CB2 2 4

Summary

The lecture covers three social-psychology topics: social comparison, self-control, and impression management.

1. Social comparison theory

People learn about their abilities and attributes by comparing themselves with others. They are especially likely to do this when there is no clear objective standard and they feel uncertain—for example, when deciding how much to donate to a new workplace charity program.

The people we compare ourselves with depend on our goals:

• For an accurate assessment: Compare yourself with someone whose background is similar to yours. For example, a beginner in a Spanish class can get a more relevant sense of their likely performance by comparing themselves with another beginner.
• To understand what excellence looks like: Make an upward comparison with someone who is more skilled or experienced. This can show what you might aspire to, but it may also make you feel inferior.
• To feel better about yourself: Make a downward comparison with someone who is less skilled or less fortunate in the relevant area. This can make you feel comparatively better.

The lecturer poses a reaction-paper question asking why some consumers love luxury brands, using social comparison theory. Students are asked to offer their own explanation rather than being given an answer.

2. Self-control

Self-control involves regulating behavior in ways that support longer-term goals. The lecture notes that this can be difficult and that some strategies may backfire.

• Thought suppression: Trying to force a thought out of your mind may make it more persistent. The lecturer suggests that it may be better to acknowledge the forbidden thought while still trying to manage your behavior.
• Self-control and mental energy: The lecture describes self-control as requiring energy. Putting effort into one task may make it harder to regulate behavior during a later task.
• White-bear example: In a study described in the lecture, people who were told not to think about a white bear later had more difficulty suppressing laughter while watching a comedy film than people who had not first performed the thought-suppression task.
• Time-of-day example: The lecture says people may have less capacity to resist temptation later in the day than in the morning. Afternoon dishonesty is given as an example of this proposed depletion effect.

3. Impression management

Impression management means controlling how other people see us. The lecture says people across cultures care about the impressions they make, though the strategies they use can differ.

• Saving face: The lecturer connects the desire to avoid public embarrassment with interdependent self-views common in East Asian cultures. As an example, the lecture describes services in Japan that can provide stand-in wedding guests when a couple is concerned about having too few attendees.
• Self-handicapping: People may create obstacles that could interfere with their performance so that, if they fail, they can blame the obstacle rather than their ability. For instance, a student might stay up late or party before an exam. If they do poorly, they can point to their lack of preparation; if they do well, they may feel especially talented. The lecture lists alcohol or drugs, reduced effort, and failure to prepare as possible forms of self-handicapping.

A final reaction-paper question asks students to advise a friend who often impulse-buys, drawing on the lecture’s concepts. The lecturer does not provide a model answer.

Course reminders

The lecturer asks students to check Moodle and the FAQ, and reminds them that late reaction-paper submissions are not accepted. The lecture closes with a brief comment about October weather in Japan.

Speakers and sources featured

• Speaker: One unnamed lecturer from YOKO Sophia University.
• Sources and concepts mentioned: Social comparison theory; a white-bear thought-suppression study followed by an emotion-regulation task; research described as supporting a self-control depletion effect; and examples concerning saving face and self-handicapping. No individual researchers or other speakers are named.