臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

過去研究證實比較焦點 (focus of comparison) 會影響社會比較的同化對比效果，進而影響自我評價。另有研究指出比較面向相關性亦有相同的影響。此外，比較方向也會影響人們的自我評價。故本研究即在同時探討比較焦點、比較面向相關性與比較方向對同化對比效果及自我評價的影響。除此之外，人們除了會與他人比較能力的表現外，也會在健康上與他人進行比較。因此，本研究之實驗一即以學業上之能力表現作為比較面向，實驗二則以健康狀況作為比較面向分別進行探討。
本研究發現比較方向與比較焦點以及比較方向與比較面向相關性都對自我評價有顯著的交互作用。而且當比較焦點為自己時，對自我評價會產生對比效果，反之當比較焦點為他人時，對自我評價會產生同化效果；比較面向為高相關性時，對自我評價會產生對比效果，反之比較面向為低相關性時，對自我評價則會產生同化效果。

The past research had demonstrated that the focus of comparison will affect the assimilation and contrast effects and self-evaluation. Some other research indicated the relevance of comparison dimensions has the same impact on the assimilation and contrast effects and self-evaluation. Besides, the direction of social comparison has an influence on self-evaluation. Therefore, for making the study more complete, we investigated the influence of the focus of comparison, the relevance of comparison dimensions and the direction of comparison on the assimilation and contrast effects and self-evaluation. Besides, people not only compare the performance of ability with others, but also compare the health with others. Therefore, the study one used the performance of the school work as the comparison dimension, and the study two used the situation of the health as the comparison dimension.
The study finds that the direction of comparison and the focus of comparison have a significant interactive effect on self-evaluation, and so do the direction of comparison and the relevance of comparison dimensions. Using self as the focus of comparison will cause a contrast effect on self-evaluation, while using others as the focus of comparison will have an assimilation effect on self-evaluation. When the comparison dimension is high-relevant, a contrast effect will be made on self-evaluation. However, an assimilation effect will be made on self-evaluation when the comparison dimension is low-relevant.

第一章　緒論
第一節　研究動機 1
第二節　研究目的 3
第三節　研究內容與流程 4
第二章　文獻探討
第一節　社會比較理論6
第二節　特性比對模式 9
第三節 選擇性獲取模式11
第四節　研究架構14
第三章　研究方法
第一節　研究設計15
第二節　前測16
第三節 實驗21
第四章　研究結果
第一節 實驗一研究結果25
第二節 實驗二研究結果34

第三節　實驗一與實驗二研究結果彙整43
第五章　研究結論與建議
第一節 結論48
第二節 建議50
第三節 研究限制51
參考文獻
中文部分52
英文部份52
附錄
附錄一　實驗一前測問卷56
附錄二　實驗二前測問卷60
附錄三　實驗一問卷64
附錄四　實驗二問卷73

一、中文部份
徐富珍 (1997)。社會比較的效果：對個人情感、認知及行為之影響研究。國立政治大學心理學系博士論文。
黃俊英 (1987)。行銷研究－管理與技術。華泰書局。
楊世瑩 (2006)。SPSS統計分析實務。臺北市：旗標出版股份有限公司。
二、英文部分
Bers, S. A. & Rodin, J. (1984), Social-comparison jealousy: a developmental and motivational study. Journal of personality and social psychology, 47, 766–779.
Brewer, M. B.& Weber, J. G. (1994). Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(2), 268–275.
Calder, Bobby J., Phillips (1981) , Lynn W. and Tybout, Alice M. Designing Research for Application. Journal of Consumer Research, 18,197–207.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, (7), 117–140.
Heatherton, T. F., & Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation 0f a scale for measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 60(5), 895–910.
Heckhausen, J. & Krueger, J. (1993). Development expectations for the self and most other people: Age grading in three functions of social comparison. Development Psychology, 29(3), 539–548.
Heidrich, S. M. & Ryff, C. D. (1993). Physical and mental health in later life: The self-system as mediator. Psychology and Aging, 8(3), 327–338.
Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp.133–168).New York: Guilford.
Holyoak, K. J. & Gordon, P. C. (1983). Social reference points. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 44, 881–887.
Jussim, L., Yen, H., & Aiello, JR. (1995). Self-consistency, self- enhancement, and accuracy in reactions to feedback. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 322–356.
Karylowski, J. J. (1990). Social reference points and accessibility of trait-related information in self-other similarity judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 975–983.
Kemmelmeier, M. & Oyserman,. D. (2001). The ups and downs of thinking about a successful other: self-construals and the consequences of social comparisons. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 311–320.
Klein, W. M. (1997). Objective standard are not enough: Affective, self-evaluative, and behavioral responses to social comparison information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(4), 763–774.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Mayseless, O. (1990). Classic and current social comparison research: Expanding the perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 452–468.
Kulik, J. A., & Gump, B. B. (1997). Affective reactions to social comparison: The effects of relative performance and related attributes information about another person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(5), 452–468.
Lin, C. & Tsai, C. (2006). Comparisons and advertising: the route from comparisons to effective advertising. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21, 23–44.
Lockwood, P. & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me : Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of personality and social psychology, 73, 91–103.
Martin, M. C. & Kennedy, P. F. (1993). Advertising and social comparison: Consequences for female preadolescents and adolescents. Psychology and Marketing, 10, 512–530.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (1999). Comparing is believing: A selective accessibility model of judgmental anchoring. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology , 10. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000). Consequences of social comparison: Selective accessibility, assimilation and contrast. In J. Suls & L. Wheeler (Eds.), Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research (pp. 253–270). New York: Plenum.
Mussweiler, T. (2001). Focus of comparison as a determinant of assimilation vers contrast in social comparison, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 38–47.
Salovey, P., & Rodin, J. (1984), Some antecedents and consequences of social-comparison jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 780–792.
Srull, T. K., & Gaelick, L. (1983).General Principles and individual differences in the self as a habitual reference point: An examination of self-other judgment of similarity. Social Cognition, 2, 108–121.
Tesser, A. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology , 21, (pp. 181–277). New York: Academic Press.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, A. (1996). Social hypothesis: Cognitive and motivational factors. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 239–270). New York: Guilford.
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327–352.
Tversky, A., & Gati, I. (1978). Studies in similarity. In E. Rosen & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.) ,Cognition and categorization (pp.79–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
VanderZee, K., Bunnk, B., & Sanderman, R. (1996). The relationship between social comparison process and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 20(5), 551–565.
Wheeler, L., (1966). Motivation as a determinant of Upward Comparison. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (suppl. 1), 27–31.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245–271.
Wills, T. A. (1991). Similarity and self-esteem in downward comparison. IN J. Suls & T. A. Wills.(Eds.), Social comparison: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 51–78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wood, J. V.(1996). What is social comparison and how should we study it? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(5), 502–537.