Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Goal orientations and social comparison: The role of different motivations in affiliation preferences

  • Yoobin Park
  • , Sun W. Park*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    In light of previous findings that both task and ego orientations are related to engagement in social comparison, the present research aimed to investigate this association in depth by examining why and with whom task- and ego-oriented individuals engage in comparisons. In Study 1, we found that task-oriented individuals tended to prefer working with a high performer because they wanted to improve themselves. In Study 2, we provided participants with success or failure feedback before asking them to indicate partner preferences. In the face of failure, task-oriented individuals showed a preference for a high performer due to self-improvement motivation. On the contrary, ego-oriented individuals were more motivated to feel superior to others and/or less motivated to improve themselves, which in turn led them to prefer a less competent partner. The present research demonstrated that the seemingly identical relation between the two goal orientations and the tendency to engage in social comparison might be substantially different in nature.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)617-627
    Number of pages11
    JournalMotivation and Emotion
    Volume41
    Issue number5
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2017 Oct 1

    Bibliographical note

    Publisher Copyright:
    © 2017, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.

    Keywords

    • Downward comparison
    • Ego orientation
    • Social comparison
    • Task orientation
    • Upward comparison

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Social Psychology
    • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Goal orientations and social comparison: The role of different motivations in affiliation preferences'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this