</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-20">Relationship between social comparison and self-evaluation bias of academic competence (Objec...</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0146680870-21">Preliminary analyses</hd> <p>As shown in Table 3, in both French (<emph>r</emph> = −.44) and math (<emph>r</emph> = −.41), self-evaluation bias of competence was negatively related to relative comparison: the more the students engaged in comparison with a target they perceived as being better than themselves, the more negative their self-evaluation bias. Relative comparison was positively linked to absolute comparison (in French and math respectively, <emph>r</emph> =.49, <emph>r</emph> =.57): the more the students compared themselves with an upward target, the more they perceived this target as being better than themselves. Self-evaluation bias was positively related to identification in math only (<emph>r</emph> =.33): the more the students identified with their target, the more positive their self-evaluation bias. Identification was positively related to relative comparison in French only (<emph>r</emph> =.24): the more the students engaged in comparison with a target they perceived as being better than themselves, the more they identified with this target.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p>The correlations between the variables in both subjects are presented in Table 4. Self-evaluation bias of competence in French was positively and weakly related to self-evaluation bias of competence in math (<emph>r</emph> =.29). This weak correlation suggests that the self-evaluation bias in these two subjects were relatively distinct. Absolute comparison in math was positively and strongly related to absolute comparison in French (<emph>r</emph> =.60): the more the students compared themselves to an upward target in math, the more they did the same in French. Finally, relative comparison in math was positively but weakly related to relative comparison in French (<emph>r</emph> =.30).</p> <p>Correlations Between Variables in Math and French</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2"><p>Variables</p></th><th align="left" colspan="4"><p><italic>French</italic></p></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left"><p>4</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p><italic>Math</italic></p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>1. Self-evaluation bias of competence</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.29**</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.07</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>−.09</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>−.07</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>2. Identification with Choice 1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.01</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.36**</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.12</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.07</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>3. Absolute Comparison with Choice 1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.11</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.02</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.60**</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.36**</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>4. Relative Comparison with Choice 1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>−.06</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.03</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.29**</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>.30**</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>**<emph>p</emph> <.01 (2-tailed)</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-22">Role of identification (H4) and contribution of relative comparison (H5)</hd> <p>The second objective was twofold and its first part was devoted to better understand the relationship between absolute comparison and self-evaluation bias of competence by examining the moderating role of the students' identification with their first target. We predicted (H<subs>4</subs>) that when using an upward comparison, the higher the students' identification with the target, the more positive their self-evaluation bias would be whereas under downward comparison, the higher the students' identification with the target, the more negative their self-evaluation bias would be.</p> <p>The data presented a hierarchical structure, with students nested in classes, which would ideally calls for multilevel modeling. However, the conditions of application for multilevel modeling were not met: five classes were not sufficient to estimate the parameters of the multilevel model that would have been required to test our hypothesis (Nezlek [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref107">55</reflink>]). In addition, the degree of freedom of the regression was different in mathematics and French for two reasons. First, some students (3.7% in mathematics and 2.9% in French) did not nominate any comparison target and thus could not be included in the regression analyses. Second, students whose data were aberrant (7.5% in mathematics and 5.1% in French) according to the results of the studentized deleted residual, the Mahalanobis Cooks' distance and the leverage values, were also excluded (Judd et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref108">38</reflink>]). Therefore, we used Ordinary Least Squares regression analyses in which the students were the unit of analysis.</p> <p>The least squares regression analysis included, in the same model,[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref109">2</reflink>] the absolute comparison score, the identification score, the relative comparison score, all the 2-way interaction terms (identification score X absolute comparison score, identification score X relative comparison score, absolute comparison score X relative comparison score) and the 3-way interaction term (identification score X absolute comparison score X relative comparison score).[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref110">3</reflink>] A first model, including all the interaction terms with gender, was tested. As the results were unaffected by any of the interaction terms with gender, they were omitted in our second model. In the second model, in both mathematics and French, the interaction between relative comparison and identification was non-significant, while the 3-way interaction term was non-significant in French only. As the results were unaffected by any of these interaction terms, they were omitted in our final models.</p> <p>In mathematics, the final model accounted for 47% of the variance (adjusted) in the students' self-evaluation bias of competence, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref111">6</reflink>, 118) = 16.49, <emph>p</emph> <.001. The results indicated a positive and significant relationship between absolute comparison and self-evaluation bias, <emph>β</emph> =.37, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref112">118</reflink>) = 4.51, <emph>p</emph> <.001 and between identification and self-evaluation bias, <emph>β</emph> =.33, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref113">118</reflink>) = 4.21, <emph>p</emph> <.001 (see Table 5). As predicted (H<subs>4</subs>), these main relationships were qualified by a significant interaction effect between identification and absolute comparison, <emph>β</emph> =.19, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref114">118</reflink>) = 2.54, <emph>p</emph> <.05 (see Fig. 1). Using standard procedure (Aiken and West [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref115">1</reflink>]), simple slopes analyses confirmed a significant effect of identification when students compared themselves with an upward comparison choice, <emph>β</emph> =.47, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref116">118</reflink>) = 3.94, <emph>p</emph> <.001, but not with a downward one, <emph>β</emph> =.04, <emph>t</emph> =.43, <emph>ns</emph>. The greater the extent to which students identified with upward comparison targets, the more positive their self-evaluation bias. Also, simple slopes analyses revealed another significant simple effect when students strongly identified with their comparison choice, <emph>β</emph> =.57, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref117">118</reflink>) = 4.82, <emph>p</emph> <.001: the more upward the comparison, the more positive the students' self-evaluation bias. No simple effect was found when they identified weakly with their comparison choice, <emph>β</emph> =.17, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref118">118</reflink>) = 1.60, <emph>ns</emph>.</p> <p>Relationship between self-evaluation bias of competence (Mathematics | French) and absolute comparison (AC), identification (ID) and relative comparison (RC)</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" /><th align="left"><p><italic>b</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>β</italic></p></th><th align="left"><p><italic>t</italic></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Constant</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.03 |.05</p></td><td align="left" /><td char="|" align="char"><p>.47 |.71</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Absolute comparison (AC)</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.11 |.06</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.37 |.20</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>4.51***| 2.29*</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Identification (ID)</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.24 |.20</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.33 |.36</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>4.21***| 4.22***</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Relative comparison (RC)</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>−.47 | −.44</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>−.51 | −.65</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>− 6.13***| − 6.85***</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>AC × ID</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.04 |.05</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>.19 |.26</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>2.54* | 2.79**</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>AC × RC</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>−.03 | −.04</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>−.19 | −.22</p></td><td char="|" align="char"><p>− 2.29* | − 2.15*</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <emph>R</emph> <sups>2</sups> (adjusted) =.47 |.35 *<emph>p</emph> <.05; **<emph>p</emph> <.01; ***<emph>p</emph> <.001</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Interaction effect between absolute comparison and identification on the self-evaluation bias in Mathematics and in French (predicted value). High and low labels correspond to values ± 1 standardized deviation from the centered mean</p> <p>In French, the final model accounted for 38% of the variance (adjusted) in the students' self-evaluation bias, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref119">5</reflink>, 119) = 13.94, <emph>p</emph> <.001. The results indicated a positive and significant relationship between identification and self-evaluation bias, <emph>β</emph> =.36, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref120">119</reflink>) = 4.42, <emph>p</emph> <.001, and between absolute comparison and self-evaluation bias, <emph>β</emph> =.20, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref121">119</reflink>) = 2.29, <emph>p</emph> <.05 (see Table 5). As expected (H<subs>4</subs>), the main effects were qualified by a significant interaction effect between absolute comparison and identification, <emph>β</emph> =.26, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref122">119</reflink>) = 2.79, <emph>p</emph> =.06 (see Fig. 1). Simple slopes analyses confirmed a significant effect of identification when students compared themselves with an upward choice, <emph>β</emph> =.61, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref123">119</reflink>) = 4.67, <emph>p</emph> <.001, but not when they compared themselves with a downward choice, <emph>β</emph> =.11, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref124">119</reflink>), <emph>ns</emph>. Simple slopes analyses also revealed an effect of comparison when students identified strongly with their comparison choice, <emph>β</emph> =.40, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref125">119</reflink>) = 3.11, <emph>p</emph> <.01, but not when they identified weakly with this choice, <emph>β</emph> =.08, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref126">119</reflink>) =.70, <emph>ns</emph>. When identification with the target was high, the more upward the comparison, the more positive their self-evaluation bias of competence was.</p> <p>The second part of the second objective was to examine the relationship between relative comparison and self-evaluation bias of competence after controlling for absolute comparison. We expected that relative comparison would contribute uniquely to explaining self-evaluation bias of competence and be negatively related to it: the greater the extent to which students believed they were engaging in upward comparison with their comparison target, the lower their academic self-evaluation bias would be (H<subs>5</subs>). Results show that relative comparison also contributed uniquely to explaining self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French: after controlling for absolute comparison, the greater the extent to which students thought their comparison target was better than they were, the lower their self-evaluation bias score, respectively in mathematics and French, <emph>β</emph> = −.51, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref127">118</reflink>) = − 6.13, <emph>p</emph> <.001 and <emph>β</emph> = −.62, <emph>t</emph> (<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref128">119</reflink>) = − 6.85, <emph>p</emph> <.01. Finally, the 3-way interaction term in mathematics was significant only in mathematics (see Fig. 2). When identification with the target was high and relative comparison was upward, self-evaluation bias in math was unrelated to absolute comparison. When the relative comparison was downward, the more upward the absolute comparison, the more positive the self-evaluation bias in math.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 Interaction effect between relative comparison, absolute comparison, and identification on the self-evaluation bias of competence in Mathematics (predicted value). High and low labels correspond to values ± 1 standardized deviation from the centered mean</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-23">Discussion</hd> <p>The deleterious impact of a negative self-evaluation bias of academic competence on learning behaviors is widely recognized. Gaining a better understanding of how contextual factors influence its construction represents an important challenge and could help identify new ways to assist students with a negative self-evaluation bias of academic competence in the future. The main focus of this study was to examine the role of social comparison in the classroom and how it may influence students' self-evaluation bias of their academic competence.</p> <p>Our first objective was to describe how fifth grade students engaged in school comparison with their peers in the domains of mathematics and French. The results showed that the students were eager to select at least one classmate with whom to compare themselves. In accordance with the results of Dumas et al. ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref129">25</reflink>]), we observed that students mostly preferred to compare themselves with a same-sex target. Furthermore, in both mathematics and French, the students engaged in a slightly upward comparison with their first and second choices, in line with Blanton et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref130">5</reflink>]) and Huguet et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref131">37</reflink>]) results among secondary school students. This type of comparison can be beneficial for children as it can strengthen their motivation to improve (Monteil and Michinov [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref132">49</reflink>]; Wheeler [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref133">70</reflink>]) and learn useful strategies for success (Bandura [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref134">4</reflink>]). However, students (65%) who selected a third comparison target tended to prefer lateral comparison over upward comparison for this target. This may suggest that comparing themselves with similar rather than better classmates provides students with supplementary information that can be used in other ways, such as for the preservation of their self-image, identification with a sub-group of classmates, or the classification of interpersonal relationships.</p> <p>Our second objective was twofold. First, to better understand the relationship between absolute comparison and self-evaluation bias of academic competence by examining the moderating role of identification with the first target. To our knowledge, no previous study has examined this interaction effect on academic self-evaluation. In accordance with previous studies, we observed that upward comparison was more beneficial for self-evaluation than downward comparison (Seaton et al. [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref135">63</reflink>]; Huguet et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref136">36</reflink>]). In addition, the results also revealed a significant interaction effect between absolute upward comparison and identification on self-evaluation bias of academic competence : the higher the students' identification with their upward target, the more positive their self-evaluation bias. This result is consistent with previous research showing that students were able to positively interpret information regarding an upward target when they identified with this target (Boissicat et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref137">6</reflink>]; Buunk et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref138">16</reflink>]). Indeed, inspiration, optimism or similarities with the upward comparison target can produce an assimilation effect on self-evaluation (Collins [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref139">19</reflink>]; Gibbons et al. [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref140">30</reflink>]; Smith [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref141">64</reflink>]).</p> <p>We also examined the contribution of relative comparison to explaining self-evaluation bias of academic competence beyond the contribution of absolute comparison. The results showed a significant relationship between each type of comparison and the students' self-evaluation bias in mathematics and French. Absolute comparison was positively related to their self-evaluation bias, whereas relative comparison was negatively related to it. This result is relevant and raises questions regarding the methods of measuring social comparison. The selective accessibility model explains the contrast effect of relative comparison, arguing that asking students to self-evaluate in reference to a comparison standard renders the differences with this target more salient than the similarities (Mussweiler [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref142">50</reflink>]). Our results are also consistent with the literature pertaining to secondary students, indicating that these students benefit from an upward comparison target they select themselves, when they are not asked to compare themselves with this target. On the other hand, numerous findings also demonstrate that students may suffer from relative comparison with an upward target when they are asked to evaluate themselves in reference to this target (Gibbons et al. [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref143">30</reflink>]; Marsh et al. [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref144">47</reflink>]; Huguet et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref145">36</reflink>]). Our findings show that the same processes occur among younger students, towards the end of elementary school. These findings also confirm the need for future research to consider both absolute and relative comparison when studying the impact of social comparison on self-evaluation in order to highlight the individual contribution of each type of comparison.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-24">Limitations</hd> <p>Despites its strengths, some limitations of this study must be mentioned. One relates to the single-item measures used to assess identification and perceived competence, which may have limited the validity of our findings. However, short-scale measures do not necessarily present low properties when describing certain human characteristics or phenomena (Robins and Beer [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref146">61</reflink>]; see also Lantian et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref147">39</reflink>]). The most important is to use indicators that are appropriate for the research purpose (Rammstedt and Beierlein [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref148">62</reflink>]). This is especially true in our study with regard to perceived competence where the correlations between our five-item measure of self-evaluation of competence in each subject and our one-item measure of perceived competence were very high (.69 < r <.83). Another limitation is its correlational design and the fact that there was only one time point. As a result, the exact nature of the links between the variables over time remains unclear. Future research should use a longitudinal approach with data collection over several years. This would allow investigating the joint evolution of social comparison and self-evaluation bias in students and provide a better understanding of the dynamics of comparison over time, as students enter new social contexts. A third limitation concerns the impossibility of taking into account possible classroom level effects. Due to the small number of classes, we were unable to run the multilevel analyses that could have analyzed such effects.</p> <p>Further research is also needed to understand the factors involved in identification (vs. differentiation) when students process information obtained from social comparison. In this regard, studies could clarify how the classroom context (e.g., teaching style, competitive atmosphere, etc.) influences students' choice of social comparison target and their identification with this target (downward or upward) according to their self-evaluation bias. This could help guide teaching practices, with the aim of promoting identification with upward comparison targets. Future studies could also extend the research on social comparison by studying the emergence of different comparison directions, not only for the first comparison choices separately but also across all comparison choices together, in order to measure comparison with a generalized other (Mead 1934). This would allow to study a tendency toward generalized comparison with others.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-25">Conclusion</hd> <p>Findings of this study highlight the inter-individual differences when students identify with their comparison target, and show that this variability is differentially related to their self-evaluation bias of academic competence. Upward comparison alone is not enough to produce a beneficial effect: students must also identify with their target. This underlines the need to consider this interaction effect when examining the relationship between social comparison in the classroom and academic self-evaluation.</p> <p>As for downward comparison, when students engaged in such comparison, their self-evaluation bias of competence did not depend on identification with their comparison target, contrary to the findings of other studies conducted in an experimental context (e.g. Mussweiler et al. [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref149">51</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref150">52</reflink>]; Fayant et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref151">26</reflink>]). This suggests that the processes occurring in a forced or laboratory comparison setting may differ from those prevailing in a classroom setting. Students are confronted with their classmates' performance on a daily basis. If they interpreted information deriving from a downward comparison as threatening, downward comparison habits would be highly harmful for them over the long term. Conversely, because students cannot always feel happy when others fail, the contrast with worse-others is likely to be beneficial in the short term, but undesirable over the long term. Finally, when students report comparison with worse-others, it may be asked how much relevance they assign this target. It is generally acknowledged that the less relevant the target, the weaker the relationship between this target's performance and one's self-evaluation (Festinger [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref152">27</reflink>]).</p> <p>To conclude, our results add to the growing body of literature on the effect of social comparison on students' self-evaluation of their academic competence, a major factor in success at school. On an applied level, the findings of this study could guide some thinking on teaching practices. One way of influencing teachers' practices would be to teach them to recognize for whom, when and in what situations upward (downward) comparison can or not be useful to students. It would also be appropriate to provide teachers with guidelines for action, such as paying attention to ensuring that students who use upward comparison identify with their target, thus enhancing their sense of self-efficacy.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-26">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>This work has been carried out within the framework of the ANR-2016 SCHOOLBIAS project supported by the French National Research Agency: ANR-16-CE28-0011.</p> <hd id="AN0146680870-27">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0146680870-28"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref50" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Aiken LS, West SG. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. 1991: Newbury Park; Sage</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. 1986: Englewood, É.-U.; Prentice Hall</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref23" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bandura ABaum A, Newman S, Wienman J, West R, McManus C. Self-efficacy and health behaviour. Cambridge handbook of psychology, health and medicine. 1997: Cambridge; Cambridge University Press: 160-162</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref1" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bandura AAyers S. Self-efficacy in health functioning. Cambridge handbook of psychology, health & medicine. 20072: New York; Cambridge University Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref32" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Blanton H, Gibbons FX, Buunk BP, Kuyper H. When better-than-others compare upward: Choice of comparison and comparative evaluation as independent predictors of academic performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999; 76: 420-430. 10.1037/1089-2699.11.3.140</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref66" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Boissicat N, Pansu P, Bouffard T, Cottin F. Relation between perceived scholastic competence and four social comparison mechanisms among elementary school children. Social Psychology of Education. 2012; 15; 4: 603-614. 10.1007/s11218-012-9189-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref15" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bouffard T, Boisvert M, Vezeau C. The illusion of incompetence and its correlates among elementary school children and their parents. Learning and Individual Differences. 2003; 14: 31-46. 10.1016/j.lindif.2003.07.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref12" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bouffard T, Narciss S. Benefits and risks of positive biases in self-evaluation of academic competence: Introduction. International Journal of Education Research, no. 2011; 50: 205-207. 10.1080/03055690303270</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref13" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Bouffard T, Pansu P, Boissicat N. Quand se juger meilleur ou moins bon qu'il ne l'est s'avère profitable ou nuisible à l'élève. Revue française de pédagogie. Recherches en éducation. 2013; 182: 117-140. 10.4000/rfp.4020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bouffard T, Pansu P, Boissicat N, Vezeau C, Cottin F. Questionnaire de la comparaison de soi scolaire pour enfants et adolescents. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement. 2014; 46; 2: 84-94. 10.1037/a0028429</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bouffard T, Vezeau C, Roy M, Lengelé A. Stability of biases of self-evaluation and relations to well-being in elementary school children. International Journal of Educational Research. 2011; 50: 221-228. 10.7202/1036894ar</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bressoux P, Pansu P. Pupils' self-perceptions: the role of teachers' judgment controlling for big-fish-little-pond-effect. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 2016. 10.1007/s10212-015-0264-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brunot SFlorin A, Vrignaud P. Contextes sociaux, conations liées au soi et performances scolaires. Les effets des dimensions conatives en éducation. 2007: Rennes; Presses universitaires de Rennes</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Buunk BP, Collins RL, Taylor SE, Van Yperen NW, Dakof GA. The affective consequences of social comparison: Either direction has its ups and downs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1990; 59: 1238-1249. 10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1238</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Buunk AP, Dijkstra PRobinson MD, Eid M. Social comparisons and well-being. The happy mind: Cognitive contributions to well-being. 2017: Cham; Springer: 311-330</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Buunk BP, Kuyper H, Van Der Zee YG. Affective response to social comparison in the classroom. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 2005; 27: 229-237. 10.1207/s15324834basp2703_4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Buunk BP, Ybema JFBuunk BP, Gibbons FX. Social comparisons and occupational stress: The identification-contrast model. Health coping, and well-being. 1997: Mahwah; Lawrence Erlbaum Mahwah: 359-388</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chayer MH, Bouffard T. Relations between impostor feelings and upward and downward identification and contrast among 10–12 years old students. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 2010; 25: 125-140. 10.1007/s10212-009-0004-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Collins RL. For better or for worse: The impact of upward social comparisons on self-evaluation. Psychological Bulletin. 1996; 119: 51-69. 10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.51</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis J. The campus as a frogpond: An application of the theory of relative deprivation to career decisions for college men. American Journal of Sociology. 1966; 72: 17-31. 10.1086/224257</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dickäuser O, Galfe E. Besser als., schlechter als. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie. 2004; 36: 1-9. 10.1026/0049-8637.36.1.1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diel K, Hofmann W. Inspired to perspire: The interplay of social comparison direction and standard extremity in the context of challenging exercising goals. Social Cognition, Special Issue: Social Cognition and Health. 2019; 37: 247-265. 10.1521/soco.2019.37.3.247</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dijkstra P, Gibbons F, Buunk APMaddux JE, Tangney JP. Social comparison theory. Social psychological foundations of clinical psychology. 2010: New York; Guilford Publications: 195-211</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dijkstra P, Kuyper H, Vander Werf G, Buunk AP, Vander Zee YG. Social comparison in the classroom: A review. Review of Educational Research. 2008; 78: 828-879. 10.3102/0034654308321210</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dumas F, Huguet P, Monteil J-M, Rastoul C, Nezlek JB. Social comparison in the classroom: Is there a tendency to compare upward in elementary school?. Current research in Social Psychology. 2005; 10: 166-187</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fayant M-P, Muller D, Nurra C, Alexopoulos T, Palluel-Germain R. Moving forward is not only a metaphor: Approach and avoidance lead to self-evaluative assimilation and contrast. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2010; 47: 241-245. 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.013</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Festinger L. A theory of social comparison process. Human Relations. 1954; 7: 117-140. 10.1177/001872675400700202</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gerber JP, Wheeler L, Suls J. A social comparison theory meta-analysis 60+ years on. Psychological Bulletin. 2018; 144; 2: 177-197. 10.1037/bul0000127</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gibbons FX, Benbow CP, Gerrard H. From top dog to bottom half: Social comparison strategies in response to poor performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994; 67: 638-652. 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.638</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gibbons FX, Blanton H, Gerrard M, Buunk B, Eggleston T. Does social comparison make a difference? Optimism as a moderator of the relation between comparison level and academic performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2000; 26: 637-648. 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.638</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guay F, Marsh HW, Boivin M. Academic self-concept and academic achievement: A developmental perspective on their causal ordering. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2003; 95: 124-136. 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.124</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guilbert, D. (1990). Évaluation psychométrique du concept de soi chez l'enfant d'âge scolaire. Master's dissertation: Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harter S. The perceived competence scale for children. Cild Development. 1982; 53: 87-97. 10.2307/1129640</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harter SMussen PH. Developmental perspectives on the self-system. Handbook of child psychology. 1983: New York; Willey: 275-386</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoge RD, Coladarci T. Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research. 1989; 59: 297-313. 10.3102/00346543059003297</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huguet P, Dumas F, Marsh HW, Régner I, Wheeler L, Suls J, Seaton M, Nezlek J. Clarifying the role of social comparison in the Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect: An integrative study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2009; 97: 156-170. 10.1037/a0015558</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huguet P, Dumas F, Monteil N, Genestoud M. Social comparison choices in the classroom: Further evidence for students' upward comparison tendency and its beneficial impact on performance. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2001; 31: 557-578. 10.1002/ejsp.81</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Judd CM, McClelland GH, Ryan CR, Muller D, Yzerbyt V. Analyse des données: une approche par comparaison de modèles. 2010: Bruxelles; De Boeck</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lantian, A, Muller, D, Nurra, C, & Douglas, K. M. (2016). Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: Validation of a French and English single-item scale. International Review of Social Psychology, 29(1), Article 1–14. 10.5334/irsp.8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lockwood P, Kunda Z. Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997; 73: 91-103. 10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.91</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lohbeck N. Social and dimensional comparison effects on academic self-concepts and self-perceptions of effort in elementary school children. Educational Psychology. 2019; 39: 133-150. 10.1080/01443410.2018.1527018</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh HW. The big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1987; 79: 280-295. 10.1037/0022-0663.79.3.280</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh HW. Big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept. German Journal of Educational Psychology. 2005; 19: 119-127</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh HW, Abduljabbar AS, Morin AJS, Parker P, Abdelfattah F, Nagengast B, Abu-Hilal MM. The big-fish-little-pond effect: Generalizability of social comparison processes over two age cohorts from Western, Asian, and Middle Eastern Islamic countries. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2015; 107; 1: 258-271. 10.1024/1010-0652.19.3.119</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh HW, O'Mara A. Reciprocal effects between academic self-concept, self-esteem, achievement, and attainment over seven adolescent years: Unidimensional and multidimensional perspectives of self-concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2008; 34: 542-552. 10.1177/0146167207312313</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh HW, Parker JW. Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984; 47: 213-231. 10.1037/0022-3514.47.1.213</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh HW, Trautwein U, Ludtke O, Koller O. Social comparison and big-fish-little-pond effects on self-concept and other self-belief constructs: Role of generalized and specific others. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2008; 100: 510-524. 10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.510</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miserandino M. Children who do well in school: Individual differences in perceived competence and autonomy in above -average children. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1996; 88; 2: 203-214. 10.1037/0022-0663.88.2.203</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Monteil JM, Michinov N. Effects of context and performance feedback on social comparison strategies among low-achievement students: Experimental studies. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive/Current Psychology of Cognition. 2000; 19: 513-531. 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mussweiler T. Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and consequences. Psychological Review. 2003; 110: 472-489. 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mussweiler T, Rüter K, Epstude K. The ups and downs of social comparison: Mechanisms of assimilation and contrast. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004; 87: 832-844. 10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.832</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mussweiler T, Rüter K, Epstude K. The man who wasn't there: Subliminal social comparison standards influence self-evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2004; 40: 689-696. 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.01.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mussweiler T, Rüter K, Epstude KGuimond DS. The why, who, and how of social comparison: A social-cognition perspective. Social comparison processes and levels of analysis. Understanding culture, intergroup relations and cognition. 2006: Cambridge; Cambridge University Press: 127-150</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Narciss S, Koerndle H, Dresel M. Self-evaluation accuracy and satisfaction with performance: Are there affective costs or benefits of positive self-evaluation bias?. International Journal of Education Research. 2011; 50: 230-240. 10.1016/j.ijer.2011.08.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nezlek JBNezlek JB. Multilevel modeling for social and personality psychology. The SAGE library in social and personality psychology methods. 2011: London; Sage Publications</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicholls JG. Development of perception of own attainment and causal attributions for success and failure in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1979; 71: 94-99. 10.1037/0022-0663.71.1.94</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Owens JS, Goldfine ME, Evangelista NM, Hoza B, Kaiser NM. A critical review of self-perceptions and the positive illusory bias in children with ADHD. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review. 2007; 10: 335-351. 10.1007/s10567-007-0027-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pajares F, Schunk DMarsh HW, Craven RG, McInerney D. Self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs: Jointly contributing to the quality of human life. International advances in self research. 2005: Greenwich, CT; Information Age Publishing</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Phillips DA. The illusion of incompetence among academically competent children. Child Development. 1984; 55: 2000-2016. 10.2307/1129775</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Phillips DA, Zimmerman MSternberg RJ. The developmental course of perceived competence and incompetence among competent children. Competence considered. 1990: New Haven, CT; Yale University Press: 41-66</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robins RW, Beer JS. Positive illusions about the self: Short-term benefits and long-term costs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2001; 80; 2: 340-352. 10.1037/0022-3514.80.2.340</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rammstedt B, Beierlein C. Can't we make it any shorter? The limits of personality assessment and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences. 2014; 35; 4: 212-220. 10.1027/1614-0001/a000141</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seaton M, Marsh H, Dumas F, Huguet P, Monteil J-M, Régner I, Blanton H, Buunk B, Gibbons FX, Kuyper H, Suls J, Wheeler L. In search of the big fish: Investigating the coexistence of the big-fish-little-pond effect with the positive effects of upward comparisons. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2008; 47: 73-103. 10.1348/014466607X202309</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith RSuls J, Wheeler L. Assimilative and contrastive reactions to upward and downward social comparison. Handbook of social comparison, Theory and research. 2000: New York; Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers: 173-200</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sticca F, Goetz T, Nett UE, Hubbard K, Haag L. Short- and long-term effects of over-reporting of grades on academic self-concept and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2017; 109; 6: 842-854. 10.1037/edu0000174</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Südkamp A, Kaiser J, Möller J. Accuracy of teachers' judgments of students' academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2012; 104: 743-762. 10.1037/a0027627</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Suls J, Martin R, Wheeler L. Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect?. Current Directions in Psychology Science. 2002; 11: 159-163. 10.1111/1467-8721.00191</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Susperreguy MI, Davis KPE, Duckworth K, Chen M. Self-concept predicts academic achievement across levels of the achievement distribution: Domain specificity for math and reading. Child Development. 2018; 89; 6: 2196-2214. 10.1111/cdev.12924</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Want SC, Botres A, Vahedi Z, Middleton JA. On the cognitive (in)efficiency of social comparisons with media images. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research. 2015; 73: 519-532. 10.1007/s11199-015-0538-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wheeler L. Motivation as a determinant of upward comparison. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1966; 2; Suppl. 1: 27-31. 10.1016/0022-1031(66)90062-X</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wills TA. Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin. 1981; 90: 245-271. 10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wolff F, Helm F, Junge F, Möller J. Are dimensional comparisons performed unconsciously? An investigation of the internal/external frame of reference model using implicit self-concepts. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2020; 112; 2: 397-415. 10.1037/edu0000375</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wolff F, Helm F, Möller J. Testing the dimensional comparison theory: When do students prefer dimensional comparisons to social and temporal comparisons?. Social Psychology of Education. 2018; 21: 875-895. 10.1007/s11218-018-9441-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wolff F, Helm F, Zimmermann F, Nagy G, Möller J. On the effects of social, temporal, and dimensional comparisons on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2018; 110; 7: 1005-1025. 10.1037/edu0000248</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wood JV. Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin. 1989; 106: 231-248. 10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.231</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wood JV. What is social comparison and how should we study it?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1996; 22: 520-537. 10.1177/0146167296225009</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0146680870-29"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Identification and similarity are two close constructs. While identification occurs when individuals see their target's position as their own future, similarity occurs when individuals perceive themselves as being similar to their comparison target.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> We first conducted stepwise analyses that confirmed there was no suppressive effects.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> As there was no significant effects of dimensional comparisons on self-evaluations in math and French, in our model we did not control for achievement in math when predicting self-evaluation in French or for achievement in French when predicting self-evaluation in mat.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Natacha Boissicat; Pascal Pansu and Thérèse Bouffard</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Natacha Boissicat Ph.D. in education, is Associate Professor at Grenoble Alpes University (France). Her current research aims at studying the dynamics and processes involved in learning and performing in educational settings, as for instance the influence of social comparison on academic self-evaluation as well as the relationship between emotion regulation and learning.</p> <p>Pascal Pansu Ph.D. in social psychology, is full Professor at Grenoble Alpes University (France). His research mainly focuses on social beliefs and judgment, and their effect on self-evaluation and cognitive performances. He also investigates how the teachers' judgment and evaluative indices present in the classroom regulate students learning and performance.</p> <p>Thérèse Bouffard is a full time professor of psychology at the University of Quebec at Montreal. Her current themes of research deals with the mechanism underlying the development of biases of self-evaluation and impostorism among children and adolescent using a longitudinal design and a person-centered approach.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib118" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib119" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref133"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref141"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref147"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref148"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref151"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1273946
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Does Classroom Social Comparison Bias Students' Evaluation of Their Own Competence?
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Boissicat%2C+Natacha%22">Boissicat, Natacha</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3188-5951">0000-0002-3188-5951</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pansu%2C+Pascal%22">Pansu, Pascal</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bouffard%2C+Thérèse%22">Bouffard, Thérèse</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Social+Psychology+of+Education%3A+An+International+Journal%22"><i>Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal</i></searchLink>. Oct 2020 23(5):1303-1326.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 24
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2020
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Competence%22">Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematics+Education%22">Mathematics Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Arts%22">Language Arts</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22French%22">French</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Evaluation+%28Individuals%29%22">Self Evaluation (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bias%22">Bias</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Identification+%28Psychology%29%22">Identification (Psychology)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s11218-020-09582-y
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1381-2890
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Overestimation and underestimation of students' own competence result from social comparison in the classroom. There is some evidence that secondary school students compare their results with those of one or two same-sex others who perform slightly better than themselves. The first objective of this study was to replicate these findings among younger students (9-11 years old) in mathematics and language arts (French). The second objective was to consider the identification with the target as a moderator factor, because findings have been divergent regarding the positive or negative influence of social comparison on students' academic self-evaluation. We expected firstly that absolute upward comparison to be beneficial for students' self-evaluation bias of competence provided they identified with their upward target. Secondly, we expected their perception of their target's competence (relative comparison) to contribute to students' self-evaluation bias of competence and to be negatively related to it. The results indicated a tendency to compare upward and revealed that absolute upward comparison was positively related to the students' self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French. This relationship was stronger when the students identified with their upward target. In contrast, relative comparison was negatively related to their self-evaluation bias of competence in mathematics and French. To sum up, these results reveal the need to consider identification with the comparison target when studying the relationship between social comparison and academic self-evaluation and to consider relative and absolute comparison simultaneously in order to bring out the full contribution of social comparison in the classroom.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2020
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1273946
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1273946
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s11218-020-09582-y
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 24
        StartPage: 1303
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mathematics Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Arts
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: French
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Evaluation (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Bias
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Identification (Psychology)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Does Classroom Social Comparison Bias Students' Evaluation of Their Own Competence?
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Boissicat, Natacha
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pansu, Pascal
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Bouffard, Thérèse
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 10
              Type: published
              Y: 2020
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1381-2890
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 23
            – Type: issue
              Value: 5
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal
              Type: main
ResultId 1